The best Jupiter view I had was through my 6" f/8 at 342x. I had a nice view of Saturn once through my 10" f/5 at 347x. That was in my driveway, and the neighbors came over to see what I was doing. When I gave them a look they thought it was fake, that I had somehow slipped a photo of Saturn into the eyepiece! Normally from my yard I can’t get much past about 200x, but once in a while I get a surprise. The highest magnification I’ve ever had was 650x through the 10" on the Ring Nebula but that was from a very dark site with exceptional seeing.
2 Likes
I was out last night and used 4 eyepieces all night. 13 and 20mm 100 degree eyepieces and 24 and 30mm 82 degree for some open clusters. 140x was all i could do last night, anything more and i couldnt focus it.
1 Like
140-175 is a typical night for me too. Seeing is usually decent enough, but the biggest problem for me is light pollution. There’s a streetlight right next to my driveway, so I’m relegated to the back yard. But wow that the weather is nicer I’ll be back to my dark sites, and real observing.
1 Like
@bkaras on a good night i can get to 200x. I dont deal with a ton of light pollution and am a fairly solid bortle 4. Its just the glories of living in the midwest
1 Like
I wished I lived in a Bortle 4 area. It’s more like Bortle 8. I can get pretty high magnification on the moon, but everything else is washed out. Thankfully narrowband filters help a little with that.
2 Likes
@bkaras 400x is as high as i have ever been and i have done that exactly once. Last year i nailed 200x on Orion, just couldnt get 250x to focus. It was amazing at 200x
1 Like
With Lunar and Planetary , light pollution doesn’t mean much . I’ve had plenty of great nights in suburban light pollution with the Moon and Planets . They both have enough brightness that detail doesn’t get wiped away with light pollution. But I’ll back the magnification down the second that hard line detail starts to suffer in the least bit . I’ll go back down one magnification . Better a slightly smaller image with hard line detail than a slightly larger image where hard line detail isn’t as hard line as it should be . So I’m very conservative when it come to magnification . With DSOs , I got spoiled years ago after my first trip to a truly dark sky site as when back in suburbia the things were pretty much pathetic smudges compared to what true dark skies provide . That aside I’m still conservative with magnification . As soon as I detect any such hard line detail starting to suffer , I’m backing it down . I want the best image , not the largest image . When pristine seeing comes around , by all means take advantage of it and I’ve had those nights . They are rare and great seeing rarely goes hand in hand with great transparency . Usually if the seeing is great , transparency isn’t that great and when transparency is great , seeing stinks . But on rare occasions , both come together simultaneously . It does happen from time to time and I’ve seen it . Those nights are special . Even out under excellent dark skies , seeing will effect Lunar and Planetary more so I’ll resort to DSOs for awhile and maybe check back in on Planets since the seeing can improve from one hour to the next . Or ,… It might get worse so back to the DSOs . I now live under borderline Bortle 1 and 2 skies so I get great DSOs . Bottom line I guess is , DSOs benefit most from the lack of light pollution and the Moon and Planets benefit most from good seeing conditions .
Long babble yeah, but that’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it .
Oh , BTW , M31 is great at 31x magnification as I can get the entire galaxy in the FOV with both M32 and M110 and on good nights easily get both dust lanes with great hard line detail in M31 even with only 4 or 5 inches of aperture . Better in my 8 inch Schmidt Newt ? But of course . Photographic sans the colors but all the B&W detail is there . I’d rather view that exceptional object from end to end in the FOV than pan across it back and forth at higher magnification as it’s just more pleasing unless you wanna check out star clusters or whatnot within the galaxy . But if I wanna check out star clusters , I’d just as soon be checking out M3 , M13 and M22 for instance . Much more satisfying .
Okay , I’ll shut up now …….
1 Like
I was out the other night, during the full moon. Mostly i was out to collimate the SCT which somehow got out of wack. I set the frac up too just to look at some clusters. In the frac i was running between a 14 and 20mm eyepiece and the SCT was loving the 32mm Q70. I know that SCTs are not known for a wide FOV, but that 70 degree eyepiece really works for me in it when i just want to cruise around.
1 Like
My most used is the 13mm Ethos with my 12" Dob — solid mix of mag and FOV for my Bortle 6 skies. On the SCT, I usually roll with a 24mm ES 68° for general viewing. For the frac (80mm), it’s mostly lunar/planetary, so a sharp 5mm or 6mm gets the job done. All depends on the night and the target!
2 Likes