Some early comments on my new Celestron Micro Guide Eyepiece:

The eyepiece was shipped via FedEx in a cardboard, UPS box. The
smaller, black, eyepiece box was inside the UPS box. This black box
was inside a plastic bag that looked a bit overly crinkled and worn to
be new. The eyepiece and illuminator were separately packed inside
the small, black box.

Blemishes on the illuminator gave it a used appearance. The eyepiece
looked new.

Despite 12 pages of instructions, there were no instructions
concerning battery type and battery replacement procedure, though both
were a "no-brainer" to figure out.

It looked as if the eyepiece's illuminator port was sealed (no opening
for dust, etc. to enter the eyepiece's interior). If this is so, then
it would aid in keeping the inside of the eyepiece clean -- an
important concern with any reticle eyepiece.

The focuser on the eyepiece worked nicely. It would appear that the
focus range ought to be sufficient for most, if not all users. The
reticle scales were sharply etched.

In daytime conditions the various scales appeared black with no need
for illumination. At night no glare, internal reflections, or stray
light were noticed. The brightness of the illuminated scales (at the
dimmest setting) reduced the eye's dark adaptation sufficiently to
noticeably effect the visibility of relatively faint stars, etc. For
making measurements on/of most deep sky objects (DSOs) it will
probably be necessary to click the illumation off and on repeatedly --
off to see the DSO, on to see the reticle. For brighter objects the
provided illumination levels should be fine. I found it easy to read
all scales at night when the red illuminator was at it's dimmest
setting, but I would have liked the ability to dim the illumination
even more.

The instructions could have been more thorough in the use of the
various reticle scales. OTOH, individual users might be intelligent
enough to work out alternative methods, applications, etc.
Nevertheless, the instructions do contain a fair amount of important
and useful information.

To date, I've not used the eyepiece for much more than calibration
purposes -- taking transit timings of Delta Orionis and Alpha
Sextantis across the linear scale. I took a minimum of six timings
with each telescope without a barlow as well as with each of my
barlows. Each set of timings were averaged and recorded for future
reference. The scale divisions are etched into the reticle at 1/10th
millimeter intervals. The timings were made to determine the angular
separation (on the sky) of the scale divisions when the eyepiece is
used with each telescope, etc.

The 12.5mm orthoscopic eyepiece provides reasonably sharp images
across the field. IMO this eyepiece was a good choice for use with
the reticle. Eye relief was reasonable -- not exactly long, but not
at all uncomfortable. It was possible for me to use the eyepiece with
eyeglasses on, but it was much easier to use with eyeglasses off.

While the eyepiece is reportedly "fully multi-coated", a white-light
reflection (indicating an uncoated surface) was obvious upon
inspection beneath a lightbulb -- probably from the reticle.

Rather useless IMO is the removable eyeshield that blocks light from
one side only. During use the eyepiece is likely to be rotated
often. The rotations would require frequent re-positioning of the
eyeshield, but if one attempts to rotate the eye shield the eyepiece's
focuser will also turn - changing the reticle's focus. Similarly, it
would quickly become obnoxiously irritating to remove and replace the
eye shield for each rotation of the eyepiece. I'm likely to leave the
eye shield off the eyepiece and not use it at all.

It's too early to know how much use I'll get out of each of the
reticle patterns. At the current time I suspect I'll most often use
the linear scale and the large, circular, 360 degree position angle
scales.

This eyepiece will likely be more useful and easier to use when it's
used with an equatorially mounted telescope equipped with an RA drive.

If any reader desires answers to specific questions, please post your
query and I'll try to provide answers when I get around to posting a
"Part II" -- if I don't post a more immediate response.

Bill Greer
To sketch is to see.