![]() It has enough fine detail to justify high magnification, but it has low contrast - and then as you increase magnification it gets more washed out, more dark, and hard to see. It doesn't have a lot of detail to justify very high magnification, unless you're looking for the finer ring divisions, but your scope can only see Cassini. If you can see the rings, the shadow of the rings on the surface of the planet, and the main split inside the rings ( the Cassini division) then you're doing fine. High magnification zooms into particular details. ![]() Low magnification gives you broad images with lots of stuff to see. Probably not worth trying anything beyond the high 1XX values - that is, for your eyepieces, a 3x barlow.įor the Moon, any magnification works. But I doubt your scope would do well above 200x, even though the theoretical limit is 260x. Please be aware that more magnification is not always better for any observation there's an optimal magnification, not too big, not too small. 3x barlow with either of the eyepieces - that would double. Once the scope is collimated, you could try to push magnification even higher, by using a 2x. I'm still learning new things after years in this hobby. The topic of collimation is huge, just google "telescope collimation" and learn. I made it a habit to check collimation every time before I use the scope I'm so used to it that it only takes 5 minutes now. The performance of your scope when observing planets depends a lot on collimation. The procedure is described in their generic Telescope Maintenance document, and also more specifically in the Astromaster Manual. Per the manufacturer's website, it comes with two eyepieces, 10 mm and 20 mm, giving 66x and 33x magnifications respectively.įirst off, make sure your scope is collimated. Okay, so that's a 130 mm newtonian with an f/5 focal ratio.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |