BUT the 102 GT is an Achromatic refractor, short focus at that and will have a lot of Chromatic Aberration so anything bright you look at (Moon Planets) at anything over the lowest power will have an annoying purple fringe around and through it that is not only distracting but lessens contrast. and unfortunately at that price does not afford the best optics. not to put down equipment but they must use virtually any lens that gets cut leaving the possibility of poor optical performance. Not saying all will be bad but going used and paying from 50-65% of new will get you a lot better scope.. remember when you want to move up in a year OR LESS who do you want to have lost the money from the new scope, to sell it used??
Yes, the Zhumell Eclipse is the barlow design ... according to the owner reviews there's a lens at the bottom of the eyepiece drawtube (and on at least one occasion it has fallen off and damaged the mirror). One other weird little feature -- the user is required to use a screw-on extension tube between the eyepiece and focuser (Zhumell calls it an eyepiece adapter or an eyepiece extender depending on where you look in the manual). You can see it here.
I'd personally recommend Celestron's 102 GT from Costco if there are any left. I've had one for more than a year and it's my only scope at this time, and I'm no newbie -- been into the hobby for 37 years and on more of a budget than some of the other guys here. It has a few forgivable (and correctable) faults -- no scope is perfect -- but it's a steal for $199. Plus, you'll get Goto, more clear aperture than the reflector, and no collimation hassles.
Question: Can scopes like the Zhumell be accurately called Newtonian Reflectors? It would seem that the insertion of a lens in the optical path would make a unique enough difference to call for a change in design nomenclature. (I mean hey, insert a lens in an SCT's light path and you've got a Mak-Cass.) Maybe these things should be called Mak-Newts.
Good luck and welcome here, you will soon find each type of telescope has its followers and drawbacks!
here are some
refractors Chromatic aberration and smaller size, Apocromatic (color free) much higher cost per inch. but EX performance on High contrast objects
Newtonians and dobs Exposed mirrors need cleaning and recoating aluminum reflective coatings. Heavy weight and mounts, bouncy in the wind.
Can give outstanding views second only to refractors, much lower cost per inch
Mid expense, no false color needs high quality optics to compete optically, can dew or frost up easier.
Todays SCT MCT MNT SNT are built by computer control and are of highter quality (consistantly) than in the past.
Lighter weight, MANY accys available for photography etc
more comfortable viewing angles than Newtonians
better compromise , greater focus travel for Binocular viewers without useing a Barlow lens...
But what ever you do don't buy a Jones-Bird system (small lens at the base of the focuser) poor performance.