Jupiter from Celestron 102 SLT – am I expecting too much?

[jonnykerm]

Hi, I'm new to astronomy so I'm not really sure to expect. I snapped this photo of Jupiter a couple of weeks ago by putting my iPhone upto my telescope eye piece – it's pretty much as I could see it directly through the telescope but I was hoping it would be a little bit more detailed, am I expecting too much?

Thanks,
Jonny

[happy-kat]

It might have been that night's seeing. In my tiny 80mm f5 refractor I can clearly make out the two main bands. Just got to sit quietly and observe, rushing looking you will see less.

Using a 6mm eyepiece giving x66.

[laudropb]

You should be able to see the 2 equatorial bands

[Mak the Night]

Jupiter is often difficult due to conditions. I can usually make out detail with my 4" Maksutov. It is at Transit at 02:17 GMT (my location) on 11/2/16 so will be high in the sky (42.3° altitude). If it is clear and the seeing is good at around 40x you should be able to vaguely see the cloud belts (depending on light pollution levels). I can usually just see the belts at around 40x - 60x. At around 130x - 150x the white Equatorial Zone should be fairly easily discerned along with the North Equatorial and South Equatorial Belts. The North Belt can often be seen as a warmer brown colour to me. The Polar Regions and other belts can often be discerned too. When visible, and on a good night, I can see the Great Red Spot. Although conditions need to be good to see anything well with my Mak. The picture below, from Cartes du Ciel, is quite a lot larger than I see it with the Mak.

Jupiter at Transit (CDC)

Jupiter often needs a combination of good conditions and long patient periods of viewing to yield any real detail. You can view it for a long time and get a few moments of clarity, but the wait is often worth it. Its high albedo (intrinsic reflectivity) which makes it seem very bright coupled with the effects of the atmosphere are probably responsible for it being so difficult to observe.

[brantuk]

Yes I agree with  the others Jonny - if that's the best focus you could get on it, then it's definitely the "seeing" that's spoiling the planet for you. It looks as if there's a bit of moisture in the air in your shot. In the early evening you will see Jupiter appear to bubble and boil as heat leaves the Earth, and sometimes it will be clear but invisible high level very thin clouds will make it fuzzy, also too much magnification can make it appear grainy.

Occasionally for a split second or two it may appear dead calm and still and Jupiter will be seen clear as a button. But it doesn't last long - couple of seconds if you're lucky. That's why imagers use a webcam to capture it. A couple of thousand frames over two or three mins will capture the best moments of clarity - chuck all the duff frames away and stack and process what's left and you have a half decent picture.

[jonnykerm]

Thanks for this guys, maybe I'm not being patient enough. I wasn't sure whether the lenses that came with my telescope were the best ones (25mm 26x and 9mm 73x).

[happy-kat]

The 25mm is fine you could look to get a new high powered one to improve the 9mm. You max looking at your focal ratio would be say a 6mm eyepiece. Or a 12mm would perhaps get a lot of use on the days when seeing is just not too clear. Have a read of the eyepiece sticky thread before choosing.

[mike head]

This is pretty much the best I've had with a phone camera, would be much better with a proper camera.

 

[Mak the Night]

I observed Jupiter at Transit. At 41x it looked promising and set the binoviewer up with 12.5mm AH ortho's and a 1.6x Barlow for 166x. The EZ, NEB and SEB could just about be discerned for about 15-20 mins and I had a glimpse of the GRS. Then it basically turned into a featureless white ball and even the Galilean Moons looked fuzzy. The seeing just totally deteriorated so I packed up. It was worth a try I suppose lol.

[Mak the Night]

Before I put the bino in I experimented with two Celestron Wratten filters. A blue 80A and a light green 56. These supposedly help with viewing cloud belts and the GRS.  I used a Celestron 17mm Plossl with the 80A and a Celestron 15mm Omni Plossl with the 56. I chose the Plossls as I thought they would be optically simpler than my Luminos and they could be 'Barlowed' to 153x and 173x. I also used an Omni Barlow as it doesn't have a compression ring and the Plossls have undercuts. As Celestron filter threads often don't play well with anything non-Celestron I used Celestron EP's which fitted the Antares diagonal as it doesn't have a compression ring either. The experiment wasn't a success, probably due to to the poor transparency and seeing, and possibly because my 102mm Mak isn't giving a big enough exit pupil with the 15mm and 17mm EP's. 

Celestron Plossls with respective 80A and 56 Wratten filters.

17mm (top) and 15mm Plossls (inserted into Barlow) with filters.

The 80A transmits 30% total light and the 56 transmits 53%. I had a Baader Neodymium filter in the diagonal nosepiece.

[BGazing]

Had some problem with seeing Jupiter two nights ago as it was low in the sky and the seeing was not the best (a lot of wind, and occasional high clouds).

Used Castell Moon&Skyglow filter and it helped quite a bit, dimmed it just as much as it had to...

It's definitely easier watching Saturn filterless...

[Mak the Night]

I find a neodymium filter often very useful for Jupiter. I even got a glimpse of the GRS a few nights ago at 166x (just before Transit), but within 30 mins or so I ended up dropping the magnification down for clarity as conditions deteriorated. Eventually I was down to 52x but it still looked good with the equatorial bands visible and the Galilean moons beside it. 

[BGazing]

I have considered neodymium but was told that Moon&Skyglow works the same on Jupiter...cannot compare.

[Mak the Night]

24 minutes ago, BGazing said:

I have considered neodymium but was told that Moon&Skyglow works the same on Jupiter...cannot compare.

It probably is a neodymium filter anyway. Baader call their neodymium filter 'Moon & Skyglow' as well.

I'm guessing it's the same thing. Of course, Baader claim to have invented it lol! When I can see the GRS I think the neodymium makes it look more red. I tend to use it combined with orthoscopic eyepieces for extra contrast with Jupiter.

[BGazing]

yeah,

On 17/02/2016 at 14:28, Mak the Night said:

It probably is a neodymium filter anyway. Baader call their neodymium filter 'Moon & Skyglow' as well.

I'm guessing it's the same thing. Of course, Baader claim to have invented it lol! When I can see the GRS I think the neodymium makes it look more red. I tend to use it combined with orthoscopic eyepieces for extra contrast with Jupiter.

actually, i was sold that one as a cheaper neodymium by some very knowledgeable guys. they told me it works pretty much the same...for half the price LOL.

[Mak the Night]

14 minutes ago, BGazing said:

yeah,

actually, i was sold that one as a cheaper neodymium by some very knowledgeable guys. they told me it works pretty much the same...for half the price LOL.

Looks like you got a good deal! 

[cloudsweeper]

Even at low mag, you should at least see the two equatorial belts, although depending on conditions they might just appear grey.  I recently managed to spot a further two belts.  

Was the focus good?  Were there wispy clouds about?

It all takes patience and getting accustomed to the target.

It's good to experiment with magnifications to see which suits you and prevailing conditions.  I've worked between x47 and x 167.

Doug.

[Mak the Night]

I can regularly see the EZ,  SEB & NEB at 41x with a 32mm Plossl on a 102mm Mak. It's a good indication that conditions/seeing will be good with higher magnification ... sometimes lol.

[ringz]

Johnny,

The main problem using a phone camera is exposure; your image is way over exposed. You will struggle to get a good picture of Jupiter's disc and have the moons visible. If you are able to manually change exposure times or ISO settings give that a try and perhaps make a composite image.  Take lots of pictures and see what you can come up with.

Martyn.

[bish]

As already mentioned, the image is over exposed. I saw the two main belts with a 76mm reflector (at x46) the other night - but if the seeing is really bad they can be a blur in my 250px. Sometimes you have to spend quite a while at the eyepiece with planets.

[BGazing]

On 18/02/2016 at 19:19, Mak the Night said:

Looks like you got a good deal! 

this one

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Premium-Skyglow-Pollution-Telescope-Eyepiece/dp/B00AZZ7YIG

[Mak the Night]

2 hours ago, BGazing said:

this one

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Premium-Skyglow-Pollution-Telescope-Eyepiece/dp/B00AZZ7YIG

Looks good. Although Amazon apparently don't deliver to Iceland with this one lol!

[todd8137]

Great image and some moons to boot ,this could soon turn into a wallet buster if you get hooked to the dark side forces ,and trust me ,it starts with a camera phone ,always keep this pic ,because this is where it started 

pat

[beka]

On 2/10/2016 at 19:13, jonnykerm said:

Hi, I'm new to astronomy so I'm not really sure to expect. I snapped this photo of Jupiter a couple of weeks ago by putting my iPhone upto my telescope eye piece – it's pretty much as I could see it directly through the telescope but I was hoping it would be a little bit more detailed, am I expecting too much?

Thanks,
Jonny

I have this scope and you can definitely see more if the seeing is good.  The 9mm will only give you 73x magnification but as others have said you should at least be able to see the  Equatorial Zone and North and South equatorial belts - again if the seeing allows. I have seen the Great Red Spot with this scope using a 4mm eyepiece from the Celestron eyepiece and filter kit. However it is not really a good scope for planets. At higher magnifications  chromatic aberration and spherical aberration are bothersome. In my scope spherical aberration is really bad. I found that the dark green filter in the kit gave me appreciably sharper views - it makes chromatic aberration a non-issue  and it seems to improve the spherical as well. On the other hand it is a great scope  for wide field viewing. It seems to me that many people beginning astronomy are at first drawn towards planetary viewing - with this scope I would encourage you start viewing some of the brighter deep sky objects.