Our experts have ranked 150+ telescopes
Disclosure - If you buy something via our link, we may earn a commission with no additional expense to you.

Celestron Powerseeker 114AZ Review – Not Recommended

Celestron’s Powerseeker line once again fails to deliver with their 114AZ model. We’d recommend steering clear of this one.

Celestron’s PowerSeeker 114AZ is another example of a telescope designed by a marketing team and bean-counters instead of engineers. While the optical tube is quite promising in terms of its capability, the poor telescope is shackled to a wobbly mount that was never designed to hold it in the first place and coupled with accessories that would not have even been acceptable for a telescope made centuries ago. 

How It Stacks Up

Ranked #15 of 24 ~$100 telescopes

Rank 1
4.5
Rank 15
Celestron Powerseeker 114AZ
3.6
What We Like

  • Great optics
  • Decent aperture


What We Don't Like

  • Unusable accessories
  • Unusable mount


Bottom Line
Not Recommended Telescope

Like the Powerseeker 114EQ, the 114AZ sports a surprisingly good optical tube, but the accessories and mount totally fail to live up to it in terms of quality.

The PowerSeeker 114 Optical Tube

The Celestron PowerSeeker 114 optical tube (both EQ and AZ versions) is a 114mm (4.5”) f/8 Newtonian reflector, identical to the Orion XT4.5.

These scopes actually provide very sharp views when coupled with quality eyepieces. Unlike with even the best fast tabletop Dobsonians, collimation is super easy and coma is a non-issue with a 4.5” f/8. The focuser on the PowerSeeker 114 is a 1.25” rack-and-pinion which works satisfactorily, and both the primary and secondary mirrors on the PowerSeeker 114 are collimatable. If put on a Dobsonian mount and supplied with quality eyepieces (which would basically make it into a poor man’s Orion XT4.5), the Celestron PowerSeeker 114AZ would be an excellent scope. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Accessories with PowerSeeker 114AZ

Like all PowerSeekers, the 114AZ comes with a 20mm “erect-image” Kellner-like eyepiece (providing 45x), a 4mm Ramsden (providing 225x, too much for the telescope), an all-plastic 3x Barlow lens, and a 5×24 finderscope with optics worse than the ones found in toy pirate spyglasses.

The 20mm erect-image eyepiece uses a prism to flip the image upright, so you can use the Celestron PowerSeeker 114AZ for terrestrial viewing without the view being upside down. However, this prism is cheaply made and, as a result, sucks up a lot of light and causes sharpness and scattering issues. The field of view is narrow, too, at less than 40 degrees, making it feel like one is looking through a soda straw. Also, 45x is rather much for a low-power eyepiece – the 36x provided by a typical 25mm eyepiece is more ideal.

The 4mm Ramsden uses two incredibly cheap and tiny lenses and an optical design dating to the 18th century. The field of view is narrow (about 30 degrees), the eyepiece adds significant chromatic aberration and flares to images, and looking through it is somewhat of a challenge due to the tiny eye lens and non-existent eye relief, forcing one to press their eyeball right up against the glass to see anything. And all of this is rather moot, as the 225x it provides is too much for a 4.5” telescope.

The 3x Barlow probably costs Celestron under a dollar to make and is entirely plastic. Using it with the 20mm eyepiece should result in 135x, but in practice, the aberrations Barlow adds make the image so fuzzy that it’s useless. And of course, the 675x it provides when used in conjunction with the 4mm Ramsden is laughably outlandish for almost any backyard telescope, let alone a small 4.5” Newtonian.

The 5×24 finderscope supplied with all PowerSeekers uses a single plastic lens element – arguably worse than the lens in Galileo’s first telescope – and an aperture stop to suppress the aberrations resulting from such a cheap lens, making the already-dim view almost unusable. Additionally, the eyepiece is equally primitive, focusing the finder is difficult, and the bracket is cheaply made, making it difficult to align the finder with the main telescope. I don’t get why this finder is supplied with cheap telescopes anymore, as a far-superior red-dot sight can be bought for as little as $15 separately and probably could be thrown in without increasing the price by more than a few dollars. You can actually buy one of the said sights and install it right in place of the 5×24 finderscope if you desire, without any drilling holes or removing screws/nuts inside the tube, but obviously this doesn’t solve the other accessory issues or the unstable, cheaply-made mount.

PowerSeeker AZ Mount

The PowerSeeker AZ mount is an extremely primitive alt-azimuth fork. Originally designed to hold 60mm-70mm department-store quality refractors, which already stretched its capacity, Celestron has elected to enlarge the forks to hold the 4.5” f/8 Newtonian optical tube. The thin, extruded-aluminum tripod legs almost entirely fail to hold the scope steady, even at 45x, and attempting to move or focus the scope results in unbearable vibrations. There are also no slow-motion controls of any kind on the mount. It’s hard to believe, but the EQ1 mount supplied with the PowerSeeker 114EQ is better than the 114AZ’s mount – at least it has slow-motion controls and holds the scope somewhat adequately at low powers.

Should I buy a Used Celestron PowerSeeker 114AZ?

Ironically, if you can get a Celestron PowerSeeker 114AZ at a low enough price used, it’s quite good value if you have any woodworking skills whatsoever. A few hours of work with plywood, pipe flanges, and a vinyl record can produce a working, stable, and easy-to-use Dobsonian mount for the 114AZ at a relatively low cost, and you can buy new eyepieces and a functional red-dot finder or Telrad to aim the telescope with. 

Alternative Recommendations

Even at the relatively low price category of the PowerSeeker 114AZ, there are quite a few decent alternatives with good optics, good accessories, and stable mounts:

  • The Zhumell Z100 and Orion SkyScanner 100 (which are essentially the same telescope) have quality optics, easy-to-use tabletop Dobsonian mounts, and their wide fields of view and red-dot finders make them easy to aim. Both scopes can also be mounted on sturdy photo tripods with a ¼ 20 socket.
  • For a bit more money, the Zhumell Z114 offers the same aperture as the PowerSeeker 114AZ but again with a stable tabletop mount and fairly decent eyepieces.
  • The SarBlue Mak60 is a very small instrument, but it’s a surprisingly entertaining and ultra-portable telescope that provides great views of the Moon and planets.

For finding more options, we recommend you check out our Telescope Ranking page and Best Telescopes guide.

1 thought on “Celestron Powerseeker 114AZ Review – Not Recommended”

  1. I was ready to spend the $248 on a new Orion XT4.5, but I bought this PowerSeeker 114AZ instead for $64. As you mentioned, the optical tube is excellent, but everything else is pretty much trash, so I bought Celestron’s Star Pointer for $17, the 8-24mm zoom eyepiece for $69, the Omni 2x Barlow for $41, the smartphone camera adapter for $17, and even the SkyMaster 25×70 binoculars yesterday $57. These upgrades made a spectacular difference, and the binoculars are amazing, and for just $17 more than a stock Orion 4.5XT. I’m working on stabilizing and dampening the tripod and AZ mount but I’m drawing up a nice dobsonian mount too. This is my first week stargazing since my early childhood, so I really appreciate your and Ed’s reviews.

    Reply

Leave a Comment