Celestron Tabletop 76


 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Page 1 of 1

Celestron Tabletop 76
Many people will scoff at this 3" reflector but it is a great field scope for somebody looking for an ultra portable setup. At $99.95 you receive a decent optics 3" scope with a very stable tabletop mount. Upgrading the eyepieces really helps. Orion Explorer II are recommended.

Scored an 8 for price and ease of use. You might want to compare this against the new Meade 60AT or 70AT computerized scopes.

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.3.89)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41056


Celestron Tabletop 76
This scope was a joke and far underperformed binoculars. The
mount was a pain and the finder an exercise in futility. I did
successfully use this telescope to point a laser to turn off
a streetlight. You can get 4.25" dobs for about double the price
of this insult to the hobby and it's well worth delaying a purchase
to get something which is usable for astronomy.

Overall Rating: 0
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.34.33)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41057


Celestron Tabletop 76
This is a supperb telescope. It can be set up anywhere very quickly and easily.
It delivrs very bright images and the best thing is that it is not at all costly.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.208.18)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41058


Celestron Tabletop 76
Not really a bad little scope if you are not expecting too much out of it. The optics are fairly decent for a scope of this size and price and for portability, it can't be beat. Put a 26mm plossl in it and you get a very nice field of view. I is definitely not large enough to do much in the way of deep sky observing, but for clusters and general observing it is not bad. The finderscope is absolutely useless. Replace it with a Daisy BB-Gun point site for a cheap alternative Telrad. Another great use for these little scopes is for solar viewing with a low cost Baader filter.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.232.51)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41059


Celestron Tabletop 76
I spent some time examining a friend's Tabletop 76, and I wasn't impressed. It's extremely portable, which is nice, and it looks like a usable telescope, but it really isn't. Aside from the somewhat insufficient aperature (a 76mm reflector is just a bad idea; not enough light grasp for any deep-sky objects, and a 60mm refractor would be sharper), the optics were pretty bad. They showed roughness, and there was a large light spike that emitted from all the stars I looked at.

The worst problem with this scope is the collimation; like an Astroscan, it is designed to be permanently collimated and never adjusted by the user. Unlike an Astroscan, it doesn't actually work. The sample I examined had very bad collimation, and while I was able to tweak it into something vaguely resembling usable shape, it was difficult because it wasn't designed to be collimated by the user. I basically had to take the mirror cell partly off and let it hang in the right position! And even with the collimation fixed, it wasn't very sharp. It wasn't insultingly bad, but I wouldn't try to split anything closer than 10" with it.

Furthermore, the eyepieces it comes with are the standard poor quality Huygenian and Ramsden, the tripod shakes like a tuning fork (a quality noted by almost all who review it), and the focuser is .965 (and I can't think of any way to ever upgrade it.)

To put the problems in perspective, after tweaking it the best I could, I pointed it at Albirio (seperation 35"), which it split without any real problem (if not exactly pin-pointing the stars) and showed the owners. They were very happy with the collimation job I did and said it wouldn't have been able to split it without it. A scope which possibly couldn't even split Albirio without some unofficial tweaking? Not good, considering it should be able to split something about 2-4" apart, about 10x closer. Even fixed, I doubt it would have gone below 10".

Oh, and the view of stars through the finderscope was actually dimmer than with the naked eye.

I don't mean to say it was totally useless or anything. It would probably put up a decent low-power image of the Pleiades, the moon, a couple wide double stars, and it would show some of the brighter deep sky objects like the Andromeda Galaxy and the Orion Nebula. But you can do much better for either the same money or the same size.

Overall Rating: 2
Optics:2 Mount:3 Ease of Use:4 Value:4
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.21.37)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=378370

Page 1 of 1

[Click Here to Login]
Don't have a login? Register!