>>1148488I use a Barska 20-60x, 60mm (pic related). Right now it's $75 on Amazon, I've seen it go for $60. Spent another $50 on a tripod. It does the job, but I've been looking to upgrade. I wrote a user review if you want to see more pictures I took through it and my full thoughts
https://www.amazon.com/gp/review/R3HGUZLZDW2YU?ref_=glimp_1rv_clI like it, it's light, cheap, and gets me the ID, but I've looked through other people's and admittedly am jealous. This is a super budget scope but for a beginner it's great. A guy I know has an 80mm Celestron that is unfortunately not made anymore or else I'd get one like that. There's a newer model one up now (Celestron Ultima 52250) I was tempted to get, but I doubt it would be a significant enough of an upgrade to warrant the price. At this point I'll just save up for a Vortex Diamondback or Viper. I've heard both are great, but they're $600-800 and I need to do more research and weigh that versus just buying a DSLR and fancy lenses.
The one I mentioned in the review that I returned was a Redfield Rampage. I thought it sucked, even if it was more comfortable to use. It had bad lens flare issues that obscured what I was looking at. I'll look in a little bit and see if I can find a pic I took at 12x with the camera only.
>>1148490Yeah I don't know much about cameras, but it wouldn't surprise me they try to bamboozle you with zoom by changing the values. I've only ever used point and shoots and it just lists it as 1-36x zoom on mine if I go all the way to digital, which is too fuzzy to be of use. Your moon looks like how I used to watch scrambled porn on HBO 15 years ago.
