Customer Reviews

Celestron Nexstar 8i Telescope Kit w/XLT Coatings

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I own a Nextstar 8i and a Meade ETX 125. Comparing the Celestron with the Meade, I have the following conclusions:
1) Meade's computer hand control is better designed than Celestron's. To set up the Meade telescope, all I need to know is where north is. After pointing the telescope to north, entering the time, selecting my location from a database presented by the controller (only once), the telescope automatically goes to two bright stars for star alignment. With the Celestron, I need to enter the time, the longitude (make sure you know whether it is east or west, I was confused the first time) and the latitude (again need to know north or south), then select an alignment star from a list. I happened to know only one star, the Polaris, it was a pain for me to read through the star charts included in the telescope manual to figure where the other named stars were located. I too needed the manual to find my longitude and latitude in the dark. Also when entering the time, Meade's hand control conveniently turns on a small red light, so I can use it to read my watch's display. Celestron's hand control does not have this feature. The ETX comes with a real finder scope (though its optical quality is poor), it is relatively easy to put an alignment star to the center of the cross hair. The 8i has only a red-dot (which I constantly forget to turn off when I am done with my observation). It is much harder use the red-dot. Even when you think the star is aligned with the red-dot, you may not be able to see the star in the telescope. (I almost broke my neck when I tried to align some stars near zenith.) I soon bought a real finder scope for the 8i (it cost about $100 for a mount and a 50 mm scope) and got rid of the red-dot. And I know I had better know the longitude and latitude before I head to a different site. Oddly, Celestron's manual does not include any alignment star charts for the southern hemisphere.

2)In terms of seeing more details in planets and more deep sky objects, the 8i wins as expected.

3)In terms of pointing accuracy, 8i is much more accurate than the ETX (ETX's drive system was poorly designed and manufactured. A star image would drift in the field.) The 8i is able to find some deep sky objects without much of my help. However, the 8i requires full-capacity batteries to operate. When the battery power starts to go down, it may rotate the telescope to dangerous positions, hitting the telescope base with the eyepiece.

4) The 8i is very light (20 pounds); it weighs almost the same as the EXT. But both telescopes' mounts are shaky (ETX's is worse). At higher magnification, a gentle touch (turning the focusing knob), causes the star image to blur, making it hard to get a sharply focused image. An electronic focuser may be needed.

In general I think the 8i is a good telescope. The optics are good and the drive system is solid. I use it more often than the ETX. The only drawback is its star alignment process which requires more work from the user. I bought a binocular viewer for the 8i later. It offers fantastic views of the moon and deep sky objects (globular clusters looked like sugar grains spread on a black velvet.)