How We Pick
Every number on this site is either published by a manufacturer, with a link to the document it was read from, or computed from one of those figures by a formula printed below. There is no third category.
By Scooter M. · Published · How we pick
What we do
- We compile published manufacturer specifications and name the document each figure came from, on the row where the figure appears.
- We compute the optical limits from those published figures, using the formulas below, and we show the arithmetic on the page rather than only the result.
- We render prices live from a data layer that is refreshed daily, and we show “Check price” when it has nothing fresh rather than a remembered number.
- We write an explicit “skip this if” for every pick, naming the buyer that telescope is wrong for.
- We rank by aperture per dollar first, then mount stability, then out-of-box usability, then honest optical execution.
What we do not do
- We do not test telescopes. We have not looked through any telescope on this site. Units we claim to have tested: 0.
- We do not own any of them, and we do not describe a view we have not had.
- We accept no free products and no payment for placement. Sponsored placements: 0.
- We claim no credentials. No degrees, no certifications, no expert panel, no optical engineer on staff.
- We publish no star ratings. A rating implies a measurement we have not made, so there is none, and none appears in this site’s structured data either.
- We publish no numeric score. A weighted score presented as objective would hide inputs that are, in the end, specifications and arithmetic. Those are better expressed as the arithmetic itself, which is what every page here does.
The formulas, in full
These are the whole arithmetic backbone of the site. Every optical number on every page comes out of one of them, applied to a manufacturer-published input. Each carries the source it is published in, so any figure here can be re-derived rather than taken on trust.
A worked example, so nothing here is abstract. A telescope with a published 130mm aperture has a maximum useful magnification of 130 × 2 = 260x and a Dawes resolving limit of 116 ÷ 130 = 0.89 arcseconds. Both figures appear on every page where that telescope does, and you can check them with a calculator.
Our selection criteria, in order
- Aperture per dollar. It is the only specification that changes what you can see, and light gathering scales as its square.
- Mount stability. A shaking image at 100x is worse than a steady one at 60x, and no amount of aperture fixes it.
- Out-of-box usability. A telescope nobody can point is a telescope nobody uses, whatever its mirror is worth.
- Honest optical execution. A parabolic mirror beats a spherical one, and a maker who publishes its real numbers beats one who does not.
That is an editorial judgment, stated so you can disagree with it, rather than a score dressed up as objectivity.
How we handle prices
- Prices render only from a live data layer, refreshed daily. No price is ever typed into a page.
- Where the layer has nothing fresh, the button reads “Check price on Amazon”. It never shows a stale number.
- Prices older than 48 hours are treated as unavailable and disappear on their own, so a missed refresh cannot leave a wrong figure on the site.
- Budget-bracket pages enforce their ceiling against the live price at render. A pick above the bracket is dropped from that page rather than displayed.
Where the specifications came from
Every specification on this site was read from a manufacturer’s own product page on September 1, 2026, and each spec row links to the page it came from. Where a maker publishes a figure only on its retail listing, the source label says exactly that rather than presenting a listing as a specification sheet.
Where a maker does not publish a figure anywhere we could read it, the row is blank and says so. We would rather show the gap than fill it with an estimate, and there are several such gaps on this site.
Who writes this
Scooter M. — an enthusiast who is genuinely into this. I read the manuals, compile the published specs, and do the math. No lab coat, no test bench, and no telescope I am pretending to have owned. There is no team behind that byline and no credential attached to it, because there is nothing to attach. More on the about page.
How we handle being wrong
We will be wrong sometimes: a manufacturer revises a specification, a figure gets transcribed incorrectly, an ASIN goes to a different product. When that happens we correct the page, date the correction on it, and say what changed. Tell us if you find one, and the editorial policy sets out the process.
How this site is funded
Amazon Associates links. A qualifying purchase earns us a commission at no extra cost to you, and it cannot move a ranking: the order of every list here is set by computed aperture per dollar, and no commission rate changes how much light a mirror collects. Full disclosure.