I'm confused :(

[Alan64]

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

[Knighty2112]

BrettL and fellow forum members,

I want to offer an apology.  The worst kind of mistake is when you had the right answer, then doubted yourself and changed it.

I went back to my observation notes of my last viewing of Saturn and I find that those who said you could see rings at 20X and separation at 50X were absolutely correct.   When I made the original recommendation of a scope that had 2 eyepieces of 20X and 50X I was thinking that that was sufficient to meet BrettL's objectives, and it was.   

Then I doubted myself but could not find my notes.   I went to one of these eyepiece simulators and when I saw how small Saturn appeared at 20 and 50X I figured I was wrong and recommended for higher magnification.  Then I found my notes.   I messed up good.  For this I am truly sorry.

I thank all of you who corrected my mistake with your posts.  

I still feel that having a scope and set-up that will go above 100X is desirable.  And I do prefer Saturn at higher magnifications, over 100X, according to my notes.  But you don't need to be that high to see it.

I hope you will forgive me for this error.  If I could go back and edit out my incorrect posts I would, but the forum locks them.  Sorry for any confusion I introduced into the discussion.

No problem mate. We all make mistakes, faux pas and just general blunders. Saturn is a joy to see no matter what size scope you use, or magnification. For most beginners who view it for the first time, then just like any first views of the moon, it will brings gasps from them. In all my scopes (from 70mm 'frac all the way up to a130mm reflector) the view of the rings are always good, and depending on seeing conditions will stand up well to higher magnification viewing, whereas sometimes on normal nights only a medium power will suffice before the image degrades too much to enjoy the view.

Always nice to read your comments, and don't let this error put you off voicing your opinion or views. Cheers!

[LukeSkywatcher]

BrettL and fellow forum members,

I want to offer an apology.  The worst kind of mistake is when you had the right answer, then doubted yourself and changed it.

I went back to my observation notes of my last viewing of Saturn and I find that those who said you could see rings at 20X and separation at 50X were absolutely correct.   When I made the original recommendation of a scope that had 2 eyepieces of 20X and 50X I was thinking that that was sufficient to meet BrettL's objectives, and it was.   

Then I doubted myself but could not find my notes.   I went to one of these eyepiece simulators and when I saw how small Saturn appeared at 20 and 50X I figured I was wrong and recommended for higher magnification.  Then I found my notes.   I messed up good.  For this I am truly sorry.

I thank all of you who corrected my mistake with your posts.  

I still feel that having a scope and set-up that will go above 100X is desirable.  And I do prefer Saturn at higher magnifications, over 100X, according to my notes.  But you don't need to be that high to see it.

I hope you will forgive me for this error.  If I could go back and edit out my incorrect posts I would, but the forum locks them.  Sorry for any confusion I introduced into the discussion.

No need to apologise. I think the main thing we all meant on the other thread was that YES you can see the rings of Saturn with pretty much any aperture. How you see them though is a completely different thing. Of course the more aperture and magnification you use you will see more, but they are still visible with little aperture or magnification. They will just look different. 

[D4N]

Yeh I've seen them through a 50mm reflector, they just look like ears but they are definitely there!

/Dan

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Stub Mandrel]

My bridge camera can resolve the rings and it's go an objective just 40mm diameter, so a scope that size should be able to resolve them as well - I know that doesn't say what magnification is needed.

Single frame:

And a stacked version: