Eye piece advice for rookie

[TragicMike]

Recently got a Celestron AstroMaster 114eq. It came with a 20mm and 10mm eyepiece but I would like to be able to see things like Jupiter and Saturn with a little more magnification. Any suggestions/recommendations? 

[Dave In Vermont]

Not knowing your budget, I'll venture a Plössl or two. The Celestron Omni-line of Plössl's have been getting favorable comments by folks's over here. As the 10mm eyepieces that come with these scopes are usually awful, you might do well to replace it with a 12mm or 10mm Omni. And try this with the Barlow that came with. I would also be prepared to get a better Barlow - if needed. Your view will determine this.

With a 2X Barlow and 10mm eyepiece, you'd have 200X to try on Jupiter & Saturn. That should make you happy - if the sky's 'seeing' conditions are amenable and the new eyepiece(s) meet expectations.

Have fun -

Dave

 

ps: Greetings to you, Mike, welcome to SGL - we love questions here, and finding their answers. So feel free to ask yours!

[MarsG76]

I recommend a nice 5mm Celestron XCel or Televue Type 6 Nagler....

 

[spaceboy]

3 hours ago, MarsG76 said:

I recommend a nice 5mm Celestron XCel or Televue Type 6 Nagler....

 

I'm sure the OP is open to all considerations but a T6 in an AstroMaster 114eq  Having experience with scopes in the AstroMaster range I'd say a T6 is a little over kill IMHO and unlikely to see their monies worth out of such an expensive eyepiece.

I agree with Dave that the celestron Omni would be a good choice for a rookie.

[ronin]

For the scope you have I would suggest nothing below 8mm. The scope is a short tube 457mm with a focal length of 1000mm, which means it has a built in barlow in the focuser to produce an apparent longer focal length. They seem to not work too well and adding more glass or trying for greater magnifications has a limit.

I would hope that what you can see at present is a bit small but mainly not that good a quality image. Main idea is to improve the quality, maybe not so greatly the size. Hence the 8mm. At 8mm the Paradigm is the one that comes to mind, the X-Cel at 9mm is a bit too close to the 10mm you have and the 7mm X-Cel may be a bit too much in magnification. As mentioned the 8mm will give a slight increase in magnification but I am thionking that something like a PAradigm will improve the sharpness and clarity of the view. Paradigms are sold bu Astronomincs as Paradigms and by Agena Astro as Agena Astro ED eyepieces. Same eyepice just dirrerent names on the outside.

Planetary observing usually means you end up with lots of eyepieces with small steps in focal length.

Owing to the already present barlow you will liikely find that using an eyepiece (say 15mm) and second barlow just does not work, so would suggest single eyepieces.

If you wer glasses then an 8mm plossl is likely to be a bit too short as the eye relief will be around 5mm or maybe 6mm, but insufficent for wearing glasses while observing. If you do not wear glasses then an 8mm plossl is an option. Have seen 8mm plossl's - try Vixen NPL plossl's, they have an 8mm.

[Wpit]

I had one of these 'short tube' reflectors many years ago and was disappointed finding that getting good focus even on stars let alone planets was difficult. However that aside I would recommend the budget range bst starguider 8mm eyepiece (around £45) to get a good experience. You'll keep the eyepiece after you upgrade from your starter scope. I would prefer manufacturers to provide one good eyepiece rather than 2 very average eyepieces.

[Dave In Vermont]

At 1000mm FL this scope is going to give you 125X with an 8mm eyepiece. It should handle 200X easily - which would be a 5mm eyepiece. I don't see it referenced as having a built-in Barlow in the optics (Bird-Jones) in the Celestron website:

http://www.celestron.com/browse-shop/astronomy/telescopes/astromaster-telescopes/astromaster-114eq-telescope

It says clearly that a 20mm supplied EP gives 50X, and the 10mm supplied gives 100X. But then it should have a longer tube? Wait a minute! I think Celestron just gave itself a black-eye in my book! It must be a Bird-Jones - and that would explain the 'soft-focus' Wpit has referenced.

Take a look -

Dave

[Ricochet]

2 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

At 1000mm FL this scope is going to give you 125X with an 8mm eyepiece. It should handle 200X easily - which would be a 5mm eyepiece. I don't see it referenced as having a built-in Barlow in the optics (Bird-Jones) in the Celestron website:

http://www.celestron.com/browse-shop/astronomy/telescopes/astromaster-telescopes/astromaster-114eq-telescope

It says clearly that a 20mm supplied EP gives 50X, and the 10mm supplied gives 100X.

Take a look -

Dave

It may not say it but just look at the pictures. There's no way that tube is long enough to have a focal length of 1000mm natively. 

Also, even if it was a nice long f ratio parabolic mirror I would contest the ability to get to 200x. Sure, you can get that magnification by putting in the appropriate eye piece but small exit pupils scrub detail and Ronin's suggestion of an 8mm matches my experience of the optimum magnification using a SW 1145p (same aperture, half the focal length and no corrector). 

[Dave In Vermont]

You are right. I'm looking at the manual Celestron has skillfully hidden on their website - I'll say no more other than it just left my 'Likely to be Suggested' list.

I wonder if Meade has the equaivalent model..... I think I'll write a booklet on this issue.

Dave

[Alfian]

Its confusing when there is a short tube 114(p) which is a 500 and another 114mm (like the Celestron) that looks like a short tube but has the resident Bird-Jones device that "barlows" it out to a 1000mm (f8.77) effective focal length. I tend to look at  useful minimum exit pupil regarding maximum magnification rather than the "2x aperture in mm" as often quoted.  I reckon that is around 160 which would make a 6mm just about viable on a good night, however, in my experience pushing magnification only works out with any modicum of  satisfaction on those rare good nights and with good optics. So, this is a long winded agreement of  looking at an 8mm. Alternatively a 15mm plossl which will have reasonably comfortable eye relief and a half decent 2x barlow,  which will give an "effective 7.5mm" would make for usable combination.

[Charic]

22 hours ago, TragicMike said:

Recently got a Celestron AstroMaster 114eq. It came with a 20mm and 10mm eyepiece but I would like to be able to see things like Jupiter and Saturn with a little more magnification. Any suggestions/recommendations? 

I had a similar issue with my first scope, the Celestron 127EQ. Supposedly a better scope than the 114eq on specification alone, but to fix the situation I bought a better scope! the same one I'm still using for over three Years.

Most scopes arrive with a 10mm and 20-25mm eyepieces,  but you can buy better eyepieces for comfort of use and better field of view, but even with 'better' eyepieces, and  further testing, and getting the scope fully cooled, collimated and totally cleaned,  the 127EQ was still no better, the scope itself, was letting me down? and as I only use the scope for visual use, I clearly needed something better. It was a quick and simple decision to make, the  resulting difference  with what I can see now is clearly noticeable, and on my Dobsonian mount, the scope is even easier to use and set up over an EQ system.

I liked the suggestion above  of using 'Paradigm' eyepieces, their very similar to my BST's, and either brand will be a good first upgrade, but don't expect the eyepiece alone to work wonders? and anything of higher power on the 114eq will produce a closer but less detailed image ( down to how the scope works and physics).

What ever you buy in 1.25" will  work on the scope, and eyepieces are transferrable, but what you desire now, regarding  magnification  will not get you the sharp result you wish you could have, any scope can produce any magnification that is allowable, by changing the focal length of the eyepiece, or with the addition of a Barlow  lens,  and better image detail may only be achievable with more aperture, from a bigger scope.
The eyepiece  magnifies the image presented by the telescope at the focal plane, no matter how good or expensive the eyepiece, that image at the focal plane needs to be  big,bright and detailed from the outset. Its not just a simple matter of adding a shorter focal length eyepiece to increase the magnification, there are so many variables to overcome/contend with?

Nothing wrong with trying a new eyepiece,  maybe you'll find that  there is an improvement after all. Remember I'm not seeing with your eyes or from your location, so your results may vary. In my experience though, expensive eyepieces on the 114/127 scopes are not what's required, but a 'better' field of view and better eye-relief may make what you can see already little more comfortable, but not miraculously better.

You have already found a limitation to your present scope? my initial  impression was simply how long everything took because of the EQ system! it was not until I had bought and looked through the 200mm/8" Skyliner, that I fully appreciated the difference between the two scopes with regards to the visual detail. The only thing to improve my present image quality is to observe from a darker location ( no visible man-made lights ) all scopes benefit from darker sites, or buy a bigger scope, producing a brighter image and more detail, for when I extend my magnification  but the bigger scope could/does add further complications to my situation, and you can only have so much power and light gathering here under UK skies.

[Louis D]

You can certainly get to a larger image with a shorter focal length eyepiece, but you're likely to actually see less detail because the image will tend to break down or get blurry.  I found the only sure fire way to increase magnification and detail at the same time required increasing my aperture.  I went from a 3" to an 8" to a 15" scope in search of increased image scale without break down of the image.  In the 15" Dob, sharp, detailed, 300x viewing of planets is easy under typical Texas summer time seeing conditions, but basically impossible in the 8" and certainly not in the 3".