What is the best telescope for under $100?

[@kaiko-san]

Every beginner's question in astronomy, thanks, David.

[@Eyesonthesky]

I see it asked over and over, and I certainly understand the for many people, there is a tight budget especially around the holidays. I think this is a great option for people to consider.

[@TheRealBrook1968]

Zhumell Z100 is very well designed. Comes with red dot finder, built in handle, 100mm , 400mm focal length, smooth azimuth and focus knob. Aluminum tube with interior matte black finish. The only con I easily solved was kelinar 17 and 9mm lenses. Have many plossls, so no big deal. Great to grab and go when I don't want to wrestle with the big boy.

[@bullthrush]

I use my Sky Scanner 100mm for quick looks at various targets. Your tripod looks handy and an easy build.

[@Eyesonthesky]

The Sky Scanner is just like the 76mm ones, just a tad larger. The tripod makes it SO much nicer to observe with these little tabletop telescopes.

[@astropythagorean]

A quality pair of binoculars can be a good starter investment for people uncertain about their level of interest in the hobby. Binoculars give you a broader perspective of the constellations which can help you to learn the relative positions of objects in the sky. Plus, they can be used for a variety of other purposes too. I now own multiple telescopes ranging in aperture from 80mm to 350mm, but I used a pair of 10x50 binoculars for the first year in the hobby and I don't regret that investment in time or money at all. I still use them when I want a broader view of the sky.

[@Eyesonthesky]

I certainly agree that binoculars are necessary for amateur astronomers, but something that is important to note is that these little telescopes can provide a MUCH larger field of view than telescopes of yesteryear (or even many refractors of today), and for many people just starting out, budget and expectations come into play (more on that in a moment). At f4, a 25mm Plossle provides a 4.3 degrees field of view - nearly that of 10x50 binoculars. And with a 76mm aperture, there is more light grasp, plus with the addition of a 3x barlow or a 3.2mm eyepiece as I suggested here, the observer can also see planets with some detail - certainly an initial expectation, yes? These little telescope options didn't exist previously, so I agree that binoculars often was a better suggestion previously. Given what these telescopes are capable of doing - AND showing planets with the addition of a single accessory - I think "Binoculars first" will disappoint many people who want to see planets and can still learn the sky using this little instrument. If you have the available funds, I'd strongly consider getting one to see how it works. They are perfect for small children, and even adequate for the occasionally-interested adult. I own telescopes from 60mm to 406mm, so I understand where you are coming from - binoculars are a necessary component, eventually. But first, now? Not anymore. Maybe the second or third optics someone invests in, yes.

[@astropythagorean]

​@@Eyesonthesky You make some great points that people should consider. Our organization has given small Orion scopes as prizes at some of our outreach events and we also loan one out to new members. They are capable devices and much better than the department store scopes of yesteryear. But, I personally think people tend to stick with the hobby longer when they are somewhat familiar with the sky before jumping into a telescope. Your experience with that may vary. Clear skies. :)

[@avt_astro206]

I have The Orion Funscope 76 It's Awesome Scope you Can See Nebulas and Star Clusters and Some Galaxies too..I have Seen Plenty of Them So Far. And Planets lIke Jupiter and Saturn 👍🏻👍🏻

[@Eyesonthesky]

It is a great little telescope - remarkably capable for its small size.

[@avt_astro206]

@@Eyesonthesky Yes managed to Observe the Traingulum Galaxy and Whirlpool galaxy and Many more

[@petset77]

Great points... especially concerning the horrific tripods on the "Travel Scope" type refractors. I recently got the Celestron version, the FirstScope, used for $30, "New, Open Box". The included eyepieces are not good (especially the junk 4mm), but I already have an Orion XT8 (8" Dobsonian) and a 4.5 EQ with wobbly EQ mount for seeing deeper into the night sky. I got this for the portability and ability to quickly dash out during breaks in winter cloud cover, and I already had some better Plossl eyeieces to make it work well for what it is. There is another alternative as a good starter scope at $30 above your budget point, the Orion "Skyscanner" 100mm (almost 4") table top with larger but same type of Dobsonian mount as the 76mm (3"), but with more aperture to gather more light. Solid Dob mounts are the way to go, on a budget. I'm likely going to build a Dob mount for the 4.5. Thanks for another great video, and clear skies!!

[@vicselixir]

Could you provide a link to that upgraded eye piece? I have the funscope and would like to get more out of it. Thanks

[@Eyesonthesky]

www.astronomics.com/astro-tech-3-2mm-1-25-paradigm-dual-ed-eyepiece.html

[@Rich-hy2ey]

Two best: 80mm Orion Shortube, used on a good camera tripod with a pan-tilt head. The best scope for a beginner who wants an effortless intro to astronomy. Or, a 130mm Newtonian (used) properly collimated and decently-mounted. Both can be had under $100 (for now) and provide excellent views.

[@petset77]

Used is the way to go if one can find what they're looking for locally to personally inspect. Our Orion "Starblast II 4.5 EQ came from friends moving away. $100, used once and then was an accent piece in their study. (it wasn't collimated, so they couldn't see anything). A few weeks later, I got an Orion XT8Plus on CraigsList a couple hours away for $325. Same story. The very nice older gentleman got it to show his grandkids the night sky and couldn't see much, so turned every knob in the dark, further removing any chance he had for viewing. Even the locking knobs on the primary were loose when I inspected it. (easy fix- collimation isn't difficult, even with a simple collimation cap). This one was also only used once, then placed back in the original box while awaiting someone like me to buy it for half price. I recently got my version of this little 3" scope (Celestron FirstScope) used on ebay for $30. Not local, but at that price worth the gamble for something listed as "Open Box New". It works.... better of course with better eyepieces. I'll dump another $20 on a red dot for it. Why not? ....anyway, clear skies!

[@jongroubert4203]

Hi, David, it's me, the royal PIA from the FB astro pages. Nice video! I'll add one more thing to the discussion of other cheap, oops, $100 scopes: the eyepieces. The eyepieces are generally the Ramsden and Huygenian models, and they stink on ice. Very narrow views, like looking down a straw. One other thing - what about the BST 2.5mm eyepiece? That would push the scope to close to the highest magnification it would be capable of, at 120x. It's also a smidge cheaper than the Paradigm. Or is that pushing the magnification too high for the 76mm spherical primary?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Hi John - wasn't sure if you'd see this, so I appreciate you weighing in with some thoughts. While most of the options available do have the narrower field of view eyepieces, Orion at least provides Kellners. They aren't half bad for a first view, to be honest. Not Plossls or even 60 degree eyepieces, but not bad either. I have an OLD 2.5mm TMB eyepiece, that I have used in this little telescope on Saturn. Indeed, it is not pushing this scope to use that much magnification, so that's a worthy option. I haven't seen the TMB eyepieces in years, and wasn't aware someone was still making one, which is why I suggested the Astro-Tech as it's affordable and in the price range of a quality barlow. If anyone is interested, it appears that the BST is identical to the older TMB I have - here's a link: agenaastro.com/bst-1-25-uwa-planetary-eyepiece-2-5mm.html

[@Superphilipp]

I'm not sure how you process your audio, but there's a weird thing going on with your consonants in the left stereo channel. A very simple fix could be to convert all your vocals to mono before you render, I'm sure you don't need them in stereo. Cool videos, I'm pumped for the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction!!

[@Eyesonthesky]

Hmmm... I'm not hearing that, but that could just be my (older) ears. Is that something you hear on all of my recent videos? I made this one with a new camera, so I am wondering if it has anything to do with that at all. It did record with quite a bit more gain, which I pulled down somewhat, but the left channel was up just every so slightly higher on this one.

[@Superphilipp]

@@Eyesonthesky It's really apparent on headphones or any stereo setup. I guess many people wouldn't be bothered by it. Your new video is fine, and I've never heard it on the old ones. Seems like you've taken care of it. :-) As a rule, you should process all audio in mono that doesn't have to be stereo (like your intro, that was specifically mixed in stereo), to avoid artifacts like this. You never know what weird kind of downmixing setup people have at home, maybe some generation of Android uses only the left stereo channel or something. You want all the information on all the channels and mixing in mono will give you that.

[@DavidRamirez-ck2ph]

I been on the the hunt for the carb nebula ever since I have gotten a 🔭. Great information David

[@Eyesonthesky]

I've got a video on how to find it! Check my old videos. I think I did that about 3 years ago.

[@isaacjohnson8752]

I had the hardest time finding the Crab in a 4” refractor, but after many times looking I saw it, it is very faint. Even upgrading to a 8” scope it’s still quite dim compared to other Messier objects.

[@neutrinos2478]

its CRAB NEBULA

[@DavidRamirez-ck2ph]

@@neutrinos2478 that's right, but carb sounds cooler.

[@YocoSapph]

c a r b

[@k.h.1587]

Those have spherical mirror, spherical abberation is more offensive than coma

[@kenplecki5600]

Great video David! Does this scope require frequent attention to collimation, or is it mostly "set it and forget it, but sometimes check it..."?

[@Eyesonthesky]

My friend Ken Plecki! How are you sir? This particular telescope has no collimation for the primary, and I think I have had to do the secondary mirror... twice? - in the 8 or so years I've owned it.

[@coliseu1143]

Do you have the link to buy this telescope?

[@Eyesonthesky]

www.telescope.com/mobileProduct/FunScope-76mm-TableTop-Reflector-Telescope/103112.uts

[@moonmonkey9595]

Hey David I’m so glad that you made this video when we spoke last you asked me about Photography through a scope like this and how I do it I can now after a few mo the of experimentation give a relatively detailed answer I will email you in a moment about it

[@Eyesonthesky]

Excellent - looking forward to it!

[@DavidYosephSchreiber]

What type of maintenance does this telescope need?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Occasional collimating of the secondary mirror - typically every couple of years. Replace the batteries for the red dot finder when necessary. That is about all that is necessary for maintenance.

[@STho205]

Excellent advice and presentation. If more people started with the tabletop 70mm Newtonian and two good eyepieces 4mm and 16mm for $40, then there'd be fewer big scopes acting as clothes hangers. Another great feature is the ability to safely store it, fully assembled and aligned, in a simple box, instead of it getting kicked about especially in children's rooms.

[@Eyesonthesky]

Thank you - they are such a nice step up from the wobbly tripod / poor-motion mounts of smaller/lesser refractors. While admittedly not perfect, they are a great "first" telescope and can spur a greater interest in the night sky. And you are correct about the storage - I still have the box for mine in which my Funscope gets stored, and it's 8 years old now! (There may be some tape on it to help with the integrity of the cardboard.)

[@poplof2050]

Wow thanks david this what i need👍

[@Eyesonthesky]

You're welcome - glad it helped!

[@dennyconnolly4114]

I recently got a present of a Bresser skylux 70/700 SF Telescope. Its my first Telescope.Any comments on it? I am a beginner.Any information will be more than welcome

[@avlri3]

good video david, really helped 👍

[@sweetypie9711]

1.25"/31.7mm lens fit this telescope please?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Yes they do.

[@sweetypie9711]

@@Eyesonthesky thank you so much! 😘

[@chimichanga.5757]

Wait please what is it called again?? I want to get it for this christmas

[@Eyesonthesky]

Orion Funscope.

[@DeuteriumTech]

Any recommendations where can I get one, preferably a seller that can ship overseas?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Orion Telescopes.

[@DeuteriumTech]

@@Eyesonthesky Thank you! Shipping rate is depressing though. :(

[@Eyesonthesky]

@@DeuteriumTech yes, it usually is, except from China.

[@garymartinez8494]

This is the best review of a telescope I've seen

[@Eyesonthesky]

Thank you!

[@nehemiahedwards5805]

I can't find any of these available, anyone know where to get one?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Unfortunately, demand for telescopes was high back in late spring through the summer as people started staying home due to the pandemic. So retailers have low/no stock on many telescopes, as manufacturers have struggled to keep up. Best option is to order one now and be in the line to get one when they do finally arrive.

[@nehemiahedwards5805]

@@Eyesonthesky Okay, thanks for the reply!

[@book3100]

Heeeeyyy.... that nice 2x4 tripod there, I had an idea to do something very similar for my refractor!

[@Eyesonthesky]

You should! The wood legs are so much more stable than the less expensive telescope tripods are.

[@book3100]

@@Eyesonthesky absolutely. The tripod I have is decent, but we can do better ;)

[@guilessa]

Great video, David!

[@Eyesonthesky]

Thanks!

[@PyricDemon]

This audio haunts me

[@thefighter887]

would i be able to fit a phone adaptor on this?

[@Eyesonthesky]

I have used a very lightweight one on mine. It is a pretty robust mount, so I'd think you'd be fine doing that.

[@thefighter887]

@@Eyesonthesky thank you sir!

[@bananaman-cv3rn]

does anyone have a link to this telescope

[@Eyesonthesky]

www.telescope.com/FunScope-76mm-TableTop-Reflector-Telescope/p/103112.uts

[@SlimJim_x]

Hi david how are you great vid

[@davidbrandenburg8029]

the best thing about that scope is the lazy susan mount. god help you if it comes in like mine, it had the rear mirror glued to the rear cap and the secondary mirror was to big so I had to buy a smaller mirror and install other wise i would see my eye looking back at me!. this mirror must have been like a 50mm wide oval mirror, way to big for such a short scope!. only thing mine was the 100mm not a 76mm like that one hes showing. your better off spend an extra dime or 2 and get one thats has collimation knobs!.

[@Eyesonthesky]

Bad idea to change the secondary. They are sized appropriately for the focal ratio. Installing a smaller one and you'll be losing light coming in from the primary. That will ensure seeing less than the primary is capable of showing. And if you're seeing your eye at the eyepiece, you're using too low of a magnification. Increase it somewhat and that problem goes away.

[@satvikvarun6386]

Thanks bro Keep making more videos 👍🏼❤️

[@satvikvarun6386]

Omg! I got a heart from Eyes on the Sky-David Fuller!!! Thankssssss😁❤️

[@loaiyar6113]

Im planning to save money for the Celestron Nexstar 6SE computerized I want to start astrophotography but I can’t use camera properly with my Celestron Powerseeker 127eq, the mount gets overloaded Do you recommend me the Nexstar? It’s my third telescope Is the one from the video good for astrophotography?

[@Eyesonthesky]

What is your budget? And are you interested in deep sky objects, planetary photography or both? Doing both is a lot more expensive.

[@loaiyar6113]

@@Eyesonthesky I’m more interested in Deep Sky Objects, well I live in a country which doesn’t provide telescope with decent price, so i have to deal with shipping My budget is 1500$ can’t afford more

[@Eyesonthesky]

@@loaiyar6113 I understand, thank you for clarifying. The telescope in this video is not recommended for astrophotography - much too small, and it would require a motorized mount. If deep sky astrophotography is your interest, you may want to consider "piecing together" a set up for those kinds of photos. For $1,500, you could get an Orion SkyView Pro mount (get the motors too!), a 72mm f/6 ED type refractor (Skywatcher and Astrotech have good ones) and a ZWO camera. You should still be under budget for that, and have a wider field of view than the Celestron SCT's will provide, though you will not have the GoTo capability, so you will have to starhop to objects, and a laptop will be necessary for the ZWO cameras also. I hope that helps!

[@loaiyar6113]

@@Eyesonthesky Thanks a lot

[@STho205]

The Powerseeker line is an example of miserable tripods that can be fixed DIY. Much too flimsy for even the scope tubes. The larger 5" with EQ mount and the counterweight horribly overloads the tripod. Get his plans for a homemade tripod. Remove your mount from the flimsy aluminum one and install it on the wooden tripod. You'll be surprised how much better the scope is.

[@Chris-Theodore]

Awesome!

[@Eyesonthesky]

Thanks!

[@luzvimindavaldez5369]

Can i see nebula with this?

[@Eyesonthesky]

Yes, but only the brightest ones through light pollution. You'll need dark skies to see other ones.

[@JETBYE]

your audio is terrible at keep switching sides