Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Celestron "PowerSeeker" 127EQ

  • Please log in to reply
437 replies to this topic

#1 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 01:09 AM

I ain't never, no not ever, never did I think that I'd ever, get my very own...

 

..."Bird Jones", until now...

 

https://www.amazon.c...telescope&psc=1

 

Now, I know that that Amazon link won't last for posterity, so, I paid $121.19 with free shipping, but with $8.48 state-sales tax, and for a grand total of $129.67.  Its time had come, and the price was right...  

 

box.jpg

 

box2.jpg

 

These were just inside, and crumpled up...

 

gift slips.jpg

 

From the wording within the listing, I thought that they were going to ship it in the glossy, colourful retail box only, so I selected to "hide" it when checking out.

 

box3.jpg

 

box4.jpg

 

EDIT: Sorry for the clouds.


Edited by Sky Muse, 07 February 2019 - 05:56 PM.

  • KevH, Adun, Earthbound1 and 3 others like this

#2 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 01:36 AM

These young folks seem awfully happy with theirs.  I do hope that they learned how to collimate it...

 

box art.jpg

 

Hmm, what is that that I see...

 

box7.jpg

 

750x!.jpg

 

Whoowee...750x!  Well now, I won't have to get that Orion 50" "Monster Dobsonian" after all.

 

box5.jpg

 

The usual literature and CD...

 

manuals.jpg

 

 


  • Devilish Kidney, Adun, Dynan and 2 others like this

#3 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 01:50 AM

A hard-copy of the owner's manual...

 

owner's manual.jpg

 

...but where's the picture of the one I got?  I've looked through the whole thing, and there are only two honourable mentions of my own; the specs on the last page...

 

owner's manual - specs.jpg

 

...and this...

 

owner's manual2.jpg

 

Let's look at that a bit more closely...

 

owner's manual3.jpg

 

"PowerSeeker 127EQ Newtonian Similar"???  I don't think so; not a chance, and this thing is NOT a Newtonian.

 

Then there's this on the very back of the manual, at the bottom...

 

manual price.jpg

 

Did the price I had paid include that $10 for the manual???  If so, I would've rather downloaded it for free. blackeye.gif   


  • Adun likes this

#4 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:36 AM

The accoutrements...

 

accessories.jpg

 

I took that finder outside, and to my surprise it focussed sharp and clear, and to the point where I'll never bad-mouth a 5x24 again.  If only all 5x24s could be as nice as this one, but I will be replacing the glue-grease with Super Lube.

 

Indeed, if you place that 4mm Symmetrical-Ramsden(?) into the 3x-barlow, you'll get a whopping 750x out of it.  I'm going to have to try that, but on something very bright, like the Moon, or Sirius.

 

It seems that throughout the "PowerSeeker" line, everybody needs a 3x-barlow, and regardless of the focal-length of the telescope of choice...

 

3x barlow.jpg   

 

And now this, the pièce de résistance: the 20mm erecting-eyepiece...

 

20mm erecting eyepiece.jpg

 

Why, it even comes with its own star-cluster...

 

20mm erecting eyepiece2.jpg

 

                             whee.gif

 

Incidentally, I do not understand the nature of this structuring at the bottom of the eyepiece...

 

20mm erecting eyepiece3.jpg

 

I've found it nigh impossible to purchase this eyepiece solo, although our Mr. Vorce offers the Meade variant which looks to be identical...

 

https://www.ebay.com...&frcectupt=true


  • Adun, Earthbound1 and sunrag like this

#5 PETER DREW

PETER DREW

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,648
  • Joined: 31 May 2017

Posted 07 February 2019 - 06:06 AM

Are you sure this is a "BJ" version. The picture on the manual shows a lot longer OTA than the Powerseeker "BJ"s I 've had the "pleasure" to work on.


  • Sky Muse and Mph100 like this

#6 dmgriff

dmgriff

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,430
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2006
  • Loc: 30 degrees latitude, USA

Posted 07 February 2019 - 12:25 PM

Are you sure this is a "BJ" version. The picture on the manual shows a lot longer OTA than the Powerseeker "BJ"s I 've had the "pleasure" to work on.

The manual spec (post #3) is focal length = 1000mm. The PS 127 is not pictured in the manual, a 114mm/900mm is shown.

 

Sounds like a Bird Jones....

 

Good viewing,

 

Dave


  • Sky Muse and Adun like this

#7 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 12:41 PM

Are you sure this is a "BJ" version. The picture on the manual shows a lot longer OTA than the Powerseeker "BJ"s I 've had the "pleasure" to work on.

Oh, I didn't need two 114mm f/8 Newtonians, as I already have this Meade...

 

kit.jpg

 

And I didn't need another EQ-1 mount, as I have this one, an "AstroMaster Deluxe" CG-2...

 

kit.jpg

 

In both cases, I was after the mounts only within those kits.

 

Yes, quite sure, and I will be having the pleasure as well.



#8 Adun

Adun

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,797
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2016

Posted 07 February 2019 - 12:45 PM

And now this, the pièce de résistance: the 20mm erecting-eyepiece...

 

attachicon.gif 20mm erecting eyepiece.jpg

 

Is everything awesome with it?


  • Sky Muse likes this

#9 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 01:13 PM

The tube's white...

 

catadioptric.jpg

 

That'll stick out like a sore thumb at night.  That's not the one I ordered.  Hmm...

 

catadioptric2.jpg

 

...not a very good paint job, that.

 

Ahhh...

 

desiccant.jpg

 

...cat litter.

 

catadioptric3.jpg

 

                                                                              meditation.gif       

 

Oh, that was merely the wrapping-tissue.                

 

 



#10 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 01:16 PM

Is everything awesome with it?

I haven't tried it out under the dome quite yet, but I am ever hopeful; full of promise and merry respites I anticipate.



#11 dmgriff

dmgriff

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,430
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2006
  • Loc: 30 degrees latitude, USA

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:24 PM

WOW!!

 

In the last picture of post #9, My old eyes thought it read "Powerseeker 127 ED" for a moment...

 

Maybe you will get some APO like views with it? shocked.gif

 

Good viewing,

 

Dave


  • Sky Muse likes this

#12 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 05:07 PM

The specs label, on the tube...

 

specs label.jpg

 

...draconian.

 

obstruction.jpg

 

The cowling, the vanes, are of...metal; incredible.  That is a rather large secondary-obstruction.  I could've just as well've gotten a C5 instead, for that matter.  Those vanes, they're reminding of...a jail cell, a prison.  I feel a single, curved vane coming on.  That should make it easier to collimate. idea.gif

 

The hind end...

 

hind end.jpg

 

Now, how is the mirror supposed to acclimate with that naugahyde over it?  As far as I'm concerned, that's just shipping material.  Naturally, the primary-mirror cell is of metal, but not to this level of design...

 

6 f5oa.jpg

 

Expectedly, no center-spot, but no problem...

 

no center-spot.jpg

 

My, look how shiny it is inside. evillaugh.gif  

 

It shall have a spot in time.  In the meantime, I took the collimation-cap from my Orion...

 

collimation cap.jpg

 

...popped it in to the "Bird Jones", and snapped a shot...

 

secondary scene - 020619.jpg

 

That doesn't look right to me.  Does it look right to you?



#13 N3p

N3p

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,527
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2018

Posted 07 February 2019 - 07:06 PM

 lol.gif 


  • Sky Muse likes this

#14 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 07 February 2019 - 08:19 PM

Let's have a look-see at its innards...

 

First, the doublet "corrector" at the end of the drawtube...

 

doublet 'corrector'.jpg

 

It came with its own star-cluster, too.  Here, the frosty, stoned edges of the doublet, and to be blackened in time...

 

stoned edges.jpg

 

The cowling and the secondary-assembly...

 

secondary assembly.jpg

 

The spherical, primary mirror; its cell has no springs, either of rubber, or metal...

 

spherical primary.jpg

 

Why, the master himself, Newton, observed with a spherical, and with a greatest diameter of 2" or less.  To wit, who am I to demand and expect a parabola? 

 

The kit includes a black-and-silver CG-2(EQ-1).  I think we all know what that looks like, therefore no images of it will be forthcoming.

 

This loose interpretation and simulation of a Jones-Bird catadioptric, colloquially, a "Bird Jones", sells like proverbial hot cakes.  The kit, as a whole, is most certainly beginner-priced, the optical-tube compact(yet another draw), and an economical alternative to a 5" Schmidt-Cassegrain(yet another draw still, albeit unwitting perhaps).  The telescope is configured and designed for the medium-to-high powers, and where any telescope must work harder to produce sharp, pleasing images.  That requires a near-perfect collimation, and if ever there was a telescope that tries to prevent that very thing, this is it.  However, the harder it is, the more rewarding the results.  My goal is to find out if the telescope is worth the while, and beyond what was paid for it.

 

In the end, this is all I was after within this kit...

 

The Objective.jpg

 

Thank you for looking.


  • Adun and N3p like this

#15 dmgriff

dmgriff

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,430
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2006
  • Loc: 30 degrees latitude, USA

Posted 08 February 2019 - 07:28 AM

Are not fast newtonians supposed to have a noticeable offset of the secondary for good collimation? Doesn't this design use a fast spherical primary with the "corrector" for f/8 in the drawtube?

 

I don't see anyway one can adjust the secondary, if needed, for offset to get the correct cone at the drawtube/eyepiece.

 

Let us know if a offset is "built in" to the apparently nonadjustable four vane spider/cowl (or none is needed in a "BJ").

 

(Or, maybe I am just confused)...

 

Good viewing,

 

Dave


Edited by dmgriff, 08 February 2019 - 07:45 AM.


#16 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 08 February 2019 - 02:09 PM

Are not fast newtonians supposed to have a noticeable offset of the secondary for good collimation? Doesn't this design use a fast spherical primary with the "corrector" for f/8 in the drawtube?

 

I don't see anyway one can adjust the secondary, if needed, for offset to get the correct cone at the drawtube/eyepiece.

 

Let us know if a offset is "built in" to the apparently nonadjustable four vane spider/cowl (or none is needed in a "BJ").

 

(Or, maybe I am just confused)...

 

Good viewing,

 

Dave

Yes, at f/8 with the "corrector", I would think it to be, natively, an f/4, or thereabouts; quite fast in any event, and with the secondary's proper off-setting.  However, in this image of the secondary-scene, you cannot see all three primary-mirror clips...

 

secondary scene - 020619.jpg

 

It appears to be mis-collimated, although the off-set appears correct for an f/4.

 

Now, the "corrector" is in place, I haven't removed it at all, yet, and it said that it must be removed prior to collimating the system in the manner of a classical Newtonian.  It may be that the "corrector" is distorting the view.  I do not know at this point.

 

I'll be investigating it further.


  • dmgriff likes this

#17 Adun

Adun

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,797
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2016

Posted 08 February 2019 - 03:03 PM

post-213496-0-38862800-1549652577.jpg

 

It's not so much the collimation offset, its, its...

 

¿Am I the only one who thinks this primary looks egg-shaped?


  • Sky Muse and Corky80124 like this

#18 KevH

KevH

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 996
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2010
  • Loc: Maine

Posted 09 February 2019 - 10:01 AM

I love your tear down and rebuild threads! Keep them coming!
  • Sky Muse likes this

#19 decep

decep

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 416
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Georgia, US

Posted 09 February 2019 - 11:06 AM

¿Am I the only one who thinks this primary looks egg-shaped?

Yes, but probably because the collimation is off.  The large part of the "egg" is the side where the clip is not visible, and the thin side has the clip fully visible.

 

Also, the camera might not have been perfectly aligned with the focuser tube.  A few millimeters out of alignment [the camera] will also cause this.


  • Sky Muse likes this

#20 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 09 February 2019 - 11:58 AM

Yes, but probably because the collimation is off.  The large part of the "egg" is the side where the clip is not visible, and the thin side has the clip fully visible.

 

Also, the camera might not have been perfectly aligned with the focuser tube.  A few millimeters out of alignment [the camera] will also cause this.

The hole of the collimation-cap is only 2mm in width.  A few millimeters off and the camera would see only black.  It was centered, and squared, over the hole at the time.



#21 Star Geezer

Star Geezer

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 270
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2018
  • Loc: Lat. N 40º 56' Long. W 87º 8'

Posted 11 February 2019 - 08:51 PM

After reading this post. Last night I had to reevaluate my PowerSeeker 127eq. When I first received the scope, I did a quick eyeball check down the focuser. It looked good to me. So, last night I put the collimation cap in the focuser. The secondary was centered and perfectly circular, I could see all three primary clips equally. I could see the reflection of the caps hole centered in the secondary. In three years I have not had to align it once.

 

I have only looked at the Planets and the Moon through the PowerSeeker, before last night. M41 was the first object to find its way into the eyepiece. For the first time, I could not tear myself away. Then it was the Orion Nebula. The wings spread out beyond the field of view. Then before calling it a night, I turned the PowerSeeker toward the Double Cluster, Awesome.


  • Sky Muse likes this

#22 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 16 February 2019 - 02:05 AM

In order to improve the versatility when mounting this infamous icon, I started to think. idea.gif  Yes, a potentially dangerous occupation, I know...

 

tube rings.jpg

 

Have a gander at those itty-bitty mounting screws.  The holes of the saddle are certainly adequate for larger ones.  They don't even fill the threaded holes of the rings...

 

5mm screw.jpg

 

5mm screws they are.  So, I had gone out yesterday to my local hardware, to the county seat.  At first I tried screwing a 6mm into the hole of the ring that I had brought with me, but it wouldn't thread in hardly at all.  It then dawned upon me, "It's not a metric hole".  No, instead they are 1/4-20 holes.thankyou.gif   

 

It appears that Synta was fresh out of 1/4-20 bolts at the time they had cobbled this one together.  Are these rings a Chinese clone of an American production?  In any event...

 

acorns.jpg

 

...stainless, always.

 

screws.jpg

 

I had a spare bar laying around, and from my Antares 805 achromat...

 

Antares 805 bar.jpg

 

That's more like it.  The telescope is now free of its bolt-on modus operandi...

 

Vixen style.jpg

 

Vixen style2.jpg

 

...and it can be attached to its original mount, courtesy of a saddle from a spare "AstroMaster" CG-2 mount-head...

 

Vixen saddle.jpg

 

I consider at least the tube-rings, if not the bar in addition, a part of the telescope rather than the mount, hence my now having posted this enhancement within this thread.  I once saw one of these OTAs on eBay, new, but without the tube-rings.  I asked the seller about that...  

 

A fat lot of good that did.


Edited by Sky Muse, 16 February 2019 - 02:20 AM.

  • xvariablestarx, Earthbound1 and mchriste like this

#23 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 01 June 2019 - 06:48 AM

The "Bird Jones" revisited... scared.gif

 

Over three months have passed since my last posting.  I spent the interim ever mindful of this particular telescope, yet occupied with others, and with other mounts, including its own "PowerSeeker" CG-2/EQ-1 which has now been hyper-tuned with bronze and fitted with wooden legs...

 

kit5a.jpg

 

The Bird will not be alighting upon that mount, as the counterweight required for it is much too large and heavy.  Only the smaller and smallest of my telescopes will mount upon that one in future.

 

The telescope had yet to enjoy its first light under the starry void, until early this morning.  I did not want to begin renovating it until afterwards.  The telescope has not been touched, yet.  Now, without further ado, the first-light report of my 127mm f/8 "Bird Jones"...

 

1.jpg

 

For this session, the telescope was mounted upon my new "Twilight Nano" alt-azimuth, and it supports it quite well...

 

4.jpg

 

The accoutrements that came bundled with the telescope...

 

3.jpg

 

...the 20mm erecting-eyepiece, the 4mm modified-achromat(I imagine), and a 3x barlow.

 

First off, I needed to align the finderscope to the telescope itself.  I used Polaris, the North Star, for that task, and whilst I was at it, I snapped a shot through the 20mm...

 

Polaris.jpg

 

That is also precisely how it appeared to my eye, and at best focus; like the devil's own pitchfork; no surprise, really.

 

After the 5x24 finderscope was aligned, I aimed the Bird at Jupiter(my apologies, Jove)...

 

4mm(250x)...

 

Jupiter - 4mm(250x).jpg

 

The 4mm isn't all bad.  It performed better than anyone had a right to expect, but as you can see there the view wasn't sharp.  

 

20mm(50x)...

 

Jupiter - 20mm(50x).jpg

 

After testing those two, a spate of madness overwhelmed me, forcing me, against my better judgement, to pop the 20mm into the 3x-barlow...

 

Jupiter - 20mm & 3x-barlow(149x).jpg

 

I must say, the 3x isn't half bad, thus far.  I will be testing it further, and with other telescopes.

 

Now, the camera had actually portrayed Jupiter much better than what I saw with my own eyes.  For example, I could see the moons at all times, and the "Amici line" of the 20mm spanning across the field-of-view.  Also, in almost all instances, Jupiter appeared almost doubled.

 

So, that's my Bird freshly fallen off of the overseas barge.

 

I've got to do something about this secondary-assembly...

 

obstruction3.jpg

 

                                                      gaah.gif

 


  • xvariablestarx and Earthbound1 like this

#24 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8,565
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 01 June 2019 - 06:56 AM

Oh, I almost forgot...

 

I set aside the three bundled items, lest they destroyed my interest in astronomy altogether, and inserted a GSO 20mm "SuperView"...

 

Jupiter - GSO 20mm(50x) 'SuperView'.jpg

 

So much for that.


  • skysoldier173abn likes this

#25 KerryR

KerryR

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,009
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2007
  • Loc: West Michigan

Posted 01 June 2019 - 09:20 AM

I had been toying with the idea of trying one of these scopes out, to see what all the anti-hype is about. 

I have a soft spot in my heart for small, inexpensive 'scopes: I have (and adore) one of those 76mm f9 Newts on a yoke mount (it's actually an excellent scope. Mine's Zuhmell, the Orion SpaceProbe II variant is vastly inferior, to be avoided), one of those funky little "thermos bottle" Orion 80mm achros (shockingly nice optics), a Celestron f4 Cometron Newt (a lot of fun. Not a bad sort-of-paraboloid for the $60 I paid), a Polaris 130 f5 Newt that had a spherical(!) mirror (and ring zones and a turned edge... Now freshly fixed and parabolized , out to Majestic for coating), an Orion XT4.5 (these are excellent, one of my all-time favorite small scopes).You get the point...

With the 127 Bird-Jones, I thought I might be able figure out a way to tease out a bit better performance than is generally attributed to these scopes. So far, this thread has cured me of that interest.

I'll be very curious to see if you can somehow get the thing to attain a decent image. So far, your images remind me of the performance of that spherical f5 Newt I mentioned...


  • Sky Muse, PatrickVt and Bowlerhat like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics