Celestron C102-HD

Ratings:Top:Astronomy:Equipment Reviews:Telescope Reviews:Celestron C102-HD

 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Prev Page 2 of 3 Next

Celestron C102-HD
great scope for price, i have the metal version and 2'-1.25 focuser. green-violet multicoatings. i have never gotten the opportunity to view through an apo and would probably be stunned(as well as the price)... but i am well satisfied at this time with this refractor. split double-double with inexpensive plossl at 80x- all three members of iota cassiopia at 100x-expected slight color fringing but not detrimental to objects being observed. stars pinpoint to the edge. a great start up scope!! jim s.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38839

Celestron C102-HD
This is my first scope, ever. After about a year of using binocs, I took the plunge with Astronomics. This scope was recommended for price, good all-around use from suburbia, with occasional trips "home to the dark skys of western Oklahoma". It has been a very good experience. My first view of Saturn was exciting to say the least and my 5 year-old loves it. My first try at splitting doubles was also a success. I think this scope goes a long way with rookies like myself by giving us a positive experience out of the box for not much $. Being a novice, I was glad to see the other favorable ratings for this scope. Lets me know it was a good choice for my "first". Am now looking for a more portable one with some more aperture, the G5 or G8, and have had offers on this scope, but I'll keep it. I'm already attached. It is my first, you know.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38841

Celestron C102-HD
I bought the optical tube only because I already had an older Super Polaris mount. The tube came with rings and a 6x30 finder. It has a 2" cast aluminum focuser, cast aluminum lens cell, and an aluminum dew shield unlike other reports of plastic parts. A 2" to 1-1/4" adapter was also provided.

I was eager to star test the scope since I had read such glowing reviews from other users. My first test was done after letting the scope cool off for about two hours. I used a Televue 2" diagonal, Ultima 2x barlow, and Televue 15mm Panoptic and Televue 10.5mm Plossl. The results of this first test were disappointing. Diffraction rings were distorted (not round) indicating pinched optics and also seemed to show the optics to be misaligned. Outside of focus the outer diffraction ring was much brighter while inside of focus diffraction rigns were fuzzy and diffuse. If I am interpreting this correctly, my optics are over-corrected.

After loosening the retaining ring of the lens cell, I tried again several days later. The second test was done with a yellow filter. This time diffraction rings were almost perfectly round, so the pinching of the too tight retaining ring had been corrected. The rings were still not quite concentric however, indicating possibly a slight mis-alignment of the optics. The worst thing though, was the pattern of the diffraction rings. Judging from Suiter's book, I would estimate at least 1/2 wave overcorrection. Images of Jupiter and Saturn later that night were very "soft." I could split epsilon Lyra at 133x with black space between, but it did not seem to be as clean a split as with my 80mm with Vixen optics at 120x. This last point was revealing to me because I had many times before heard people say they would rather have less aperture with better optics. Now I can say I definately agree!

Considering the price ($300 for optical tube only) I am satisfied with the quality of the harware. The focuser is nowhere near as smooth as a Televue (or any of the other premiums) but it seems good enough. The finder is good; almost identical to the 6x30 that came with my old C-8. I like the spring-loaded tensioner that takes the place of one of the finder alignment screws. It makes it easy to align. Still, a Telrad would be a good addition.

I am interested in learning more about improving spherical correction by increasing spacing between the lens elements. If I can impove this scope to even 1/4 wave I will probably keep it as a "kick around" scope. For $300 I won't get too upset if someone trips over it.

John C.

Overall Rating: 6
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38842

Celestron C102-HD
I shopped around and found.... what I think is a great deal. I found the Celestron C102 - HD for $365.00 new / $395.00 shipped at http://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp?vName=Celestron&isRec=1&sku=C102HD&product%5Ftype%5Fid=1&vid=4 .

I also found it at http://www.poconoscopes.com/west/celestron.html for $399.00.

I had seen the telescope range from 499-699.

Hope this helps,
Michael

P.s I will have mine on 12/25/00 :)

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38843

Celestron C102-HD
I just wanted to add to my comments above. Everyone who`s looked thru mine raves about it`s refractor-sharp, etc., images. Image quality rules!!! My neighbor thought he was looking thru a $3,000 apo. It consistently out-performs larger scopes!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38844

Celestron C102-HD
I think the C102HD is one of the best buys in entry level scopes. I got mine for $550, and have added an 8x50 illuminated finder. The tracking accuracy is quite astounding with precision alignment and the RA drive motor. The optics seem very good, with magnification mostly limited by atmosperic conditions. On a good night, I've gotten excellent views at 300x.

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38845

Celestron C102-HD
Not a perfect telescope, but what a great buy. This is truly the beginners'
scope. Fine images and easy to use. You can spend 4 times more money and see
10% more. Good work Celestron!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38846

Celestron C102-HD
I've had my scope for about three months and, for the $399 price, I couldn't be happier. Contrast on Jupiter and Saturn have been incredible. I can see four moons around Saturn and the Cassini division is obvious. Consider swaping out the aluminum tripod with a sturdy wooden tripod. I swaped the finder with a higher quality right angle view. For the planets it's tough to beat. However, my 6" reflector is better for deep sky.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38847

Celestron C102-HD
this is my first telescope and it kicks ass i only paid $399 what a deal

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38848

Celestron C102-HD
This is my first scope so I did not want to rate it as I have nothing to compare it to.I have mostly been viewing Saturn and Jupiter and the views are great.I can see the North and South Equatorial bands on Jupiter at 152x. Saturn is a magnificent site and the Cassini division stands out clearly.I did my best to star test the scope and from what I could tell the rings of the airy disc were the same in or out of focus.The mount is a little loose but I was able to improve that by tightening bolts and adjusting.I plan to replace the aluminum tripod with a home built wooden one as there is a lot of vibration caused by the mount.I paid $399 for the whole assembly and am very pleased with the scope.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38849

Celestron C102-HD
If you've read all the other comments, I can't add to them except to say that some people seem to have gotten carried away. Yes, the scope is a real bargin: I paid $365 (plus $35 shipping). The mount is pretty good by any standard; the tripod fair; and optically good (not great) for an achromat. It is not a miracle and can't perform with the APOs. Still, at around $400 it is a very good scope.
When comparing what else you can get for the price, the C102 looks very good. If you are tempted to shell out a similar price for one of the little "go-to" scopes, you will probably be disappointed. At that kind of price you just can't get good optics, adequate apperture, an accurate motor drive, and a computer. The C102 will actually show you more! And that is what a scope is supposed to do.

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38850

Celestron C102-HD
For $500, I don't think there is another scope that can
beat it in terms of optical quality. In fact, on very
good seeing nights, this translate to: $500 = 50X/inch :-)
which is very good for an achromat.

I decided on this scope after reading what people have
rated here, Ed Ting's and other reviews of this scope on
the net. Mainly, I wanted to see what a 4" refractor
can do and will guide me to my next (and hopefully my
final scope ;-). (Although I hated my 60mm Tasco I had
in college years ago, I've always been fond of refractors.)
Having bad "department store" experience with the Tasco,
I was dubious at what the C102-HD can show. After all,
$500 can't really buy a good scope but junk, right? Was
I in for a surprise!

On very good seeing nights, I can see 4 or more bands on
Jupiter very clearly, the Great "Pale" Spot, Jovian moons
resolved into tiny disc and ink black transit on the surface.
Being an achromat, I see purple halo on Jupiter and its
surface seems very slightly purple. The image is very
sharp at 167x (6mm TV Radian EP) and 200x (5mm Tak LE).
I've tried a #8 yellow filter as Ed Ting suggested and
it definitely helps. But I don't feel like it makes much
difference in terms of sharpness.

On Saturn, Cassini division is seen very clearly and sharp.
B ring is brighter than A ring and I think I see the Crepe
ring, but not sure yet. I can see bandings on the planet
surface at 167x and 200x. There is no false color or halo
on Saturn.

The moon is of course very impressive with lots of details.
But it definitely has purple halo on rims as well as very
slight purple at some bright crater's edges. I'm definitely
going to try some photo shot later.

Since the weather has been bad since January, I haven't
been able to push more. But so far, 250x (8mm TV Radian
and 2X Celestron Ultima Barlow) looks promising on Saturn.
330x will probably not work out and 400x (i.e. 100X/inch)
is definitely out of the question.

I've done a little of bit of DSO. M42 is impressive and
the trapezium is clearly seen. Open clusters such as M44,
M46/M47 are easy (since they're so bright). Nebula such
as M1 and M78 are difficult since they looked very faint
and unimpressive to me, as well as galaxies such as M81/M82.
M79 globular being very low in the southern sky looks like
a dim fuzz ball, but began to resolve into some dim stars at
167x (I can't wait to look at M13). Note that I haven't gone
to a dark sky area yet. Stars are pin point. It has been
said that a 4" refractor should be able to see all of the
Messier objects. I've compiled a list that I'm interested in
(as well as some NGC) and look forward to the "hunt".

No comment on the mount and tripod; it's tolerable but
not recommended (why I haven't given it a 10). When
approximately polar aligned, the RA slow motion control
tracks very well, epecially with the 60 degree FOV of my
TV Radian. I didn't know that my focuser was stiff
until I was at the store one day and played with the
Meade 102ED refractor; its focus was very smooth. I came
home and loosened the two screws and my focuser is now
equally smooth. The OTA seems very well constructed to
me in this price range and looks like will last for a
very long time.

If I were to have only $500 to spend on a scope, the
C102-HD would be it. Highly "relatively" recommended.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38851

Celestron C102-HD
I purchased mine for $399. On the down side the focuser was droopy with quite a bit of lateral motion which was annoying at higher powers. After loosening the screws at the bottom an tightening the the one on top the assembly is reasonably tight now. Also while the mount is good the aluminum tripod legs don't cut it and it takes quite a while for it to dampen. My solution was to purchase a JMI Moto-focus. Optics are quite good. Ronchi band test showed strait lines inside and ot of focus. Star test seemed good with a bit of purple on the inner rings out of focus. Good detail on the planets and moon. I purchased the single axis clock-drive and it has shown itself to be accurate. Would I purchase this telescope again? Yes.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38852

Celestron C102-HD
There are so many things I don't like about this scope. But then I kick myself and am reminded that I paid $365.00 for it.

The things I don't like;
1. The CG-4 mount, while sturdy enough for the scope, is mounted on the worst tripod I have seen. Apparently, novices seem to think that there is some advantage to aluminum legs. As a materials engineer I can tell you that other than weight, I cannot think of a worse thing to make the legs out of. Aluminum has a horrible damping coefficient.I replaced mine with wooden legs.

2. The correction for chromatic abberation is marginal. This scope will throw up a fair amount of purple haze around bright objects. Because of this, there are some resolution problems when viewing Jupiter and Venus.

3. The sky diagonal supplied with this scope is marginal at best. Plan on collimnating it as it will probably not be a true 45 deg.

What I like:
1. The focuser is very nice,I had to adjust it to smooth it up a bit and then it performed marvelously. It has the travel to handle any lens configuration you can throw at it. This is a problem for most scopes in this price range.

2. The supplied 20mm Plossl is of nice quality.

Chromatisism on bright objects aside, this telescope gives nice tack sharp star images. Aside from some slight spherical abberation, the star test was nice.

3. Contrary to what I had heard, the air spaced achromat is in a nice aluminum mount that is adjustable.

4. While the 6x30 finder is a bit small (I would prefer an 8x50),the mount for it is very convenient and holds alignment nicely.

In spite of everything I've said bad about this scope, I would recommend it. Having access to several high dollar apochromats, I am probably being too tough on it. It performs as well as the previous Vixen manufactured C102 at less than half the cost.If people spent $400.00-500.00 on this scope instead of the go-to junk that Meade and Celestron is marketing now, the amatuer astronomy world would be the better for it.This scope is hard to beat for the money, but don't expect it to be the end all instrument. Make sure to invest in a nice Barlow, this scope handles 200-220x nicely.

If you have questions e-mail me at jelliff@engineering.uiowa.edu

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38853

Celestron C102-HD
I just thought this might be useful. I have had my C102HD since Christmas 2000, and basically all of the above helped with the decision.

I am a NOVICE TO THE EXTREME..... so if everyone else knows this :) OK. But, when I was going through the parts I noticed the main 4" scope lens cover has a center 2" or so inch cap on it. I left the cover on the scope and took off just the the 2" center cap. I took a look a VERY bright objects (jupiter) and dim ones like the (double star- which one... dk) and I was very surprised to see the PURPLE HAZE was gone. I know this would seem to make you 4" scope a 2" one.. but the image was basically the same size in my viewfinder.

Try it out on you scope and leave me a POST.

Michael

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38854

Celestron C102-HD
Do a good job in planets !!

Chema

Overall Rating: 7
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38855

Celestron C102-HD
Hello to previous poster,

I have an Orion ShortTube 80. The best achromats can just almost barely achieve chromatic aberration-free views of bright objects (such as the Moon or Jupiter) when perfect focus is achieved. The greater the focal ratio (the focal length of the telescope - mine is 400mm) and the lower the aperture diameter (mine is 80mm - yours is 102) the easier it is to achieve color-free focus. So, by reducing the diameter of your scope as you describe, you are increasing the focal ratio (probably doubling it) and making it easier for you to achieve perfect focus for your eyes.

However, you are taking a hit on image brightness and, more importantly for the planets and the moon, resoltuion of fine detail.

IMHO: Most astronomers only restrict the aperture of the scope under certain limited conditions:

1 They are using the scope terrestrially (bird watching for instance).

2.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38861

Celestron C102-HD
In case your waiting with bated breath for me to mention #2... (strange behavior on this site):

2. Sky stability is poor and image quality can be improved by installing an aperture mask on a much larger telescope than this.

So, try making very, very, fine focus adjustments using your focuser and see if you can make the violet almost but not quite go away - without stopping down your aperture. If you can make the color go away completely with just the right tweak - you have an excellent set of optics (lens and eyepiece combination).

Clear and Steady Skies

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38862

Celestron C102-HD
The C102HD is an exceptional scope for the price. Costing $399, I do not know of any scope in the price category that can match it. False color is apparent around bright objects, and the aluminum legs do not dampen vibrations very well. But the mount head is well made, the clock drive is accurate for a telescope in this price range, images are crisp to the edges - even with moderately priced plossels, and the 2" focuser allows the use of wide angle 2" eyepieces - an unusual option for this price. The lens cell on my scope is meteal, and the focuser was a little stiff before adjustment. I've been extremely pleased with the amount of scope for the price.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38864

Celestron C102-HD
Oh, man am I stoked! I had been looking for a decent refractor for some time, and when a local Celestron dealer closed out all of it's scopes, I rushed over to see what they had. Having read all the great reviews here, I purchased the LAST C102HD they had in stock. With the closeout sale, I paid only $275!!! Reading some of these reviews, I see that many considered it a steal at $400 to $500, so you can imagine my excitement. I made my purchase having felt that I got a pretty good deal. Now it seams I got a GREAT deal! Just bought my new scope today, and I'm looking forward to using it along with my 6" reflector. Will post my experiences once I've had a chance to put it to use!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=38865

Prev Page 2 of 3 Next

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

Checking Your Telescope
Starting out in Amateur Astronomy
 
How to use This Site
Why Register?
[Get rid of the ads!]
Voting Guide