What sort and power of telescope do I need to observe the rings of Saturn?

Answer 1

You can see the rings at only about 30 or 40 power. Almost any telescope can do that.

Answer 2

Because the rings of Saturn are easily observable with almost any telescope, even a small, inexpensive refractor with an aperture of 2.4" and a 60 m.m. objective lens will offer a fairly good but not very detailed view of Saturn's rings. If you want a detailed image, a telescope with a larger aperture will be necessary. For example, a 6" or 8" Newtonian, Dobsonian, or Schmidt Cassegrain will allow you to see the split in the rings called the Cassini Division.

However, the clarity of image produced by any telescope will be influenced by the eyepiece used and the condition of the atmosphere at the time of viewing. Clarity of planetary viewing is heavily influenced by atmospheric conditions such as temperature variance, water vapor, air currents, particulate matter, smoke, pollution, etc. If atmospheric seeing conditions are not favorable, a higher power eyepiece will actually magnify the imperfections in the atmosphere, making the planetary image less satisfactory than that produced by a lower power eyepiece. For example, on a night with poor atmospheric conditions, a high powered eyepiece used with even a first rate telescope may create an image in which Saturn or any other planet may appear to be ensconced in a boiling ocean. For this reason, although almost any telescope will allow observation of Saturn's rings, other factors such as eyepiece choice and atmospheric conditions will determine the quality of the image and the amount of observable detail.

Answer 3

(skip to the end for telescope recommendation)

The most important aspect of a telescope, with the exception of solar telescopes, is aperture. Aperture means the diameter of the main lens or mirror. The greater in diameter the main lens or mirror, the more light the telescope will collect. The power is decided by the focal length of the eyepeice, which is changeable in most telescopes.

The magnification of a telescope is: magnification = (telescope focal length)/(eyepeice focal length)

Larger aperture telescopes typically have longer focal lengths so this contributes to the magnification.

Planets like Saturn aren't very dim, so technically you don't want to collect a lot of light to see them or the light will drown out the detail. But, using high a high power eyepiece to magnify often produces fuzzy bad images. In larger telescopes you can use a lower power eyepiece and put what's called an off axis aperture stop over the front of the telescope. This is basically a cover with a smaller diamter hole cut in it off center. It allows the telescope to collect less light while keeping the focal length the same so the image isn't too bright but the magnification is like that in a larger telescope.

That all being said, you can see the rings on Saturn nicely in a 4.5" reflector with a 24mm and 2x barlow or maybe even in a 80mm refractor (apochromatic preffered). I wouldn't use anything smaller.

Answer 4

No particular 'type' of telescope is better, since only the spatial resolution is important and the seeing of the night you are observing. I mean, lenses or mirrors, a refractor or cassegrain... whatever is fine as long as it is big enough to get enough light and to 'resolve' the rings. Saturn's rings are thin: though they're 250,000 km or more in diameter they're no more than 1.5 kilometers thick. The planet itself is 1,429,400,000 km (9.54 AU) from the Sun (so about 1.3Gkm from Earth) and has a diameter: 120,536 km (equatorial).
So, the distinction you want to see is about 16 arcseconds on the sky, which you can see with a 4mm diameter mirror, were you able to gather enough light - which you wont be able to.
I have seen the rings very clearly with a 20cm telescope... did you want to be able to resolve the gap in the rings, or just see them?
The people in the telescope shop would be able to advise you on this.

Answer 5

The first time most folks see the rings is with something like a cheap 60mm refractor. You don't see much detail, but it was the most memorable moment of my astronomic life.
Advertised power is pretty meaningless with a telescope. You can make it whatever power you want, but the picture would be so low quality at higher powers it doesn't help. It's just a selling point.
You can get a pretty inexpensive 60mm refractor or 100mm reflector from Walmart or somewhere that will get you into observing enough to decide if you want to spend big bucks.

Answer 6

The rings of Saturn can be easily seen even with a modest telescope. The one I used when I was a kid, many many years ago I must admit, was a small 2 inches (primary lens diameter) refractor with a shaky tripod. But it worked, I could easily see the rings. So go for anything bigger than 2 inches if you want to see something like the Cassini division.

Answer 7

I've seen them with a 4-inch (100 mm), f/10 reflector telescope. They were not very distinct, you couldn't distinguish individual rings from each other. But you could definitely tell that they were there. For a better view, you'd need to use a 6 or even 8 inch.

Answer 8

NOthing you could buy at the Discovery store, for the highest price even.

Check out your nearest university. Often they have an astronomy program, so they may offer public viewing nights. Looking out of *those* scopes is something you really have to do!

Answer 9

You need at least a 6" aperture to see the Cassini division. I can see it fine with my 8" Newtonian set to 200x

Answer 10

100mm eyepiece!!!!!