Starguider 5mm @ 240x is it too much mag?

[bod00]

Hey guys,

Been back out with my scopes now its getting nice and dark at a decent time. In particular I was out last night and got amazing clear views of the moon and saw Jupiter in all its glory for the 1st time, Quite a sight most of the other times I had not managed to make out the bands clear but it was as amazing as it looks in photos.

My 150pl and 8mm give me a 150x and it pretty clear but was just wanting to push it a little more, I have most the ED range and wanted to know if people thought that the 5mm might be too much at 240x or will I get away with it on really clear nights like last night?

Any help is much appreciated

 Thanks!

[Lee M]

I've found I can rarely get a good clear image using the 5mm but frequently felt I could get a bit more than out of the 8mm. I picked up a Meade 6.7mm which works nicely in-between.

[Pig]

240 x is pushing it a bit for Jupiter especially if the seeing is not so good, I find around 200 x is much better.  

The Moon is a different kettle of fish and will easily take this kind of magnification and a lot more, if your focuser is capable of fine adjustment the clarity of the lunar detail can be very rewarding

[Naemeth]

I tend not to push 200x anymore, but sometimes do just for fun. I've done ~400x on galaxies before, but you don't get a better view, the object is just bigger. It's best to use the minimum magnification that you can to see an object.

[bod00]

Thanks guys, I was thinking something in the 6mm range would be nice which would give me about 200x but SG don't make one so would have to look at another one. I might look at some of the meade ones but if was going to change EP I was thinking of maybe a zoom lens from 18 mm- 7mm something like that, more so for the moon if i'm honest. Although if I can get some better detail with the 5mm on the moon I might just bite the bullet and get some really nice close ups.

If anyone have a preferred 6mm then I would be interested in checking it out

Thanks

NIck,

[Pig]

The Celestron XCel- LX  are very good eyepieces and will work very nicely on Jupiter, I think they do a 7mm and you can pick one up for £40ish second hand

[alan potts]

The simple fact is it depends on your conditions where you live, if seeing is good and you do not have a great deal of light polution then X240 is very usable on many objects. I tend to stick below X200 on Jupiter as I like it that way. Last night I was using over X300 at times on gloubar clusters and the results were fairly good most of the time with just moments of stunning views.

The Moon can take a good amount of power as well but it is all down to conditions. I was viewing the moon the other night and in this direction which was East I stuggled with X160 but the other way I was well above X200 without issues on Venus.

Alan

[rwilkey]

I find 150x is my sweet-spot, I use a WO 6mm SPL to achieve this in my f/9 frac.

[ronin]

The 8mm at 150x will most likely serve you well all the time, the 5mm will be used very occasionally and when conditions are right the views will be good, just they will not be all that often. A 6mm at 200x will also be in a similar situation, it will not be possible to use evey night but those when conditions suit the views will be worth it.

So that aspect depends on how happy you are to have an eyepiece (or two) that will get used say 1 night in 4 and the for the 5mm say 1 night in 10.

The other aspect is your "opinion" on high magnification images. Reading posts I can see that some people will consider a poor image at 250x is better then a clearer image at 150x. In effect almost no matter how bad, it is better simply because it is bigger.

[Charic]

Bod00..............Hi, my intention is to get the 12mm  BST and a 2xBarlow . That will allow me to effectively get 6mm at 200x and 4mm at 300x. Still within the reach of the limits of my telescope. After testing this scenario, will I then decide if I need the 5mm BST. I see details on Jupiter very well, for my old eyes, using the 8mm,  but I`d like to get a little more for the wow! factor,  if its possible. All things considered.

[John]

Jupiter seems to reveal more detail at slightly lower magnifications than, say, Saturn or Mars. I find 180x - 225x delivers the most contrasty and detailed views of Jupiter with my ED120 refractor or 265x  with my 12" dob.

On most nights, higher magnifications than the above result in a larger planetary disk but slightly less distinct features. Personally I'd rather have a smaller scale image with more contrast.

On Saturn and Mars though I find 250x / 300x regularly useful and even more on really good nights. 

[Greg77]

Bod00..............Hi, my intention is to get the 12mm  BST and a 2xBarlow . That will allow me to effectively get 6mm at 200x and 4mm at 300x. Still within the reach of the limits of my telescope. After testing this scenario, will I then decide if I need the 5mm BST. I see details on Jupiter very well, for my old eyes, using the 8mm,  but I`d like to get a little more for the wow! factor,  if its possible. All things considered.

+1 on that

I use 5" APO and mags from 47 to 238X. But on most nights I use 158-190X  with XW 5...just when the seeing is realy good, then I use 4mm eyepiece on targets like Saturn or Mars...

CS!

Greg

[Greg77]

Sorry...wrong quote.

Here I go again:

Jupiter seems to reveal more detail at slightly lower magnifications than, say, Saturn or Mars. I find 180x - 225x delivers the most contrasty and detailed views of Jupiter with my ED120 refractor or 265x  with my 12" dob.

On most nights, higher magnifications than the above result in a larger planetary disk but slightly less distinct features. Personally I'd rather have a smaller scale image with more contrast.

On Saturn and Mars though I find 250x / 300x regularly useful and even more on really good nights. 

I use 5" APO and mags from 47 to 238X. But on most nights I use 158-190X  with XW 5...just when the seeing is realy good, then I use 4mm eyepiece on targets like Saturn or Mars...

[bingevader]

Had a super night Friday using the X-Cel LX 5mm (240x) on the moon, it was £42 second hand. It was too much for Jupiter though, I dropped back to the 9.6mm plossl for that (think there maybe a gap in my collection there!).

I can vouch for the WO SPL 6mm (200x) it is usually super on Jupiter (but not with the moon up!).

Cheers

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

With my 8" scope, I frequently push beyond 240x (which my Pentax XF8.5mm provides) and go for the 8mm Delos (254x) or the 7mm XW (290x), but only on nights of good seeing, or when there are occasional patches of good seeing (which can occur even on mediocre or downright bad nights). I personally like using quite a high magnification on Jupiter, but it does require some practice to tease out the detail. On Mars I have used up to 400x with my 8" scope. I had a scope similar to the 150PL (but on an alt-az mount), and the main reason I did not use the 5mm EP I had very much was that it was an orthoscopic with microscopic eye relief (totally unsuitable for me with my glasses).

In summary: a comfortable 5mm can certainly be used, but that does not mean I would not get a longer focal length planetary EP of some kind as well.

[Rustysplit]

As others have said, the 5mm will certainly get a fair bit of use on the moon, and maybe the other planets if the seeing allows. The last few times out I have been using my 5mm Radian in my 1800 focal lenght dob, giving me 360x mag on moon, on a couple of occasions, I have even barlowed this to 720x and it still held up well. Try barlowing your 10mm celestron and see how it goes. If it is ok on a night of good seeing, you can be sure that the 5mm SG will be even better.

[bod00]

Thanks for all the replies everyone, Plenty to be thinking about, The conditions when I was looking were probably the best that I have seen in my short time and the results were very clear a lot better than they were last time I looked anyway! - I would like to get around 200x as a lot people recommend this as the max but like I have said SG don't make a 6mm that would suite my scope.

I have tried an expensive Barlow in my Celestron and it didn't give me good results but thats due to the design I am lead to believe so maybe in my SW it might be worth going over this again. I like the looks of the X-Cel's and would be happy to pay the money if it gave me that extra little bit.

My main interest is in the moon and planets at the moment as the light is quite bright around where I live so I am at least 30 mins away from real clear dark skies so I was also thinking of maybe getting a Frac to just try and focus on them really and it might be slightly less of a handful than my 150pl

will be putting some bits on my list to Santa I think!

Thanks

[Rustysplit]

You will need to get a pretty decent frac to equal the views that your 150pl is giving you I would have thought. I guess something like a 120 evostar would be the minimum to give similar detail and resolution as the newt. These in themselves are quite hefty. The 150pl was designed with planetary viewing in mind.

[Mr Spock]

I use x235 on Jupiter most of the time. The Moon, Saturn and Mars anything from that to x294. On rare nights, the moon will take x392.

I wouldn't drop below x200 on my scope as some of the fine detail gets lost. If people are having difficulty getting to x200 at any time they may have either exceptionally poor local seeing conditions on a permanent basis, or collimation issues.

[Caldwell14]

I can use my 4.8mm Nagler,  giving me 224X on a fairly regular basis using my ED120 when viewing Jupiter. When I used to used a Dobsonian I struggled to get above 150X on more than half a dozen occasions in two years. That said on those rare occasions when the seeing was exceptionally steady the Dob won.

[bod00]

You will need to get a pretty decent frac to equal the views that your 150pl is giving you I would have thought. I guess something like a 120 evostar would be the minimum to give similar detail and resolution as the newt. These in themselves are quite hefty. The 150pl was designed with planetary viewing in mind.

The 150pl is a great scope cant fault it other than its length, I was thinking of the same 150mm for the Frac but looking at the focal lengths probably wont suit my EP range so will have to put a bit more thought into it