Just wanting to enjoy better views of saturn its moons jupiter and other planets. I havea p130mm 650 focal and have 10mm and 25mm plossals.
Would it help to buy a barlow to increase mag to enjoy better pictures. Or would it be better oget a shoter focal lense.
I am not intending to spend too much money since I recently brought my scope and wanna optimize it within reasonble budget to enjoy more of the sky.
Can you also let me nkow which barlow or eyepiece would be good in budget and worth buying.
regards
2007-01-08 08:32:12 · 5 answers · asked by planck12 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
I like the extra eye relief I get with the longer focal length eyepieces, so I'd go the barlow route. f5 is quite fast for planetary viewing, so the image quality would probably be better too (unless you're going to buy expensive eyepieces).
2007-01-08 10:12:39 · answer #1 · answered by Iridflare 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the same quality, a barlow will normally cost a bit less than a shorter focal eyepiece.
Unfortunately, it is easier to get a poor quality barlow than a good quality lens.
If you intend to use the higher magnification very often (meaning you'll do more planetary observatins than stars and nebula), then it is worth investing in a good short focal lens.
2007-01-08 09:11:47 · answer #2 · answered by Raymond 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The eye relief is better with a barlow (IOW, there is a bigger lense to look thru) .....so if the quality is very good a barlow might be preferable.
2007-01-08 11:26:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer shorter focal length eyepieces myself, but not by much. It is pretty much 50/50. Look at the source for deals on both.
2007-01-08 09:09:03 · answer #4 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Also a low quality barlow is often very dark . See if you can try one out before buying.
2007-01-09 00:00:20 · answer #5 · answered by y2ceasar 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋