Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Eyepieces, Barlows and Filters
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:08 PM
anthony2302749's Avatar
anthony2302749
Registered User

anthony2302749 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 542
David

If the toucam is at prime focus your magnification should be 25x not the 200-250x that you mentioned (Magnification at Prime Focus = Focal Lenght/50). Looking at the size of Mars in your image I would say this correct.

When imaging planets, image scale is an important factor, since you will be taking pictures of small targets (Mars etc) you will need to magnify these object in order to capture sufficient detail. For imaging, magnification is a function of focal lenght and the focal lenght will determine image scale.

I you were to use a 5x Powermate with your setup you will end up with a focal lenght of 6250mm. Divide this by 50 and we end up with a magnification of 125x. In terms of image scale we end up with about 0.18 arcsec per pixel.

This is a respectable image scale for your setup and you will find that you will record more detail.

Anthony


Quote:
Originally Posted by davidpretorius
thanks anthony, great explanation,

can you do me a favour and post your mars pic as it exactly seen in size. I have a 10" at 1250mm fl, no barlow The toucam at prime focus gives me around 200 - 250 x mag.

I would be keen to see how big your scope actually shows mars. I am only assuming you have made it bigger in photoshop.

The amount of detail you have is great.

With 200 x already, if i get a 5x televue. i will get 1000 X with the toucam at prime focus???

This is mars as i see it thru the toucam at prime focus
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 27-10-2005, 12:48 PM
bonox
Registered User

bonox is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by acropolite
In the LX (2000mm focal length) my 2x barlow gives 285x with a 14mm EP, slightly more if placed after the diagonal, useable only when the seeing is very good.
does this generally mean that all barlows should be placed directly at the focuser or visual back? I have always done it purely because i can't fit the barlow into my diagonals without them contacting the prism surface.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 05:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement