I'm finding manual higher power tracking frustrating and the only mounts with low vibration slo-mo controls seem to cost as much as the Skyscout itself!

If there was a decent goto with tracking with super-quick setup, like what you mention for the 102SLT, for around $100, I'd seriously consider it.

There are two ways in which the Celestron NexStar 102 and Celestron SkyScout Scope 90 resemble each other – they are both refractors and they are both built by-gosh Celestron tough. What sets them apart is the mount (the section that connects the telescope tube to the tripod and allows it to move) and the focal ratio.

Now, let's compare the two and try to keep the technicalities to a minimum…

Both telescopes have a similar aperture (the size of the primary light gathering source). While the extra 12mm between the 90 and the 102 won't make a whole lot of difference in some objects, it most definately will give you a slight edge (about 40% more light gathering power) in magnitude reach (capturing fainter objects) and resolution.

In the case of focal length (the distance it takes the objective – primary – lens to bring the light into focus) – the two are almost precisely the same despite the differences in telescope tube length. The focal length is where you pick up your magnification factor. Focal length of telescope divided by focal length of eyepiece equals magnification power. Here the two are identical. Anything more than about 240X is useless.

Now, here's where the real kicker comes into play – the focal ratio. The Celestron SkyScout scope 90 is f/7 and the Celestron NexStar 102 is f/6. Without going into a lot of equations (it's early and there isn't enough coffee in the world to make me do math at this hour!) it all boils down to what type of view do you want. A telescope with a low ("fast") focal ratio offers lower powers and a wider field of view with any given eyepiece while larger focal ratios ("slow" telescopes) give higher magnifications but the field of view is more limited. Small focal ratio telescopes are actually better for deep-sky observing because of the lower power and wider fields. (yes, virginia… it really is better to use less magnification – the objects will appear far brighter and much easier to find.)

Now, the editor in me comes into play. Let's see if I can say this so even my Mom would understand: What you see in the same eyepiece in both telescopes is like comparing a regular window to a picture window. You can see the tree outside in both of them – but the f/6 window will show you the tree, the fence 10 feet away to the left and the car in the driveway to the right.

Now, let's get down to the mount, shall we?

The Celestron SkyScout Scope 90 is altazimuth. The user manually manipulates it up or down, left or right, and needs to be moved manually as the object progresses. The Celestron NexStar 102 is a GoTo equatorial – it moves up, down, left or right via a user keypad – but it will also perform those functions on its own and track the object. Upgrades exist to make the SkyScout Scope 90 a GoTo for about $100 – about $600 for the total system.

Honestly? I love them both and trying to chose between the two is difficult. The SkyScout Scope 90 has some great gadgetry and is a virtual teacher… The Celestron NexStar 102 SLT is for quiet contemplation. Both are excellent beginner's scopes – but the NexStar is better suited towards technically minded adults.

The bottom line is they are both Celestron tough. Future reviews will show that a lot of similar telescopes look great sitting in the corner of your living room, but don't live up to their expectations when used!

And James? Yes! The Celestron NexStar 102 will provide a lifetime of fascination for those even remotely interested in astronomy. If there comes a point where you want to graduate to a larger telescope, you'll never sell it because it is so portable and durable. Solar filters are inexpensive and a 2" wide field eyepiece turns the night sky into a showcase!

By the way, the equatorial mount link seems to be broken.

Thanks Tammy!