ASTROMASTER 130EQ-MD

it's garbage

Get it without the motor drive, the motor drive mount is garbage but the standard EQ mount is great
Overall the scope is good and I adore mine

>>8936941
Had one after falling for the stargazing live meme and sold it.

Was great for the moon, shit for everything else.

>ahh yes Mars is a very slightly red dot
>ahh yes stars
>this is boring

>>8937058
>is too retarded to understand magnification
lmao

>>8937121
Comes with two lenses iirc and I only used the most powerful one

File: 1494906354319.jpg (406KB, 4000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 4000x2250px

>>8937122
[math]M=\frac{f_o}{f_e}[/math]
[math]f_o[/math] being the objective focal length and [math]f_e[/math] being the eyepiece diameter
For this scope, the a 10 mm lens it will be
[math]\frac{650}{10}=65[\math]
65x magnification
What you did was buy a scope and magically thought "I should be able to see anything because that is how magnification works right?!"
If you wanted to see small objects you should have gotten a scope with a longer focal length.
A scope like the AS130 is more meant for having a wide aFOV than for deep view with its large objective diameter...like almost ALL Newtonian reflectors
lrn2astro scrub

>>8937183
>>8937183
>if you wanted a better thing you have to pay more money

I'm aware of that but I wasn't impressed with the 130EQ and it didn't make me want to buy a better telescope.

What telescope do you have?

>>8937209
What part about my post did you not understand, brainlet?
What you mean by 'better' is more magnification.
It is not a factor of money, it is the ratio of focal length and eyepiece diameter
Get off /sci/ because you clearly did not understand the BASIC math I posted
There are cheaper scopes with a longer focal length giving them a GREATER magnification.
Like my PS70 which has a 700m focal length and cost 130$, thus more magnification than the 650mm AS130. Though its useful magnification is far lower because it is a refactor.
Greater magnification[math]\neq[/math]better scope
I have a AS130, a PS70, and a home built dobsonian

>>8937359
What can you see with your PS70 mr angry?

File: Untitled.png (63KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1366x768px

>>8937362
Are you still not understanding what is that I am saying? Are you south american or something?
Let me put it to you this way, pic related is the AS130 with a 4mm eyepiece and a 3x barlow. This is basically the highest useful magnification of the scope.
You do not understand the basics of optics and complaining when the results are bad because you thought it was a matter of money
Stellarium is accurate with its view simulations

>>8937378
OR to put that into math [math]M=\frac{650}{5}\cdot3[/math]
Also I meant a 5mm eyepiece, the 4mm eyepiece overextends its useful magnification

File: Untitled.png (67KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1366x768px

>>8937362
To clarify even more, you were using a 10mm eyepiece
[math]M=\frac{650}{10}=65[/math]
When you should have been using [math]M=\frac{650}{5}\cdot3=390[/math]
Mars is a very small planet and requires quite a lot of magnification, but you are too much of a brainlet to understand these concepts...so trot back on to your south american engineering classes and stay off /sci/