Is the Celestron Omni XLT 120 Refractor Telescope worth the investment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scope Thoughts
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Celestron Omni XLT 120 Refractor Telescope, focusing on its value as an investment for amateur astronomers. Participants explore various aspects such as specifications, mount stability, light gathering capabilities, and potential for astrophotography.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express interest in the Celestron Omni XLT 120, noting its size and potential for light gathering, but question the accuracy of its specifications regarding aperture.
  • Concerns are raised about the sturdiness of the mount, with some suggesting that mounts are often a weak point in telescope setups.
  • Several participants discuss the importance of motorized mounts for astrophotography, suggesting that it may be better to invest in a scope with an integrated motor rather than adding one later.
  • One participant mentions their experience with different types of telescopes, comparing reflectors and refractors, and suggests that reflectors may offer better value for light gathering.
  • Another participant notes that the CG4 mount is adequate but not ideal, expressing that the add-on drive may require patience to use effectively.
  • Some participants share personal experiences with their telescopes, discussing the challenges of stability and vibration in mounts, especially for photography.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the value of the Celestron Omni XLT 120, with some advocating for its purchase while others express reservations about its specifications and mount quality. Multiple competing views regarding the importance of mount stability and motorization for astrophotography remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the variability in telescope specifications and the subjective nature of telescope performance based on individual needs and experiences. There are unresolved questions about the compatibility of the motor with the telescope and the overall quality of the mount.

DaveC426913
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
24,318
Reaction score
8,513
I've got a 6" reflector, which I have fun with. I know just enough to get myself in trouble.

My friend is eyeing a scope too.
This looks like a pretty sweet setup.
http://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-omni-xlt-120-refractor-telescope-21090.html
http://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-telescopes-dr-motors.html
Pretty big for a refractor. I've got aperture-envy.

Your opinions?

My thoughts:
  1. The description can't decide if it's a 102mm or a 120mm.
  2. You never know if the mount is sturdy. A place scopes often cheap-out.
  3. No idea how to assess the motor. Easy to install?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I have an Orion 8" Reflector on a Dobsonian mount (no clock drive or computerized star finder). Its great for looking at stars randomly but I never know what I'm really looking at.

http://www.telescope.com/catalog/pr...cHjFuA36KvNEiwA7DpAqOqfyEoQVQ0mStcBoC8__w_wcB

I also have a smaller Orion Cas-Mak scope which doesn't gather as much light but is lighter and easier to setup for casual "don't know what I'm looking at mode either but I have an idea of the general direction" mode of viewing.

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-Star...Make-It-Zoom-Kit/p/27167.uts?keyword=maksutov

I think the StarMax 90 went up in price, I remember paying $200 not $400 though I could be wrong.

When I was looking for scopes I focused on light gathering and clarity so that meant bigger mirrors/lenses not more power although I do have two barlow lenses to increase the power a bit.

And there's this Mak-Cas with 127mm mirrors which may be comparable to your 127mm:

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-Apex-127mm-Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescope/p/9825.uts?keyword=maksutov

I tended toward reflectors as more bang for your buck in a scope whereas refractors could be used for terrestrial viewing.
 
I'd go with the 120mm for more light gathering although you need to study the specs to see what else varies.

Here's some pros and cons on general telescope buying where they prefer reflectors over refractors and larger aperture over smaller.

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-equipment/how-to-choose-a-telescope/

One review for your motor mentioned it didn't fit the Celestron he had so you might want to check with the seller about the scope and drive compatibility.
 
Also I have to mention my first scope an Edmund Scientific red stovepipe reflector with absolutely terrible lensing but I never knew until I compared it to my Orion's.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-Edmund-Scientific-Newtonian-2001n-red-Telescope-vintage-print-Ad-/141789738809?hash=item210353b739

( I couldn't find a better picture than this ebay ad)

then I graduated to binoculars 50mm until my arms got tired and I got neck cramps.

Anyway, with colder months coming up viewing should be a lot better too except for the snow you guys get.

In Texas it mostly gets colder with the ocassional ice storm every five years or so.
 
DaveC426913 said:
I've got a 6" reflector, which I have fun with. I know just enough to get myself in trouble.

My friend is eyeing a scope too.
This looks like a pretty sweet setup.
http://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-omni-xlt-120-refractor-telescope-21090.html
http://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-telescopes-dr-motors.html
Pretty big for a refractor. I've got aperture-envy.

Your opinions?

My thoughts:
  1. The description can't decide if it's a 102mm or a 120mm.
  2. You never know if the mount is sturdy. A place scopes often cheap-out.
  3. No idea how to assess the motor. Easy to install?

if you are only considering visual, that 120mm scope would be ideal on a non-motorised mount
the mount looks similar to my motorised HEQ5 PRO mount,

http://www.bintel.com.au/Mounts---Tripods/EQ-Mounts/Sky-Watcher-HEQ5-Pro-GoTo-Mount/96/productview.aspx

just a little lighter and without the computerised drive. It would be great for visual work.

if you have any inkling at all, of maybe wanting to do photos through a scope then I would seriously suggest you get a mount that is already
motorised rather than trying to add on some after-market adaptor ... it will save a lot of "making this work with that" hassles

Celestron are a great brand for scopes they have been around since the 1970's
my main scope is a 9.25" reflector
http://www.telescopesdirect.com.au/Celestron-CPC-925-GPS-XLT-Computerised-Telescope?sc=304&category=-404

fortunately it was $2000 cheaper when I bought it 3.5 yrs ago

keep us updated
ask more Q's if needed before your final purchase decision

cheers
Dave
 
Looks like a nice scope, nearly 5" achromat [curious they don't mention that, but, it is]. The CG4 isn't a great mount but adequate for that scope. The add on drive is not the best, but, again adequate if you have a little patience. I would say it is worth the money, perhaps even a bargain, at the advertized price. Scope prices are getting more competitive these days- good for consumers.
 
davenn said:
if you have any inkling at all, of maybe wanting to do photos through a scope then I would seriously suggest you get a mount that is already
motorised rather than trying to add on some after-market adaptor ... it will save a lot of "making this work with that" hassles
I was wondering about this too. Thanks.
 
On the mount issue, also make sure its a rock solid mount with no vibration. On one of my mounts, the slightest touch sets the starfield jiggling around. However, its a lot better than holding binocs but not good for photography/
 

Similar threads

Stargazing New Celestron CPC 925 XLT Telescope Arrives - Dave's Story
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K