Magnify my image from a pee to the size of a baseball

[Philosophaie]

Tonight I saw Jupiter with 4 of its Moons. Attached is two pictures of Jupiter:

JUPITER1 and JUPITER2. This tells you about how powerful my telescope is.

I was wondering what kind of telescope would I need to magnify my image from a pee to the size of a baseball?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sky-Watcher 130mm EQ2 Newtonian Reflector Telescope

-130mm EQ2 Reflector Telescope130mm (5.1 inch) diameter primary mirror -900mm focal length, f/6.9

-20.4 sq. in. light grasp

-307x maximum theoretical magnification and 1.08 arc-sec resolving power

-High-quality super Plossl fully-coated 25mm and 12mm 1.25” eyepieces provide clear, sharp images at magnification of 36x and 75x with a 52° apparent field-of-view and great eye relief

-1.25” 2x Barlow lens doubles magnification of the included eyepieces to 72x and 150x for up-close planetary and lunar viewing

-Red-dot finderscope with variable brightness makes locating night-sky objects easy

-Stable 1.25" rack-and-pinion focuser

-EQ-2 equatorial mount provides proper stability with dual slow-motion controls, 360° azimuth adjustment

[Ben Ritchie]

Were you using the barlow? If not then that's the place to start - the Tal 3x one would be useful too.

And, um, "pea" ... I hope

[Chris H]

If thats a pea my 10" dob shows it as a ping pong ball, for you too see it as baseball size you'll need something like a 20 inch scope.

[barkis]

Increased size, but as you see, it Improves nothing. You need to get the size via the imaging system.

The only Information you have, is that you can tell the planet is slightly oblate.

Ron.

[Ags]

A telescope of your current size should show the banding on Jupiter, although this can depend on atmospheric conditions which can degrade the image. A bigger telescope may not show a bigger image as the limiting factor is often the atmosphere. For example, it is often hard to go much above 150x maginification, which your telescope is capable of (the 12mm EP with barlow), especially if the planet is near the horizon.

Also, the image you see with you eyes is often better than the image captured from a single frame by a camera - to get a better image with a camera you need to take many shots and then use image processing software to combine them into a highly processed single image. With enough data and enough processing, the processed image can eventually be much sharper and colorful than the visual image.

[Capricorn]

What scope, what eyepiece and where are you?

Someone seemed to have an idea of the scope etc but can see no mention.

[Daryl]

What scope, what eyepiece and where are you?

Someone seemed to have an idea of the scope etc but can see no mention.

Info is in his sig line... but black colour text on near black background aint good idea :)

Sig states : Skywatcher 130mm Newtonian Reflector on EQ2 mount

[the_laughing_crow]

Ive got the 130p Heritage edition (simlar scope but with a shorter focal length and on a simpler dobsonian base) and I got what I considered to be a pretty good visual of Jupiter the other night at about x260 magnification. Which I achieved using a 5mm focal length eye piece (TS planetary HR branded) and a x2 barlow (antares branded).

I waited up as late as I could so it was higher in the sky as the higher an object is in the night sky then the shorter the length of earth's atmosphere the light has to travel through from the object to reach your primary mirror. Thats important because the atmosphere is dirty and tubulent.... the less atmosphere the better. Hence Hubble is in space and many earth telescope are on high mountains.

I would say that in my own opinion you wouldnt really want to go much beyond x300 magnification with any scope no matter how large and certainly with a 130p Im considering x260 to be about the best its capable of.