The Worst Celestron Telescope Models: What to Avoid and Why

Celestron is a reputable brand in the astronomy world, known for creating a range of telescopes, from beginner-friendly models to advanced options for experienced stargazers. However, like any brand, some models have received mixed reviews and are often criticized for particular limitations or quality issues. This article explores the most commonly mentioned “worst” Celestron telescope models, focusing on user complaints and expert reviews to help you make an informed decision.

1. Common Issues with Budget Celestron Telescopes

Many of the lower-end Celestron models are designed to be affordable, making them attractive to beginners. However, they often come with drawbacks:

• Low-Quality Optics: Entry-level models may lack clarity, especially for viewing deep-sky objects.
• Flimsy Mounts: Stability is often an issue, which can lead to frustrating viewing experiences.
• Limited Aperture: Smaller apertures limit light-gathering ability, restricting clear views of fainter objects.

These limitations are most apparent in Celestron’s entry-level models, where affordability often comes at the expense of quality.

2. Celestron PowerSeeker Series

The PowerSeeker series, especially models like the Celestron PowerSeeker 70EQ and PowerSeeker 127EQ, frequently appear in discussions about the least effective telescopes by Celestron.

PowerSeeker 70EQ

• Optical Quality: The 70mm aperture in this refractor model restricts light intake, making faint celestial objects hard to view.
• Mount Stability: Users have reported that the equatorial mount is challenging to set up and doesn’t remain stable, making it unsuitable for prolonged viewing.
• Limited Capability: This model may be too basic for anyone beyond a beginner, limiting its usefulness as viewers grow more experienced.

PowerSeeker 127EQ

• Poor Secondary Mirror Placement: The 127EQ uses a “Bird-Jones” design, which has been criticized for inferior image quality due to poor secondary mirror alignment.
• Difficulty in Collimation: The design requires frequent collimation (alignment of the optical elements), which can be challenging for beginners.
• Frustration Among Beginners: Many beginners find this model’s setup cumbersome, ultimately leading to poor user satisfaction.

The PowerSeeker series is generally geared towards beginners, but the compromises in stability and optics often lead users to outgrow these models quickly.

3. Celestron AstroMaster Series

The AstroMaster series offers some affordable options but has received criticism for particular models, notably the AstroMaster 130EQ and AstroMaster 114EQ.

AstroMaster 130EQ

• Mount Challenges: The EQ mount is complex for beginners and often criticized for wobbling, especially at high magnification.
• Optics Quality: While the 130mm aperture is decent, many users note chromatic aberration (color fringing) around bright objects, which detracts from image quality.
• Weight and Portability: At nearly 24 pounds, this telescope can be challenging to move, limiting its appeal for portable stargazing.

AstroMaster 114EQ

• Inconsistent Focusing: Some users report difficulty achieving a crisp focus, particularly when viewing planets and the Moon.
• Optical Aberrations: Like the 130EQ, this model also suffers from chromatic aberration, affecting the quality of views.
• Not for Long-Term Use: While it’s an accessible choice for beginners, many report that they quickly outgrow this model’s limited optical capabilities.

Both models in the AstroMaster series are beginner-friendly in price but fall short in performance, making them less appealing for those looking to upgrade over time.

4. Celestron Inspire Series

The Celestron Inspire 100AZ telescope in particular has been flagged by users for its limitations, especially considering its price point.

• Overpriced for Features: The Inspire 100AZ is often considered overpriced compared to other telescopes with similar features but better optical quality.
• Plastic Build Quality: The extensive use of plastic in its construction, especially in critical parts, leads to durability concerns.
• Mounting Issues: This model’s alt-azimuth mount can be challenging to adjust precisely, frustrating users who want smooth motion.

The Inspire series is often marketed as a beginner-friendly option, but the price-to-performance ratio leaves much to be desired, according to many user reviews.

5. NexStar 130SLT and 4SE: Underwhelming GoTo Models

Celestron’s NexStar series has received praise for some models, but a few in this line, like the NexStar 130SLT and NexStar 4SE, face criticism for specific drawbacks.

NexStar 130SLT

• Battery Drain: The GoTo functionality drains batteries quickly, which can lead to power interruptions during stargazing.
• Mount Stability: The 130SLT’s tripod and mount are often regarded as inadequate for the telescope’s weight, leading to shaky views.
• High Price Point: For its performance, many users feel that the 130SLT’s price is not justified, especially with its frequent setup issues.

NexStar 4SE

• Limited Aperture: The 4-inch aperture limits viewing potential, especially for faint deep-sky objects.
• Expensive for Beginners: This model is on the pricier side, making it less appealing to newcomers who might find similar features in more affordable telescopes.
• Alignment Difficulties: Some users struggle with the GoTo alignment system, which can be frustrating and time-consuming.

These GoTo models, while convenient for automated tracking, fall short in terms of durability and functionality, especially considering their price.

6. Understanding “Bird-Jones” Designs in Celestron Telescopes

Many lower-end Celestron reflectors use the Bird-Jones design, which attempts to compact a longer telescope tube into a shorter one. However, this design often results in:

• Reduced Image Quality: Misalignment and optical distortions are common issues with Bird-Jones reflectors.
• High Maintenance: Frequent collimation is required, which can be intimidating for beginners.

Models like the PowerSeeker 127EQ and AstroMaster 114EQ both feature Bird-Jones designs, and they are often seen as some of Celestron’s least effective telescopes due to these inherent design flaws.

Conclusion

When it comes to choosing a Celestron telescope, it’s essential to carefully consider your needs and budget. While the brand offers high-quality options, several models, particularly those aimed at beginners, have notable drawbacks in terms of build quality, stability, and optical performance. Lower-end models, such as the PowerSeeker 127EQ and the AstroMaster series, often feature design compromises that can be frustrating for users. Higher-end models like the NexStar 130SLT also suffer from issues related to mount stability and battery consumption, despite their advanced features.

For those starting out in stargazing, it may be worthwhile to either save for a mid-range model or explore other brands that offer better entry-level options. By being aware of these limitations, you can avoid the pitfalls associated with the “worst” Celestron telescope models and find a model that better fits your needs.

FAQs

1. What are the main complaints about the Celestron PowerSeeker series?
   • The PowerSeeker models often suffer from poor stability and subpar optics, making them less ideal for long-term use.
2. Is the NexStar 130SLT a good investment?
   • While it has convenient GoTo features, many users find the mount and battery life issues to be drawbacks that impact its usability.
3. Why is the Bird-Jones design considered inferior?
   • This design requires frequent alignment and often compromises image quality, making it less user-friendly.
4. What makes the AstroMaster series challenging for beginners?
   • The equatorial mounts can be complex to use, and the optics often suffer from chromatic aberration, reducing image clarity.
5. Are there better Celestron options for beginners?
   • Yes, models like the NexStar 6SE or Omni XLT series offer better optics and stability, though at a higher price point.