Hello Stargazers! We're excited to announce that we're now on Patreon! Follow us for behind-the-scenes footage from LearnToStargaze and updates on the development of our stargazing retreat, "Stargaze Nova Scotia." www.patreon.com/LearnToStargaze
I had this telescope for around 10 years, I barely know how to use it, but tonight I'm alone, my wife still working, my youngest daughter goes with the nieces. I'm about to turn into am expert with your vids. Gracias amigo!!
I wish you had shown how to put together the telescope in regular speed and verbally explained what you are doing. I just got this telescope today and it looks hard as hell to assemble and get everything correctly put together.
best video of all the ones I have seen about this telescope, which is my first ever and after watching this video we were outside on the deck blown away by looking at the moon! We'll watch part 2 and 3, thank you for making these, very helpful.
I mean, I have an astrophysics degree and work at an observatory. This is the most difficult telescope I have ever used. Does that answer your question?
Do not buy a powerseeker. Even though the author of this video shows off a lot of the problems with this scope, I think he doesn't hammer home enough that this is a bad scope for beginners. All of the powerseekers and most of celestron's other beginner scopes are bad. Many of meade and orion's beginner scopes are low quality too and it can be difficult to avoid crappy scopes in the budget price range. Get a $330 6" Dobsonian. (Orion, Apertura, and SkyWatcher sell these). If you can't afford it, get a $200 5" tabletop reflector (AWB OneSky 130, SkyWatcher Heritage 130, or Zhumell Z130). If you can't afford that, get the $150 Zhumell Z114 (or a used Orion StarBlast 4.5) If you can't afford that, either get the Zhumell Z100/Orion SkyScanner 100 tabletop reflector for $100, or a decent pair of binoculars. (7x50s or 10x50s). I highly recommend saving up for the 5" tabletop or 6" full-size dobsonians if you possibly can. Dobsonian reflectors (and tabletop dobsonians) are the very best telescope for any beginner. They are newtonian reflectors on simple, sturdy, easy to use rockerbox mounts which go up, down, and all around. They are the best bang for your buck, because both the optics and mount are affordable and work great. Telescopes on tripods need to have mounts which cost almost as much as the entire telescope itself. That means either the big telescope you want will be extra expensive, or you have to settle for a smaller one. Dobsonians don't have this problem because their design is extremely simple and sturdy, whereas undersized eq and altaz mounts can cause a lot of wobble. also get the book Turn Left At Orion, which will show you how to find lots of stuff in the sky in small and large telescopes. The author of this video also has a book, maybe check that out too, I've never read it.
Like with any hobby whether it's photography, riding bikes, drones, or even this hobby; you are going to encounter gear snobs. You have to start somewhere, so don't let other's opinions scare you off, or convince you to go out and plunk down a grand on a scope that you might lose interest in. It's better to put just under $200.00 into something like this or comparable to it, and not invest as much money only to have this gathering dust in your garage or attic, than something costing you a grand gathering dust. Today this very telescope came to my door. It's my second one I have ever owned, the first one was a yardsale special that was beat up, had scratched lenses, etc, but I got my first view of Saturn with it, even though it was blurry, but I could still see the rings around the planet, and was totally fascinated by the whole business and wanted to eventually get something better. I did a preliminary set up on the new scope today, and currently it's cloudy, windy and cold, but it's supposed to be mostly clear tonight at 1 am, so I'm going to give it a go. Do I expect shots like the ones on the box? No. I understand the value of good glass and equipment as a wildlife photographer, but even then; I started out with a super cheap point and shoot that was only able to give me 30 jpeg photos in 2001, and it was a serious piece of junk. If you can afford to get something better like around the $400 range and you are sure that this is what you want to do, then it might be a good idea to do more research and choose something you can grow into. If this is something you aren't sure about but want to get some good shots of the moon or just to stargaze, then this might be suitable. Right now the price of these scopes have went out of this world, and there are toy scopes that can be had for $40 out there that are tabletop scopes, but if you want to get anything more than the moon, you will need to set your sights a little higher. (No pun intended.) :-)
Your videos are super helpful. Do you know where I can get the correct screw for the Celestron Piwerseeker 70EQ? The one that they provided is too short to secure the counterweight. Thanks.
You need to practice on distant objects during the day. See how the the telescope reaches focus with each eyepiece. Focus using the set of knobs below the eyepiece. Don’t use the Barlow that came with the telescope.
Are these your only choices? I state the minimum requirements for what constitutes a beginner telescope in several of my videos. Neither of these telescopes meet the minimum requirements for a beginner telescope (although the 80EQ far more annoying to use, than the 70AZ). In summary: A beginner telescope shall: -have 4 inches of aperture or greater, -include an AZ mount that stays where you point it without slipping when you let go, -include a red-dot or bulls-eye finder, -be easy to use when pointed high in the sky. A beginner telescope shall not have "Bird Jones" in the focuser (this is generally any telescope with 114mm or 127mm of aperture). Most all small Dobsonians meet these requirements, as well as many 102mm refractors.
Because of the laws of physics. Light obeys this formula as it forms an image with a lens: θ = 1.2 x λ / D θ is the resolution ( in radians), λ is the wavelength of light, and D is the diameter of the telescope’s primary lens. This angle is essentially the size of the smallest object the telescope can distinguish. If you calculate this for the Moon for a backyard telescope, you get an a angle corresponding to a size of between 1 and 2 kilometers.
@@LearnToStargaze could I bother you again? could you give me the measurements of the telescope unit itself? (eg is it like 90cm/35inch long? because i cannot find it online about the telescope unit itself) I would like to buy it as an gift for someone :)
@@mastergene825 The powerseeker telescope isn't really something you would want to buy as a gift.... It's sooo much more work than a more basic telescope like a small dobsonian.
Hi, John. Just finished watching all three videos on this scope. I'm not sure why you're reviewing this scope as opposed to something more worthy - which is basically any other entry-level scope. This Powerseeker 70 is the very definition of a "department store junk telescope". You gave many reasons for this throughout the video. Like you said, the first tip off is the inclusion of that 3x Barlow. Heck, even the inclusion of that 4mm eyepiece is ridiculous - as you mentioned in the video - the magnification far, FAR exceeds the capability of the telescope. And like you also discussed, the Barlow is practically useless. (By the way, a much easier way to calculate that maximum magnification is simply to double the aperture in mm. 70mm x 2 = 140x.) Plus, those incredible pictures on the box are just a bad come-on to the consumer, showing them things that they will never, EVER see visually through the scope. The ridiculous (but humorous!) lengths you went to in your third video to duplicate that photo with this scope conclusively prove this. These pictures on department store scope boxes set expectations waaaay too high. This leads to disappointment and frustration in the consumer when they don't see the pretty pictures on the box through their scope. They end up selling scopes like this at their next garage sale, or donating them to Goodwill, and then leaving the hobby forever. This is not what we want. Like you said, EQ mounts are silly on these entry-level, beginner scopes. It is still very easy to track an object on an alt-az mount, and they are far, far easier to set up. I've always found that these entry-level EQ mounts are much more trouble than they're worth. As you discuss at length in the second video, you have to do a polar alignment with these EQ mounts to get the benefit of being able to track on only one axis (the RA axis). However, when you actually use the scope, I've found that you often have to fight with the mount to get it to point where you want it to. The end result is usually me picking up the entire scope and rotating it to get the telescope to point at whatever object I want to see. You have to do meridian flips with EQ scopes. You have to balance the telescope and counterweight with these EQ scopes. As you discussed, the setting circles on these cheap, entry-level EQ mounts have far too much error in them to allow them to use them accurately, and (as you also mentioned), no one does this anymore. All of this business unnecessarily complicates using a telescope for a beginner. My philosophy with a beginning astronomer is to get them out with a nice scope that is as simple to use as possible. An alt-az mounted scope requires none of these shenanigans and meets this requirement handily. An alt-az scope is simply point and view - no polar alignment, no balancing. (By the way, you say in the second video that Polaris is 0.45 degrees from the true North Celestial Pole. That is incorrect. It is actually about 45 minutes from the NCP; this works out to be 0.75 degrees.). In the US, this scope, the PowerSeeker 70, is $129. For only a few dollars more, you can get a better scope, on an easy-to-use alt-az mount, with better eyepieces. Meade has the Infinity and StarPro lines, which come in 70mm, 80mm, 90mm, and 102mm sizes. The 70mm starts at about $149 and will be so much easier to use than the PS70. Each of these scopes - in both lines - comes with three eyepieces (Kellners) and a 2x Barlow - not a ridiculous 3x Barlow. Almost all of the magnification combinations with the Barlow are suited to the magnification limitations of the scope, except for the very highest ones. In your second video, you recommend replacing the inadequate finderscope that comes with the PS70 with an RDF. These Meade scopes - both lines of scopes - already come with an RDF. The additional $15-20 cost for doing this brings the end cost of the PS70 right in line with the initial, out-of-the-box cost of either the Infinity 70 or the StarPro 70. You also mention in the second video to upgrade the 20mm eyepiece that comes with the PS70 because it has a bit too narrow of a field of view to allow the user to find things easily, so that they should go out and buy a 24mm-28mm eyepiece instead to fix this problem. Again, the Meade scopes already come with a 26mm eyepiece (not the Meade 26mm Plossl you showed; the 26mm that comes with the Meade scopes is a Kellner design) right in the box that solves this problem. In the second video you discuss the limited range of motion of the declination slow-motion control. This isn't a problem on the Meade StarPro line of scopes. This line has slo-mo controls that work infinitely in either direction, on both axes, without ever needing to wind them back, so to speak. (It would have been nice if these infinite controls were available on the Infinity line of scopes, but hey, I don't work in Meade's marketing department to name these scopes!). Like you, I too have found that the RA slo-mo control fails very quickly on these cheap EQ mounts. This isn't a problem with the particular one you bought, but a problem that is endemic to these entry-level EQ mounts generally. Again, the slo-mo controls on the Meade alt-az mounts don't suffer from this problem on either axis - they just work. And again, the movement of the entire scope left and right on that base is a problem that is endemic to these entry-level EQ mounts, no matter how much you try to tighten them. This removes the entire reason for having an EQ mount in the first place. I wish you would have come out in your conclusion in the second video and stated that you don't recommend this telescope. Compared to the equivalent Meades, it fails badly.
Well I was trying to get my kid interested in astronomy, who spends so much time on videos games. But after reading the comments of this telescope, I am starting to regret buying it and the boom was suggested by Amazon too. So now I am thinking this is a scam.
It took about 2 months of editing to make this 3 video series. There are other videos from other RU-vidrs that cover assembly. No need to create something that’s already been done.
Although I agree with your assessment of the quality of this telescope, the image itself in this telescope does improve with the use of a proper eyepiece (not included of course). I completed all of RASC’s Explore the Moon program with this scope while we were filing the “Moon at Noon” show, and besides the crappy mount, the telescope was well suited to that observing program.
@@LearnToStargaze ahahaha sorry I just need to get anger out from trying to use it lastnight, I’m sure it works good with patience which my back at a 45 degree angle does not. Thank you for letting me know there’s a missing more clear eye piece. I will continue my mission to scan the stars lol
@@Tre26 No worries. Even a $20 eyepiece like this would massively improve this telescope: www.amazon.com/SVBONY-Telescope-Eyepiece-Apparent-Astronomy/dp/B01MAZ7LA6
