What magnification is used on those rather nice amateur pics of Saturn?

[tenbyfifty]

Had a look at Saturn last at what I calculate to be 186x and it still looked quite small and no sign of Cassini

division. I know seeing is v important, but are people imaging Saturn at 300 or 400 times to get those detailed pix?

[Kai]

Its a mixture of apature and focal length in my case.

I image with my 200mm Sct @ f10 and some times use a 2x barlow to give my f20.

Might have a go with my dslr and eyepiece projection sometime this year just to try something different

[GordonCopestake]

It's not magnification but resolution you need to see cassini. See this article:

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1132

For imaging all the usual visual guidelines go out the window. Most webcams have very small imaging chips and the image scale is small. I like to think of most webcams as a 5mm eyepiece. For imaging you want to be at about f/20 so depending on your scope you'll want to barlow up, 2x for an SCT or 3x for most refractors. x4 is even better if your mount and tracking can take it. At these focal lengths though it's hard to keep the target on the chip which is why people buy EQ6's and heavier mounts.

i'm not an imager so others can perhaps give better advice

[tenbyfifty]

It's not magnification but resolution you need to see cassini. See this article:

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1132

Looks pretty involved - what's the short story?

i'm not an imager so others can perhaps give better advice

Don't really want to dabble with imaging yet, I was just curious how they get so much detail

[GordonCopestake]

Remind me, what scope do you have?

[tenbyfifty]

Remind me, what scope do you have?

ETX90

[GordonCopestake]

You might be able to see cassini in a 90mm aperture, but it's touch and go and you would need excellent seeing. You need a larger aperture for it to be clear IMO

[tenbyfifty]

You might be able to see cassini in a 90mm aperture, but it's touch and go and you would need excellent seeing. You need a larger aperture for it to be clear IMO

Fair enough. I'll start saving me pennies. I think it was Steve that pointed out that new skywatcher 6" 1200mm reflector - that would be a pretty good planetary scope for the money wouldn't it? Would it be comparable to a 6" mak?

[GordonCopestake]

yup, thats ideal