A New "Best" Ultra-Budget Beginner's Telescope? Review of the Orion Observer 134! 

Celestron 102AZ is a great beginner scope (Alt-az, no collimation required, but chromatic aberration making high power on Jupiter and Saturn disappointing).

SvBony makes some decent budget eyepieces that are pretty good. I picked the 68 degree ultra wide angle(with the red rings) from amazon. I have the same scope as well. I also replaced the finder scope with the SvBony SV182 which I haven't had a chance to try yet but I think the right angle diagonal will be much more comfortable to use.

Thanks for the idea. I added a hook to the bottom of the eyepiece tray and hang a grocery bag with 4 cans of beans to help stabilize it. This helps to get the vibration to subside quickly.

This is the scope I started with, had amazing contrast

Congratulations. Keep up the good work .

He's actually made a monocular video (well not exactly, it was about internet budget hoax telescopes/monoculars) And we all watched, it was great 😃

This happens all the time, especially at the lower price points. There's often no consistency from what comes out of China. You get whatever they decide to ship that day.

Exactly my though! Around 4 years ago I purchased my first and only telescope (SpaceProbe 130ST) and I needed to move the primary mirror which is not an easy task for an inexperienced person. This new telescope could make that way easier just like you said, cheaper and with a better mount!

That thought crossed my mind too. In today's inflationary environment the price of this product has (at least temporarily) gone down 25%. Wow.

Hey Ed, can you suggest some eyepieces for upgrade? Im purchasing this telescope as I type this.

Try the included eyepieces for a while. This will give you an idea of what focal lengths you like. I would then recommend a Celestron X-cel LX of your size preference for ~$100. They are excellent for the money and not too heavy. A heavy top of the line eyepiece will probably not stay steady in that focuser. @@mikess308

Thats not cheap😢

​@@baileyslater2599 For a good telescope these days it is

Between the Starblast and the 134, get the 134. With the Starblast you will constantly be searching for something to set it on. You won't have that problem with the 134.

@@edting I just bought the 134! It's lightweight & easy to put together. Haven't got too far with the EQ mount yet. I understand how it works, I just don't know how to find stuff yet.

You could technically set the altitude axis to zero degrees and use it as an alt az mount. I'd just leave it as is. The finder mount is what I call the "cheap standard". It's the one that appears on the Starblast. You can always drill your own holes for your finder.

I like the 134 better because you don't have to find something to set it on.

I use the 5SE mount for my solar scope and it’s brilliant. My night time scope is the C8. For my money, the very best hobbyist scope you can buy if you don’t want a gigantic dob.

@@MikeLikesChannel Hi Mike. Yeah, a Nexstar 8 got me back into the hobby years ago, they're a great package. Light, portable, 8", and GoTo. If I had to go down to one scope (God forbid!), I'm not sure if I'd go Nexstar or dob. Both are so versatile.

I can't recommend a GOTO scope for a complete beginner, personally. I'd rather the beginner learn how to use a telescope manually than rely on something automated to do everything for them. Not to mention GOTO scopes tend to have errors and issues eventually that create problems to problem solve. I'd say either go with a scope like this or a 6 inch dobsonian if you have more money to spend.

I disagree. A beginner's first fault is wanting instant gratification. The 5SE provides enough 'guaranteed' sights to fuel the continued interest in the hobby. In addition, the 5SE is not the best GOTO scope on the shelf; and, working with that wedge takes some education and discipline...continuing the education process. I would never recommend a dobsonian for a beginner's first scope. Simply because of the size. You aren't taking that out in the field unless you own a car. One would hope that one's astronomy interest is sparked at an age prior to reaching the age to legally drive. Lastly; any one interested in the night's sky typically has spent enough time studying charts and maps before making that first purhase that I think the train of thought that the first scope be manually navigated is overkill.@@JCW86

Yes. The problem here is the industry has completely abandoned us by not producing a quality alt-az mount in the ultra-budget category. Look at the lower end of the Orion catalog. The alt-az mounts are all flimsy yoke mounted junk.

​@@edtingsir, I'm in India and here ,no orion scopes are available. Skywatcher is available but at double prices A worthy opponent of this scope(orion134) which you reviewed is A startracker(indian brand) 130/650 it's mount is okayish and has a spherical mirror . It needs a barlow for prime focus Other than that A explore scientific 130/600 Parabolic mirror and prime focus without barlow attachment is available at prices cheaper than usa😅. Could you please see it it has eq3 Explore scientific 130/600 nanoeq3 Thank you

Saturn's rings and Jupiter's moons are no problem. Forget about taking it on a plane. The idea of an airline portable scope is a big debate. The problem isn't the optical tube, it's the mount. You saw the size of the shipping carton, right?

Get the Observer, because it has a better mount. Remember, in a cheap scope, it's all about the mount.

Not too long ago, it was easy to find replacement telescope parts. These days it is almost impossible. You have to resort to ebay or Chinese sources, and even then the mounting holes and/or stack height may not match up.

collimation is pretty quick and easy, and doesn't have to be done often unless you're rough with a reflector.

Any light pollution will degrade the images you see through the telescope. Start with the moon, Jupiter, and Saturn. Those are bright enough to burn through. There are some bright deep sky objects that will show up under mild light pollution, like the Pleiades and the Orion Nebula. For best results, get to the darkest location possible.

Awesome, thanks for the response

Yes. The older I get, the less tolerant I have become for tabletop telescopes. But that's me. Others do not mind.

@@edting I love tabletop telescopes, well the mounts anyways. I have a Skywatcher Merlin tabletop mount that's a good display for my Celestron 90 SLT. I also got a Skywatcher Heritage 130p for £30. It got sold cheap on eBay because the previous owner accidentally cracked the mirror but £30 for its mount was a steal and now "displays" my upgraded Skywatcher ST80 refractor. Yes they suck for astronomy but the mounts are both handy for display purposes and useful if you want to point your refractor out of the window for daytime terrestrial viewing with a correct image 45 prism. Still for looking up I still intend to start with a Porta ii or Twilight 1 mount.

The issue with any travel scope isn't the optical tube, it's the mount. That's where people get tripped up. Good, steady mounts are not light or portable. If you can find and Orion Starblast it might work but you have to find something to set it on.

Good job getting the Starblast. A couple of thoughts: 1) That thing is really low to the ground. Even a kid will need it boosted. You will need something steady and will need to watch to see the scope doesn't get pushed off. This is your major challenge (I'll note the Orion 134 avoids this problem entirely). 2) Don't get the 5mm/3mm eyepieces. That is way, way too much magnification. Neither the optics nor the mount can support that kind of power. I wouldn't buy anything for now. The eyepiece is rarely your bottleneck in the beginning. If you must, a TeleVue 20mm Plossl is a good replacement for the stock Kellner and won't break the bank.

I agree with the EQ comment. There are so many options (AZ GTi, etc., manual Alt-AZ, and I think Starsense Explorer really opens the sky to beginners).

Yeah, for some reason, they didn't use the standard dovetail mount for the finder scope. The extension legs on the tripod also get a bit wobbly. Otherwise, decent size scope for the price.

@@skiinggator Don't know about extension legs. Always do my sky watching sitting down and never extend legs on any tripod.

@@skiinggator ((I have a Gators Ski Club patch on an old jacket of mine))

Thanks for that. I'm hoping to get my hands on the 114 mm to compare to this one.

I paid $200 for mine when it first came out a few months back. Now it's on sale for $149 with the same mount as the 134mm. A true bargain!@@edting

What's the diff between the 2? Im a beginner and looking to buy one for my 10 year old she's been begging for one since she was 8

I have the smaller one which is much lighter and perfect for a child.@@janjaf844

The SLT is a cheaper version of the NexStar se, and if you've followed me here you know I have mixed-to-positive feelings about the whole NexStar series. The SLTs and ETXs have typical lower-end Goto problems - pointing accuracy and long-term reliability. I'm curious, does your SLT always find every object you ask it to find? If so, does it always place the object in the center of the field of view in a low power eyepiece, or is it off to the side?

@@edting I have really liked it. Although lately I am having trouble getting it to align. Once I do get it aligned it tracks well and gets the object I am slewing to pretty close to the center of my 25mm eyepiece. I am going to check for updated firmware and see if that helps. The other issue I am having is the direction buttons on the controller seem to be wearing out. I may need to get a new controller, unless you know of a way to "reset" the buttons so that they respond to the firs touch. I have to press them multiple times to get the scope to move.Other than that I am very happy with it. I do want to get an SCT at some point though.

If you have the means, get a 6" or 8" Dob.

@@edting thank-you. I am really trying to spend between 2 and 300 dollars to start. Am I going to be sorry if I don't spend more?

I wouldn't buy anything for a while. The eyepiece is rarely your bottleneck at this point. If you must spend money, get a TeleVue 25mm Plossl to replace the stock eyepiece. If you must spend a lot of money, get a 24mm Panoptic.

Nice. Someone just told me they just bought one off Orion's "clearance" section for $174. Wow.

The main attraction of the mount is it's much better than what you normally find at this price point. But it's far more likely the opposite will happen - you'll remove the optical tube and put it on an even better mount.

@@edting Suggestions for an upgraded mount? I am now partial to the EQ mount. Also do you think that upgrading the plastic tube rings would help with the wobble?

That should be OK. I prefer this Observer 134 though.

The space probe has the same optics as the nexstar 130, vixen r130, and the awb130 and skywatcher 130. A consistently decent set of objects. But the mount is a little on the undersized end, being an eq2

Unfortunately, there's no reflector I know of under $350 that has a metal focuser. And that price is for the OTA only, no mount included. This telescope and mount are selling for $209 currently, which is practically a steal nowadays.

No, get the Dob. This is an ultra-budget alternative for those who cannot afford to spend more. It is flawed but it will get the job done.

The 2 inch eye pieces on the dob are great! You'll love the huge field of views you'll get from a 25mm eye piece. Just point it around some constellations and enjoy the amazing sky Remember to keep your finder eye piece oriented straight up from the scope. That will help as you slew it around tracking from a constellation star towards an object off to one side or the other. Try turning the finder and you'll probably notice its more difficult. Just a beginner tip I figured out but it could be a me thing.

No debate on this one - get the Dob. This Orion 134 is a budget scope and can't compete.

A 6" or 8" is still miles ahead of this scope. If you have the money, get the Dob.

Yes, that is a problem. See if you have the Zhumell Z114 where you are (same as our Starblast). Sometimes people in Europe have access to things we don't have here. Try Bresser, Konus, and other brands. Try to stay away from junk!

@@edting thank you Ed! Couldn’t find those brands except the Bressner brand and just ordered one. My first! Thank you.

My usual recommendation is not to buy anything for a while. The eyepiece is not your bottleneck here, it's usually the mount that causes you frustrations. If you must, replace the stock eyepiece with a TeleVue 25mm Plossl or a 19mm Panoptic. As you grow, those eyepieces will stay with you.

@@edting thanks so much!

😂

I haven't seen the 114 yet, but reliable sources tell me the 134 is slightly better. The f/ratio is more forgiving, and sources tell me the 134 is more well made.

Right now, don't buy anything. The eyepiece is rarely your bottleneck in the beginning. Keep using the scope and in a year or so you'll know what you need, and won't be needing any advice from me. Keep going!

Much Appreciated! I think the biggest thing is getting to an area of low light pollution. Here in southeast Connecticut it’s fairly bright. Any suggestions on viewing spots here in the northeast?

Excellent advice!!!@@edting

When you are ready to upgrade I suggest the explore scientific 24mm 68degree or televue 24 panoptic, which give the maximum field of a 1.25" eyepiece and are sharp to the edge (the televue being a little better than it's es clone), es prices are a lot higher than they used to be, but meade used to sell the series 5000 swa which had the same optics as the explore scientific, which is unfortunately now the exclusive source for that particular eyepiece series. A used meade will cost considerably less. I also suggest any version of the meade 8.8mm UWA, and the 5.5mm or 4.7mm UWA. That seems like a super high power eyepiece, but at around f5 it is not too high of a magnification, as it would be on a cassegrain, or long tube refractor or reflector. I think they are discontinued, but can be found used. I used to have the 5.5, and found it to be very comparable to a type 6 nagler, at least when using it with my 7mm type 6 nagler, it was the same quality of view and comfortable eye relief, just at a higher magnification. Many say the 5mm nagler is a star in the series, and in that case might slightly edge out the 5.5mm meade, but I only had a 7 at the time. All of my gear was stolen so I don't have them anymore, but I do now have a 4.7mm which was the older version with the same optics as es82 degree, and it is a decent performer, also a copy of the type 6 nagler design like the es82 are in the smaller focal lengths. The larger ones seem to be more like the type 5 naglers, but those are 2" and irrelevant to the orion 134. A really nice set for that scope would be a 4.7 or 5.5uwa/es82 (you don't need both), an 8.8mm uwa/es82, and the 24swa/es68. If you get all crazy fiddly like many of us do, and want the ability to go in-between magnifications, a 6.7mm UWA/es82, or 7mm nagler (type1 can be found for lower price, sometimes as low as $100), and a 14mm UWA/es82, or 15mm celestron axiom lx or luminos are good compliments, and you might not want to have nothing between the 8.8 and the 24. The 13mm type 6 nagler is the Uber premium option but very expensive. I would not suggest the massive 13mm type 1 nagler or older version meade series 4000 14mm eyepieces for that plastic focuser, stick to the smaller ones. Some might say that is overkill, but if you get a chance to go to a star party and try any of these, and can appreciate the well corrected wider fields, consider it an investment as you will use them as you upgrade to a bigger dob. If you go to an SCT, the 4.7/5.5 will be at the theoretical limit of those f10 scopes, but the other ones are all very usable, especially the 8.8, 13/14/15 and 24mn. If you just want a lower power, brighter view than the 25mm, a 32mm plossl is a good choice, and you don't need an expensive one, a $30-40 celestron omni or orion Sirius plossl is a good one. They are also the widest field in a 1.25" eyepiece, but at 52degrees instead of 68, same true field but at a brighter, lower power. Also consider long eye relief, more moderate 60deg field eyepieces, which are available in many brands and price points, as a lower cost alternative to the 82deg eyepieces in the higher powers, that also have more eye relief than the 82deg eyepieces. Such as the celestron x-cel LX series, and other brands of "long eye relief planetary" eyepieces as they are typically referred to. But me personally, I like the really wide stuff, and only break out the low power plossls when I need a bigger exit pupil than is possible with the lowest power widefield for the given focuser size of the scope I am using. 32plossl 24 5kSWA/es68/panoptic 15mm AxiomLX/luminos OR 14mm 5kUWA/es82 OR 13mm Nagler6 8.8mm 5kUWA/es82 7mm Nagler 1 or 6 OR 6.7mm 4k or 5kUWA /es82 5.5mm 5kUWA OR 4.7mm 5kUWA (there is a 4kUWA and a 4.8 nagler1, but both of these have very short eye relief and are not very comfortable) 4k= meade series 4000 5k= meade series 5000 ES82/ES68 = explore scientific 82 and 68 degree series. Axiom LX and luminos are celestron's 82 degree offerings, the axiom LX was the same optics as the ES/5K, the luminos is not quite as good but close enough for government work.

The manual says it's parabolic.

I recommend the NexStar 5 and 6. Ignore the wedge "feature", it doesn't do much. I talk a lot about the NexStar mounts on this channel. Don't go bigger than the 6, the mount can't handle it. The 8 is too big. Also, NexStars are good, but not great in the accuracy dept. They also tend to develop problems as they age. If your disability and budget can handle it, the AVX mount is better than the NexStar mount.

@@edting Thanks Ed ! I'm glad that I asked before buying.

I would pick the 6 over the 5, more aperture and beefier mount. The 5 comes on the smaller mount that the 4 comes on.

Do not buy that Celestron. That isn't nearly enough money for a computerized scope. The optical tube is the dreaded Bird-Jones type design, an automatic sign of junk. There's more but I don't want to pile on.

@@edting I truly appreciate you replying so quickly. I trust your advice, so, I will go with this Orion Observer 134 and will plan to eventually “graduate” to something else as I gain experience. Thank you!

Don't do it. The mount is not steady enough to support that kind of magnification.

@@edting thanks, gonna get the Orion xt 6" Dob after some thought. It will be my first, but thankfully, I can afford it.

No, they are all about the same. TeleVue eyepieces actually have slighly *more* outfocus travel than most other eyepieces.

Yep, those are my recommendation for best scope for beginners (under $250). They're capable and easy to use, and far more portable than a dob (my general recommendation is an 8" dob, especially if they come up for sale cheap on craigslist)

do you see any false color on things like the moon, jupiter, saturn?

all you see is false color on Jupiter and Saturn :) Jupiter washes out at 40x or so, Saturn a little better. But enough to see moons and two bands on Jupiter and the rings. It's really the one thing the scope does not do well. @@JCW86

​@@JCW86yes, there will be false color. A fringe filter can help, but gives a yellow tint, more expensive filters like the baader semi apo are an option, but they aren't very cheap

That's a lengthy review! I'm not sure I'm up to exploring all its possibilities.

If you have the money, go for the 6" or 8" Dob, no question. This telescope is an ultra-budget alternative for those who cannot afford anything more expensive. It is not perfect but it beats the other ultra budget gear out there.

@@edting Thanks!

If it's your first scope, I will always recommend the 8" Dob!

Because you need tracking, short focal length, and faster focal ratio ideally. APO refractors the ideal choice for DSO photography.

The optics are decent, I didn't worry too much about this. I don't think we can be too picky at this price point. The mount is where all these cheap scopes fall down, and the fact that this one actually works was a big pleasant surprise.

@@edting Thanks! I cam across a vid on youtube about this scope where this guy said his had very good optics and it make me think that maybe the Meade mirror quality was involved. Likely he just got a good sample. Anyway I shouldn't buy it since I have a good 130 Newt already. Thanks for the input.

It's the same mount with a shorter, faster optical tube on top. People tell me it's OK. Keep in mind, at f/4 your margin of error and tolerances get very tight.

yes it can. you can look up how to adjust an EQ mount to AZ setup on youtube.

How about removing the plastic extender, adding a metal visual back and placing a 1.25" Paracorr ( I have one for my Starblast 4.5). It should have enough focus travel and will slow the OTA to f/5.5!

​@@luisrosa55331.25" paracorr is a rare item, they haven't been made in decades and the chance of finding one is nil. You are lucky to have it

That's a Celestron AVX. I'd avoid buying it for now. You are going to be overwhelmed as it is without having to learn an astronomy-specific operating system. Be patient, it usually takes a while before you get comfortable with the scope.

@@edting Thanks! I trully appreciate your help. I'll be sure to save money and learn the ropes.

JMI has not really been in business for a long time and many of their products are now permanently out of stock.

i'd look at agena astro for some possibly parts upgrades

The lowest possible. 35mm to 40mm.

Actually, unless you are in dark skies, a 35 or 40mm eyepiece has lower contrast, too big an exit pupil, a more washed out sky background, which makes it harder to see galaxies. A better option would be an 82 degree eyepiece in the 23-26mm range or 20mm 100 degree eyepiece. Or even a 30/31mm 82degree eyepiece, better than a 35mm or 40mm for this application, and the 30/31mm 82 degree eyepiece has a wider field than a 34/35mm 68 degree, and there are only 2 options for a well corrected 40/41mm 68 degree eyepiece, televue and explore scientific, though there are used 40mm meade 5000 SWA that are the same as the ES. But I feel that exit pupil is too big for Andromeda unless you are in really dark skies. So that leaves the 23mm celestron Axiom LX, 24mm meade 5000 UWA and 24mm ES68 (all three were made by the same company, now exclusive to ES), the current 23mm celestron luminos, and the venerable 26mm Nagler. As well as the ES100 20mm, but I prefer the other sourced 20mm Orion XWA and the other versions such as William optics 20mm 100, stellarvue and TS etc... which are better at the edge and cost much less than the ES, and I found them to be very close to you guessed it. The 21mm ethos (way too expensive, as is the ES, when you can see what you can pick up for around $200 used from the other brands. I personally have the william optics 20mm xwa version.