Cheap telescopes: What to expect, what to look for

I spend time on several online astronomy forums and see this question all the time:

"What telescope should I get? I have $100 to spend."

Left: Too many super cheap telescopes end up in the thrift store. Sadly, they knew they would.

Constructive responses from amateur astronomers usually include one or more of the following:

• Clarifying questions: what do you want to see, what is your interest, how dark or light-polluted is your sky, etc.
• Save your money until you can spend more
• Find a used telescope
• Check out your local astronomy club
• Buy binoculars instead

All of these responses are quite valid and good advice. There is endless data online about recommended telescopes and equipment, which I won't delve into here. 

Most "experts" will tell you these cheap telescopes are all junk and are "hobby killers." However, I have seen many comments by avid amateurs who started with just such a telescope and the thrill of seeing craters on the Moon or Saturn's rings for the first time set them on a lifelong path as an amateur astronomer. I think a far more reliable determinant of whether someone will catch the astronomy bug is the person rather than the equipment. I think that's the case for most everything related to astronomy—or anything else, really. Nevertheless, if you can afford spending a bit more, you will likely get a better telescope and enjoyment for a longer period of time and without as much frustration.

You will see some reviews of ultra cheap telescopes saying how fantastic and awesome they are, primarily because most of the reviewers never looked through a telescope before and ANY view of the Moon's craters, for example, will elicit that type of response. If that's all you're after, then maybe dipping your toe in the cosmos like this is enough. But after that initial "wow" moment, the cons start stacking up. I think this quote from a $100 telescope five-star review on Amazon says it all:

"...if I could do it over again, I would've spent more and gone with a better one."

However, for various reasons, all of the above advice may not be feasible or practical for you. For example, maybe you just don't have $300 to spend on a telescope. While you are slowly saving money, the prices are slowly going up. You're not sure if your kid is going to use it and you don't want to spend hundreds of dollars finding out. You may not be comfortable looking for a used telescope, not knowing what's good and what isn't. You may not have a local astronomy club, or can't get to one. With binoculars, you're not going to see much detail on the Moon and none on the brighter planets—it's just not the same as the telescope experience.

If you don't follow the above advice, here's what you can expect, and here's what to look for. The key criterion is enjoyment, and that depends on the individual and your expectations.

What to expect from a cheap telescope

Most telescopes recommended by amateurs start at about $300 these days, although sometimes you can get one on sale for cheaper, especially in the used market. So we're talking about sub-$300 (new) telescopes. This is the total price for the optical tube assembly (OTA, the telescope itself), a mount that moves in two axes, and a tripod or base on which the tube and mount are placed. You also need at least one eyepiece (the lens that you look through), some type of lower power finderscope attached and aligned to the main telescope so you can find things in the sky, and some type of chart or software that tells you where those things are. Some telescopes come with all of these pieces, especially the ultra-low end scopes. That doesn't mean they all work well, or at all.

With a cheap telescope, you can expect the following:

• Shaky views. Manufacturers usually skimp on the mount and tripod. Your view in the eyepiece, especially the higher the power you use, will vibrate uncontrollably any time you touch any part of the telescope. So if you are trying to focus, you will have to move the focuser a little, wait several seconds for the view to steady, decide if it's better or worse, and repeat until you get it in focus. All the while, the object will appear to move out of the field of view because the Earth (with your telescope attached to it) is turning and the sky is not. When you move the telescope to get the object back in view, you will again have to wait for the scope to settle. This can be frustrating, but not necessarily terminal.
  
  
  
  
  
• Blurry views. Most cheap telescopes either have poor main optics (the refractor lens or reflector mirror), or poor eyepieces (the lens you look through), or poor mirror diagonals (for refractors, to bend the light 90 degrees so that you can look high in the sky at a reasonably comfortable angle), or all three. Some main optics are better than others, but the view will still not be as sharp as that of a higher quality telescope. Finer lunar detail available to a scope of that size may not be visible, the edges of the bright planets may not be well-defined, moon shadow transits of Jupiter are often difficult to make out, color fringes appear on the edges of bright objects, and stars may be misshapen blobs rather than pinpoints.
  
  IMPORTANT NOTE: These same effects may be the result of poor atmospheric "seeing." This is the case in the eastern U.S., for example, which is under or near the jet stream and is often subject to poor seeing. The view will appear be ripply as if viewing a stone in a shallow stream, or soft and blurry. If possible observe objects when they are higher in the sky, where you are looking through less atmosphere. Also avoid viewing directly over pavement, rooftops, cars, or other objects that radiate heat at night. If the seeing is bad, switch to a lower power eyepiece where the effects are less noticeable. Or wait for a better night.
  
  
• Jerky movements. Going back to the mount and tripod or base, the movements of the axes (left and right, up and down) are usually not very smooth, so it becomes difficult to place an object in the center of the field of view, and then recenter it each time it drifts out of the field, sometimes overshooting it and then losing it completely.
  
  
• Difficulty finding objects. This is usually the most frustrating aspect and one which causes a lot of cheap telescopes to end up in the closet or the dumpster. The other defects above may still allow you to enjoy using the telescope if you have patience and reasonable expectations, but this one is terminal if not addressed. Most cheap telescopes come with very cheap finderscopes or red dot finders, and sometimes the design does not even allow you to easily replace them later on down the road. Also, if you don't know the sky, you will be limited to the Moon and maybe Jupiter and Saturn. You WILL need to learn the sky.

• No imaging capability. These cheap telescopes are not designed for imaging, which requires a tracking mount and a much more robust build. With some practice, you can hold your phone up to the eyepiece and snap a fuzzy view of the Moon. That's about it.
  
  

With these defects, or should I say challenges, in mind, you can usually work around most of them to be able to see craters on the Moon, the four brightest moons of Jupiter, the rings of Saturn, maybe some slight detail on these brighter planets, and brighter double stars. If you are in a dark enough sky, you can glimpse some of the brighter deep sky objects, such as star clusters and a few galaxies and nebulas. 

So if you don't take the advice above and still end up buying a cheap telescope, with some patience and resolve, you might still get some enjoyment out of it. Just don't expect anything close to the images you see online. Not even close. Even big expensive telescopes can't compete visually with images from even mediocre telescopes.

Except for some stars that show subtle color, a yellowish or chalky gray color to the Moon, and some muted colors in the bright planets, almost everything else will be shades of white or gray. These objects can still be fascinating and quite beautiful, but you have to appreciate what you are seeing, not just what it looks like in the telescope. It's a thrill to see these incredibly huge and distant objects through your own telescope with your own eyes! If it isn't, then maybe a telescope isn't the right thing for you or your child. No problem, we're all different.

Cheap telescope as a toy

Do not give a child younger than about 8 years old a telescope. It's just not something most of them have the patience or understanding to operate and appreciate. Expect that you, the adult, will be the one having to learn the sky and find objects for young children. A cheap telescope will stretch your own limits of patience.

A telescope given as a toy is just that—a toy, and won't function as a precision instrument. Telescopes make bad toys. A $30 pair of binoculars would make a better toy, and is also a functioning instrument that's a lot easier to use, for a lot less money. 

What to look for

• The most critical part is the mount and tripod. Thicker, adjustable legs on the tripod, a heavier mount, and a spreader to keep the tripod legs from collapsing are all good. Most cheap telescope tripods are not tall enough to allow an adult to observe without bending over. But that's okay, because sitting is more comfortable and allows for a steadier view at the eyepiece. Look for 1/4-20 mounting threads on the telescope tube assembly so that you can upgrade to a better photo tripod. Many of these, whether new, used, or from a thrift store, will be better than what comes with the telescope. 
  
  Above: Many cheap scopes come on wobbly pan-tilt photo-style tripods such as this one, but if the thread on the top is the standard 1/4-20, you can upgrade it to a heavier photo tripod at a later date.
  
  
• Ignore claims of what power a telescope can give you ("High powered telescope!!"). The power, or magnification, is determined by the combination of the focal length of the telescope and the focal length of the eyepiece. Most cheap telescopes, and some good telescopes, will not give you any kind of clear, bright view over about 100x, often much less (x is the power). That is still enough to see many objects within range of the telescope fairly well. In fact, some large objects are better in lower power.
  
  
• Assuming equal quality, the most important optical characteristic to consider is the size of the aperture. The larger the aperture, the more light the telescope collects, making typically very faint celestial objects a little brighter and detail a little easier to see, even on brighter objects like the Moon and Jupiter.
  
  
• For cheap reflectors, parabolic mirrors are generally better than spherical mirrors. That doesn't mean a spherical mirror can't produce a decent image, at least in the middle of the field of view, but it is a cost-saving measure, not a feature, and it's best to avoid it.
  
  
• Eyepieces and barlow lenses that, combined, give no more than 150x, and often even that is way too high. For example, many telescopes come with 25mm and 10mm eyepieces. For a scope with a 700mm focal length, those eyepieces will give you 700/25=28x and 700/10=70x, which may be reasonable. If you put the eyepiece into the included 3x barlow (tripling the magnification at the loss of a lot of sharpness and brightness), you would have 84x (still possibly okay) and 210x (too high for pretty much all of these telescopes). What happens with too much magnification? It dims the view down, it becomes very blurry, it magnifies the scope's jitters, and it becomes even more difficult to track an object as it speeds through the tiny field of view.
  
  In my opinion, the maximum usable power for a cheap telescope with a cheap eyepiece is about equivalent to the aperture in mm. This is under perfect conditions (very steady atmosphere), which may not happen very often depending on where you observe. So for a 70mm telescope, 70x; a 90mm telescope 90x. This is about half of the generally recommended 50-60x per inch (25mm) of aperture for higher quality telescopes. Under perfect conditions. Divide the number in half and you're probably closer to typical effective use.
  
  
  
  
  
• A red-dot finder. In most cases, a magnifying finderscope that looks like a mini-telescope attached to the main telescope will be too small and dim to see anything well through it. A red-dot finder, however, allows you to point the dot at what you want to view and, if aligned properly, you can then view it in the main telescope. It's very intuitive. If the telescope comes with a magnifying finderscope, it will likely be a 5x24, which is frustrating to use and you won't see many stars at all in it. A 6x30 is better. A red-dot is probably best for a beginner.
  
  
• Generally for small refractors and reflectors, a shorter tube (shorter focal length of around 300-800mm) for a refractor or reflector means lower power, wider views, better for dark skies and viewing larger star clusters and galaxies. A longer tube (longer focal length of around 800mm or more) will generally give a more magnified view using the same eyepiece, but with a narrower field, better for the Moon, bright planets, double stars, and smaller objects.
  
  Note: If you see a short tube reflector and it has a long focal length listed, this may be a Bird-Jones design, with a spherical mirror and corrector lens, which is almost always poorly rendered in cheap telescopes. The infamous Celestron Powerseeker 127mm reflector is a good example.
  
  
• Many cheap telescopes now come with cell phone adapters, remote shutter buttons, cheap barlow lenses, and moon filters. Ignore these mostly useless accessories when you first start out. You can probably take cell phone photos of the Moon through the eyepiece easier without the cell phone adapter. Barlows that come with these scopes are generally too cheap to be satisfying long term and give dim, blurry views, but may be exciting at first. If the scope comes with one or two, try them out and decide for yourself, but get the object in view in a low power eyepiece first, remove it, insert the barlow, then insert the eyepiece into the barlow.
  
  
• For a refractor, make sure it has a 90 degree diagonal. Many only come with a 45 degree diagonal, which is fine for terrestrial use, but unsuitable for observing high up in the sky, where the sky is usually darker and steadier. The 90 degree diagonal lets you place your head and eye at a more comfortable position, which is key for observing.

If you must buy a cheap telescope, I recommend first reading the telescope rankings on Telescopicwatch.com, which start with the cheapest at the top.

Let's look at a sample listing

Here's the Celestron Travel Scope 70, a 70mm (diameter of the main lens) refractor with a basic tilt/pan camera type mount on a tripod, with a 400mm focal length. It has a list price of $119.99, but it was on sale on Amazon for "Prime Big Deal" days in October 2025 for $99.99. 

I have not used this particular telescope, so I am going only by the specs and the reviews of other users. I can therefore not say whether I personally would recommend this telescope or not versus others in its price range. This is just to illustrate how you would go about assessing the telescope for your own needs from an online listing. If you are interested in a particular telescope, read the reviews and ask others who have it on astronomy forums such as cloudynights.com or Reddit r/telescopes. See the review of this scope on Telescopicwatch.com.

The specs:

It's a 70mm refractor, with a 400mm focal length, making it a focal ratio of f/5.7. Let's break that down:

70mm - This is the aperture, which determines how much light the telescope collects. The more the better. 70mm (2.8") is relatively small, so only brighter objects will show up and the resolution, or the fineness of detail, that you can see through it will be relatively low. Hint: getting any telescope to a dark sky will let you see much more!

400mm - This is the focal length of the telescope. Divide by the aperture to get the focal ratio (400/70=5.7).

f/5.7 - An f/5.7 telescope is on the "fast side," providing lower power views and wider fields, but still "slow" enough to forgive some optical defects in the eyepieces.

The good (maybe):

• Celestron sells astronomical telescopes and gear. They don't make any of it themselves, but they are one of the most well known companies selling astronomical gear. That doesn't mean all their telescopes are good, but they know when they are selling crap. The low price provides a clue on this one, but some crap is better than others.
• Appears to have a 1/4-20 attachment point, allowing you to upgrade to a better photo tripod.
• 90 degree diagonal, suitable for astronomy, although it will mirror-reverse your view, which is normal. It also comes with a 45 degree correct image diagonal if you want to view nature or other terrestrial scenes.
• No cheap barlow. You can buy a better one anyway for less than $20 if you need it. The backpack is more useful.
• Decent eyepiece focal lengths, giving 20x and 40x. This is very low power for an astronomical telescope, but okay for a scope of these specs. The Moon will easily fit in the field of view and Jupiter and Saturn will be quite small, with surface detail very difficult or impossible to discern. Saturn's rings will be visible when tilted at an angle (right now they are almost on edge). Jupiter's moons will be visible. Larger, brighter deep sky objects like the Pleiades and M31, the Andromeda Galaxy, and M42, the Orion Nebula, will be framed fairly well. Smaller objects will be very dim and tough or impossible to see unless you are in a nice dark sky. Hint: for deep sky, start out looking at open star clusters, which will show up better. Skip most of the galaxies and nebulas until you have more experience and can observe in a dark sky.
• Lightweight and portable for camping, hiking, etc.

The okay.

• Small 70mm aperture and short focal length limit you to low power, wide field views and low resolution.
• Backpack is useful if you want to hike to a darker, more open site and protect the scope during transport. 
• Starry Night software for the computer is fine, but there are other good cheap or free options,  including mobile versions (Sky Safari, Stellarium) for easier use at the telescope.

The bad.

• Tripod is rickety, although it has a spreader, and is adjustable for sitting height only. Views will be jittery and bounce around a lot.
• Altitude/azimuth mount like a cheap camera tripod (tilt/pan). Not easy to position objects and tends to be jerky when trying to move the view around.
• 5x24 finderscope is small and dim. It will be difficult to find objects by looking at a chart and "starhopping" to the right location.
• No idea about the quality of the eyepieces. Likely low quality but usable.

Upgrading

Sometimes it's worth upgrading certain parts of the telescope, usually the eyepieces, diagonal, finder, and tripod/mount. This may be a good strategy if you like the scope but find some parts are annoying. It can help you spread the cost over time and still be enjoying the scope from the get-go.

Here are some cost estimates for minor upgrades, i.e., parts that are a bit better but not overkill for a cheap telescope:

• Eyepiece: Different focal lengths allow you to achieve different powers. Don't go overboard with high power. Views get dimmer and blurrier beyond a certain point. (Recommended price range: around $35 per eyepiece. Often recommended: Svbony "redline" series)
  
  
• Finder: Red-dot finders do not magnify and are more intuitive. Just point the dot where you want to look (after making sure it is aligned to the view in the eyepiece). Make sure the finder bracket will fit the mounting bracket on your telescope! (Recommended price range: $15-30)
  
  
• Barlow lens: A barlow lens adds magnification. You put your eyepiece into the barlow, then insert the barlow in the telescope focuser. 2x, or at most 3x, will give you higher magnifications. Again, don't go crazy with high power. (Recommended price range: $15-25. I have the Svbony SV137 2x barlow and find it to be a great value for the price.)
  
  
• Tripod: Sometimes the optical tube assembly is pretty decent, but the mount and tripod are almost always too unstable on these cheap telescopes, which leads to frustration. Your best bet is to look in a thrift store for a working photo tripod. You can get them online, too, but it's harder to tell how sturdy it is. Just make sure it's an improvement over your current one and that your telescope or mount has a 1/4-20 thread so you can mount it on a standard photo tripod. (Recommended price range for new: $30-50, but only if it's sturdier than what came with the scope and it fits.)

If you upgrade all of the above parts, you'll end up spending at least $95. Consider that you might just want to buy a better telescope from the start, if that's possible.

Bottom line: Take the advice at the top of this post. If you just can't, then approach a cheap telescope with very low expectations and a large amount of patience, learn the sky, and get as much enjoyment out of it as you can. But don't say I didn't warn you!

SAFETY NOTE: Never point a telescope at the Sun, even when no one is looking into it, without a full aperture reputable solar filter designed for visual observation securely fastened over the aperture and the finderscope capped. Supervise children and don't leave the scope unattended when the Sun is up. For terrestrial viewing with small kids around, it's best to set it up in the shade. If your telescope comes with a little solar filter that screws onto an eyepiece, smash it with a hammer and throw it away, it is dangerous to use!

Astroboy cartoons by Astronomerica.