Jump to content

stargazine_ep44_banner.thumb.jpg.6153c4d39ed5a64b7d8af2d3d6061f61.jpg

Is a shorty Barlow harder to focus than a standard size?


Recommended Posts

Looking for a little advice.  I have an Orion 2x shorty Barlow that came with my telescope.  It seems to be much harder to focus when I use that with any of my eyepieces than my actual eyepieces are.  I have a new Orion 6mm planetary eyepiece, which if terrific, actually, but when I pair it with my shorty 2x, I can't really get a clear focus on it, which is a little disappointing.  I am thinking of buying a TeleVue 3x Barlow, which is much longer.  It seems like with a longer eyepiece like that, it wouldn't require so many micro-adjustments to try to get a good, clean focus.  (I could be wrong about that also, I know.)  I Since they are quite a bit more expensive than the one I have, I want to make sure that it would be a good choice at this point.  I am a beginner and am working with a 114 Reflector.  

Any thoughts or suggestions much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be the 114 reflector itself, and by using a Barlow, your expecting too much! Barlowing the 6mm is simple to say, but difficult to achieve, due to the amount of magnification, plus the scope itself. I had a 127EQ, same issues, I couldn't get away trying to Barlow the short focal length eyepiece. Do you have the same issue with the longer focal length eyepiece?
Also, you can often remove the Barlow lens cell from its extension tube, the lens sits in a cell, and sometimes can be removed from the Barlow and attached/screwed onto the base of an eyepiece. This alone will reduce the multiplication factor of the Barlow, so a 2x will feel more like a 1.5x Barlow. Try it see if theres any difference.

I think you would be wasting good money on a 3x Tele View on your present scope.
Whats the focal ratio on the telescopes data plate, use that as a guide to your shortest focal length eyepiece (highest power) if its an f/5 scope then a 5mm lens is a good limit! If your trying to Barlow a 6mm eyepiece by a factor of TWO, the effectively your using the 6mm as though it was a 3mm, far in excess to what is achievable?

 

Edited by Charic
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestion.  I just checked, and yeah, it will unscrew and I can screw directly on to any eyepiece.  Who knew? I never would have thought of trying that.  :-)

I'll give it a try tonight and see if it makes a difference.

(I do realize that I can't expect too much from a lower-end telescope, but it was a bit of a compromise for me at this point.  Hope to upgrade as finances progress.) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will just be less powerful. 

Magnification of a telescope is determined by the telescopes focal length and the focal length of the eyepiece.

If your scope has a focal length of 1000mm and you use an eyepiece of 6mm you achieve a magnification or power of @ 166x written as 166x.

The Barlow, for want of a better excuse doubles the focal length of the telescope? Your 1000mm focal length is now 2000mm when you insert a Barlow of 2x into the focuser, and depending on which eyepiece you use next, will determine the power.

1000/6=166x
(two times Barlow ) 2000/6=333x

(TeleVue 3x ) 3000/6=500 Lol!

There lies a problem

Edited by Charic
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It hasn’t to do with a ‘lower-end’ scope, Jay. It’s just that you are probably trying for too high a magnification. That’s not necessarily a good thing. (Magnification = scope focal length/eyepiece focal length.)

Using a higher factor of Barlow - TV or other - will definitely not help!

Edit: @Charic beat me to it.

Edited by Floater
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Floater,

I kind of thought it might be a limitation of the telescope more than the eyepieces, but it was worth a shot. :-(

Thanks to Charic also for the calculations.  This telescope has a focal length of 500mm, so a 6mm with a 2x barlow would bring it to 166x, if my calculations are right.  The max magnification they recommend is 200x, so a 3x would apparently not be a good idea.  This is most likely the max magnification I should attempt to achieve at this point.

Thanks to both of you for saving me some money that wouldn't make much difference.

Not disappointed at all, I am actually really pleased with what I can see, even with a low-end scope like this.  It was so amazing the first time I looked a Jupiter and saw it not only as a more than just a bright light, but one with actual small moons in an orbital pattern.  I was so excited, I don't think I'll ever forget that.  So learning as I go, maybe some day a more advanced setup, but there is still so much to learn and see right now with this one, that I'm not too worried. 

Thanks again for the great advice.  I really appreciate it.

Edited by Jay F
changed focal length and results of calculations
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a generic version of that shorty barlow I paid about $30 for years ago.  It's not that sharp of a barlow compared to a Televue 2x or Meade 140 2x.  I loaned it to a beginner friend and told him he could keep it indefinitely since I wasn't using it.  It came back to me within 6 months because he had also found it not that great.  I literally couldn't convince him to keep it, so now it sits in my box of sidelined equipment on a shelf in my closet.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tried screwing the Barlow lens in directly to my eyepiece, and there was some improvement that way.  I was able to focus in pretty tightly on Crater Schickard this morning with my 3mm planetary eyepiece and it looked crisp and clear. That eyepiece with the Barlow was pretty good, but the focus is still just slightly off when compared with the 6mm without it.   Thanks again for that suggestion, @Charic.

@Louis D I appreciate that information.  I think that is probably part of the problem.  It is an inexpensive Barlow.  I guess you get what you pay for!  Possibly I would have better luck with TV 2x at some point down the line, might be my next upgrade.  (but not a 3x :-)) 

Thanks, again.

Kind regards, Jay

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jay F said:

.......... I was able to focus in pretty tightly on Crater Schickard this morning with my 3mm planetary eyepiece and it looked crisp and clear. That eyepiece with the Barlow was pretty good, but the focus is still just slightly off when compared with the 6mm without it. 

 

Can I suggest you 2x Barlow the 6mm to give you your 3mm 'eyepiece' rather than 2x Barlow your 3mm eyepiece!

That's how I'm reading/understanding your text? 

The Meade #140 that Louis D mentions is a good tele negative Barlow and probably cheaper than a TeleVue, should the need arise.

Edited by Charic
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Charic  I only have a 6mm eyepiece, not a 3mm one.  I mistyped that in the post above.  Sorry about that, I just reread the post and it's pretty confusing, even to me :-) 

I do get it that, with my telescope specs, the 6mm with the 2x should be the highest magnification I should try, and I'm good with that. 

You saved me some money :-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jay F said:

@Charic  I only have a 6mm eyepiece, not a 3mm one.  I mistyped that in the post above.  Sorry about that, I just reread the post and it's pretty confusing, even to me :-) 

I do get it that, with my telescope specs, the 6mm with the 2x should be the highest magnification I should try, and I'm good with that. 

You saved me some money :-)

I'm thinking your best bet is to get a 3.2mm BST Starguider from FLO rather than keep trying to find a good barlow-eyepiece combo.  That eyepiece is already a negative-positive (barlow/smyth + konig variation) eyepiece.  It should be a well matched combination.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Corpze
      Hi, i have made a video where i show a coople of eyepieces that i use and like, and also show how a barlow works, compared to the "Powermate" from Televue. And how is the FOV affected when changing the magnification with different eyepieces?

      Feel free to comment and give me feedback - I hope you like the video!
      /Daniel
       
       
    • By Zermelo
      I picked up a Celestron Omni last year quite cheaply and had originally been using that with stock eyepieces, which was fine.
      Since then I've bought a couple of BST Starguiders and a Hyperflex zoom, and I'm now wondering if I'd notice any difference with a better barlow (this is now being used on an F/5 150mm Newtonian). Otherwise, the pennies can be directed elsewhere.
      I'd not considered it before as the next rung up seemed to be around the £90-£100 mark, which seemed out of line with the rest of the spend. But I've seen some positive reviews of 3-element models in the region of £35-£40.
      In particular, I've read good things about the Revelation/GSO Astro 2.5x (though apparently closer to 2.2x) and the Baader Classic Q 2.25x.
      - does anyone have experience with both of these, and have a preference?
      - would I notice any significant difference with either, compared with the Omni?
      - I read somewhere that the Baader in particular required focussing the tube into the OTA to an extent that caused some image degradation. Obviously I'd want to avoid this if true, so is this a feature of the Baader, or of both, or of all (shorter?) barlows? (to be honest, I'd not thought to see whether this was happening with the Omni, I'll try to remember to check, if this weather ever breaks).
      Thanks in advance.
    • By LondonSi72
      Hi SGL,
      My lovely wife bought me a SW Explorer 130 with the basic RA drive for my 40th birthday 8 years ago, and I've enjoyed using it on and off ever since.  I've started getting more into it - it's a great beginner scope, but I'm - like lots of others on this forum - looking at upgrading.  One of the things I found tricky with the scope was getting the focus just right at high magnification (I'm sure that's kind of obvious!).  It does wobble quite a bit on the EQ2 mount when focusing.  I get pretty good - if small - views of Jupiter, Saturn, (the Moon, of course) and have had hints of seeing some DSOs.
      I bought a 8mm BST Starguider, and it's a great improvement on the standard 10mm that comes with the scope, but if I push the scope by adding the 2x Barlow and the 8mm it's a blur and the focus seems to keep missing the sweet spot.  I saw a post elsewhere on this forum by MakTheNight, (looks like they've left now - last post was 2 years ago) who added a Baader Helical Focuser that attached directly to the T-thread on the focusing apparatus on the SW. Link to that post is below. I got one and it is indeed a great improvement on fine tuning - the problem is I can't use it with the Barlow as the helical focuser is about an inch long and the focuser can't move far enough into the scope to focus with the Barlow and any of my eyepieces (the 8mm BST, or the 10 or 25mm standard eyepieces)
      .
      Clearly MakTheNight managed to get their setup to work with some specific eyepieces (a Luminos 10mm and 32mm Plossl) and a specific Barlow, so I tried looking up how I could work out what combination of eyepieces and Barlow would work, rather than randomly buying kit and having to return it because it won't work with my scope, but I haven't found anything useful yet.  So I thought I'd take the plunge and ask here

      Can anyone help me figure out how I can calculate what combinations of eyepiece and Barlow would work with this setup?  I'm also looking at upgrading the OTA and mount to a 200P and EQ5 at some point, so ideally would have a combination that could work with that too - the focal length and mirror is quite different - 1000mm on the 200P parabolic vs 900mm spherical on the 130.
       
      Many thanks!
      Simon
       
       
    • By StarGazingSiouxsie
      Hi  
      Tonight I was looking at Jupiter and got some nice views with a range of eyepeices. The best image detail wise and for clarity of image was a 15mm, which on my 8" Evolution gives me appx 135X 
      I tried using my Televue 2X Barlow which normally works fine. I can't remember exactly which eyepiece this happened with, maybe the 15mm or a 9mm, but when I used the barlow the planetary image would soon disappear out of the eyepiece. The mount seemed to otherwise be tracking OK although notice the planets seem to move out of the eyepiece view after a while. So did I have too much magnification with the Barlow? I think I did manage to get focus, the image just wouldn't stay put.
      Thanks for any insights or advice 
       
      Siouxsie 
    • By Ryaen
      Hi, I am pretty much new in Astronomy. Recently I have bought Meade Polaris 127mm telescope. The Barlow(2x) which Meade has provided is pretty basic. It gives pretty blurry view.
      I have read few blogs and get to know that for 127mm, 2x-3x magnification is more than enough. Now I’m confused in its specs(element in it).
      Wondering which one I choose, 2.5x Barlow 3 element or 2x Barlow with 2 element to get clear and crisp viewing.
      Ryaen
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.