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.

Orion Starblast 90 Review – Not Recommended

Orion’s StarBlast 90 represents the latest in a series of cheap, shoddy products meant to cash in on Orion’s brand reputation, and is a scope you should avoid no matter the price.
NOT included in the Ultimate Telescope Shortlist

Orion has actually marketed a telescope known as the StarBlast 90 for some time. In its previous incarnation, the scope was a beautiful 90mm f/7 achromat with a ruby-red tube, solid metal components, decent eyepieces, and a not-perfect but functional alt-azimuth mount with thick, beefy tripod legs.

Recently, Orion discontinued the old StarBlast 90 and replaced it with a new scope – also confusingly called the StarBlast 90, which shares absolutely nothing in common with its predecessor besides a 90mm aperture objective lens. This new scope is not only a pathetic replacement for its predecessor, but it is an outright insult to the older, beloved StarBlast line of 4.5” and 6” Newtonians.

How It Stacks Up

Ranks #27 of 29 ~$200 telescopes

Rank 27
Orion Starblast 90

Best Similar Featured Alternative: Orion StarBlast 4.5 EQ Reflector

What We Like

  • Nice carrying case
  • Useful moon map

What We Don't Like

  • Bad optics
  • Low-quality mount head
  • Unusable finderscope
  • Cheap plastic components
  • Terrible prism diagonal
  • Mediocre eyepieces

Bottom Line
Not Recommended Telescope

The StarBlast 90 is a low-quality instrument that will likely ruin your experience as a beginner, and has no place in the kit of any astronomer.

The Optical Tube of Orion Starblast 90

The StarBlast 90 is a 90mm f/5.6 achromatic refractor. At f/5.6, the scope is going to, of course, have a lot of chromatic aberration, and the StarBlast does so as expected. This means that the scope is in practice limited to rather low magnifications; the images quickly become fuzzy at high powers, and, of course, the Moon, planets, and bright stars will have ugly purple halos around them. The telescope, unfortunately, has some other optical issues that are a little less expected and a lot more troublesome. The images are just not very sharp, even at low powers, which seems to be due to a poor job in the manufacture of the lens itself. That’s a wonder, really, since it is kind of hard to mess up a cheap refractor objective. There also seem to be a lot of issues with stray reflections and glare, probably caused by poor interior blackening and baffling.

Unusually, this scope has a lens cap that remains attached when it is taken off of the front. Holding on by a tiny strip of plastic, it’s only a matter of time before it breaks and leaves your cap on the ground, and quite possibly on snow or wet grass. 

The StarBlast uses a 1.25” rack-and-pinion focuser. Like many scopes in its price range, this focuser is unfortunately all-plastic. However, the one on the StarBlast is definitely one of the worse ones, as it wiggles a lot as you rack it in and out, which is a real nuisance. Unusually, the focuser also has a bubble level and compass built into it. I have absolutely no idea what it is doing on this telescope, but it is utterly pointless and it would’ve been wise if the manufacturers put the money spent on it into some of the other, more lacking areas of this instrument.

Lastly, the telescope attaches to its tripod with a standard ¼ 20 threaded hole, meaning it’s possible to easily install it on a photo tripod, or bolt a dovetail on to attach it to a real quality astronomical mount (not that that would likely be worthwhile).

Reviewing the Starblast 90’s Accessories

The StarBlast 90 comes with two eyepieces: 25mm and 10mm Kellners providing 20x and 56x, respectively; a 45-degree erecting prism; a 5×20 finderscope; and Orion’s MoonMap 260. Orion sells a kit that adds a 2x Barlow and a dinky red flashlight. Don’t bother; the Barlow is good but of no use on such a low-quality telescope, and the flashlight is really cheap.

The included Kellners seem to be mostly plastic and lower in quality than the kit Kellners often supplied with many inexpensive telescopes. They have a rather narrow field of view (less than 50 degrees) and seemingly internal reflection issues. Despite this, Orion actually makes a point in their advertising to brag about their supposed quality, calling them “quality Kellner eyepieces (not cheapie ‘H’ eyepieces like with most other brands)” when in truth they are not quality and are only slightly better than the Huygens eyepieces included with some of the really cheap scopes on the market.

The included diagonal is a 45-degree erecting prism design. This prism makes for upright and non-reversed images (you can read a newspaper looking through it, unlike a normal star diagonal, which will show a mirror image flipped left-right), but at the expense of viewing comfort and image quality. The diagonal not only has a nearly all-plastic build, but the prism induces annoying diffraction spikes on bright stars and planets, reducing the already-low image quality even further. It really should be replaced by a quality 90-degree mirror or prism star diagonal.

Then there’s the finderscope. A 5×20 finder is already a terribly small instrument—barely able to show you anything in the sky at all—and this one makes matters worse by adding its own miniature 45-degree erecting prism, which gobbles up the finder’s already feeble ability to gather light. What’s more is that the whole finder, including seemingly even the objective, is made of plastic. Thanks to the erecting prism, the finder isn’t even useful as a peepsight, and it attaches to the scope simply via a plastic tab and notch, making replacing it with a new finder quite the hassle.

Lastly, the scope also includes Orion’s MoonMap 260, a nice if unnecessary bonus.

The Mount’s Capabilities

The StarBlast 90’s mount is a joke. It is basically a very cheap photo tripod head affixed to a moderately sufficient steel tripod. While the tripod would do an okay job supporting the telescope, in practice the terrible mount head makes the scope’s motions jerky, wobbly, and impossible to fine-tune. There are no slow-motion adjustments. It is never quite balanced. The locking mechanisms are poor and do not allow for anything other than overly-loose motion that makes the scope impossible to keep pointed at or alternatively, overly tight, jerky movements. If the bad optics and poor accessories didn’t already convince you to avoid the scope, the unworkable mounting should.

Alternative Recommendations

The StarBlast 90 is nothing short of an absolute rip-off, so it’s no surprise that there are a number of telescopes we would recommend you consider in its stead. Here are some of our top picks – some of which beat the StarBlast 90 at a fraction of the price.

Under $300

  • The Zhumell Z100 and Orion SkyScanner 100mm have similar light-gathering power to the StarBlast 90, but provide considerably sharper views, especially on small targets like the Moon and planets. The tabletop Dobsonian mounts are easy to aim, and the included accessories are quite decent too; there’s nothing like having a good red dot finder and sharp eyepieces to start off with.
  • The Zhumell Z114 and Orion StarBlast 4.5 Astro both offer vastly brighter and sharper views than the StarBlast 90, along with of course a stable and easy-to-aim Dobsonian alt-azimuth mount. They improve upon the Z100/SkyScanner 100mm not only with larger aperture but also with the ability to adjust their mirrors for collimation for optimum sharp view quality.
  • The Sky-Watcher Heritage 130P offers over double the light-gathering ability of the StarBlast 90 and significantly better resolving power, in addition to a vastly superior mount, better accessories, and sharper optics. 

Check out our rankings and top picks pages for more information.

Performance Score Of Orion Starblast 90


Quantitative measurements of how the telescope performs in various performance categories:









Rich Field




Ease of Use






Not Recommended Telescope

Where to Buy?


We get no money from sales of "not recommended" telescopes from our website because we have decided not to make the aforementioned retailer links affiliate links, though we had the option to.

An amateur astronomer and telescope maker from Connecticut who has been featured on TIME Magazine, National Geographic, Sky & Telescope, La Vanguardia, and The Guardian. Zane has owned over 425 telescopes, of which around 400 he has actually gotten to take out under the stars.

Leave a Comment