What is the maximum magnification for this telescope?
1022897
Sorry, I have no idea. My grandson picked it out and I bought it for him. That's all I know. Sorry I can't help you.
1022898
525x supposedly but its very hard to focus anything, even the moon, at 525. Plus there's no stabilizer or anything to keep it from moving/shaking when trying to focus on something specifically, making it even more difficult
1022899
The useful magnification is about 140x for astronomical purposes. Beyond this you're going to get fuzzy images. Don't be fooled by extravagant claims.
14465
The minimum focus distance is 0.15m. At that distance the magnification should be at least 1:1.
283850
i use Orion Min-EQ Tabletop Equatorial Telescope Mount. that's enough for me
1193215
1.25 inches, it is the diameter. You need an adapter to used it in your telescope or a 0.965 inches eyepiece.
1376571
The level of magnification is about 2x. Remember that this is just a cheap alternative to Zacuto.
1661999
Yes, but you need to be aware that there are limitations to ground-based telescopes, particularly small scopes like this one. With a 76mm aperture (diameter of the tube), the maximum usable magnification is something like 150x, give or take. The 300mm focal length determines the level of magnification you can get from each eyepiece (divide 300 by the eye piece focus, so 15mm eyepiece is 20x magnification). This scope comes with 10mm and 20mm pieces. A Barlow (check out "Celestron AstroMaster Accessory Kit Telescope" for a tidy kit) can double or triple the magnification. Planets are big, but they are still far away. Even at 50x (6mm eye piece or equivalent), Mars will still look like a large red star. Venus, in addition to being hard to view because of its position relative to the sun, is covered by a dense cloud layer; you can see that it is a disc rather than a distant star even at lower magnifications, but there isn't a lot of detail to see through a small (or large) scope. Jupiter is much larger and better for viewing as a result. At 50x, it will still be small, but it should be easily recognizable as the gas giant we know and love. You should even be able to see the four bright dots in a line that are the planet's four largest moons. At 100x, the banding in its clouds should be clear. Saturn is smaller and farther than Jupiter. Still, you can see that the shape is distorted. A little more power and the cause should be clear: the rings. With my larger scope at home, by 125x (doable on this scope with the right equipment) it is clear that the rings are spaced away from the planet. Uranus and beyond, though, are beyond the reach of this scope, at least if you wanted to see more than a dot. So, yes, you can see the closer planets, but you need to keep your expectations realistic. I'd strongly recommend a Barlow and a decent eye piece. There are a number of kits, some less than $50, that should do nicely in that regard. Even without, there is still quite a bit to view in the night sky.
2119555
Absolutely. This is a fine telescope for any astronomical use. The only drawback is it's size. It's a bit of work to get it somewhere and set it up, but I love mine. For detailed planetary study, a large refractor is better, but for deep sky, this is MUCH better than the refractor, so a good all around scope.
1106732
The magnification is found by dividing the focal length of the objective lens (400mm) by the focal length of the eyepiece. The telescope comes with two eyepiece lenses, 4mm and 20mm, so with the first one should have a magnification of 100x and with the second,20x. I am not making any comment on the quality of the image produced here. Brian Oliver. Brian Oliver.
1546869
I would say no. The focal length won't let you get enough magnification to get good pictures of distant nebula or things like that. I'd recommend something a little bigger like a 8 inch. Plus you'd probably want something with a motor drive so you can have long exposures, without distorted images.
1310868
Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower power. Enjoy your telescope! Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower... » Read More Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower power. Enjoy your telescope! « Show Less
142666
This is a basic, basic telescope I got for my 6 year old daughter. The zooming is not very high. It has two glass magnification pieces which are 6mm and 12mm respectively. In my opinion, its good for seeing the moon, but if your interest is more than that, it may not work for you.
638342
It could be you need an extention for eyepiece or your eye isn't cloce enough to eyepiece,or you are useing an eyepiece that has too short of a focal length. Try a 32mm or 36mm. If that works, work down in focal length. I tried a 6mm and saw a blure. Every telescope has a max magnification. The 8" with a 1200mm focal length maxes out at 450/460 power. With 5x barlow max 15mm yields 400x and 13mm yields 461x.
866404
The magnification is fixed at 6x. The effective range is 550 yds. Not waterporoof, it has a case and I've got waterproof pockets. It has a target acquisition recticle, that looks like an X. It is very, very easy to use. And is a Nikon. I am completely satisfied.
1133161
It's difficult to answer this question but will do my best. The views can be very sharp...it simply depends on the distance of the object being viewed. There is a limit to this lens, obviously. I feel it is quite good, but I have also purchased the additional set of lenses for this telescope giving me even more range and depth to what can be seen clearly and sharply. I hope this helps.
2127726
For any telescope, magnification is focal length divided by eyepiece focal length. For this scope, that give 300/20 and 300/10, or 15 and 30X.
1159087
What are you trying to achieve in your star gazing? Although 12 x 36 IS are helpful, optics that let in more light i.e. bigger diameter front lenses, are necessaary for faint objects. However, if you are hoping to see nebulae, galactic clusters, Messier objects, or galaxies, no binocular is good enough. For that activity you need large and powerful telescopes. My Canon binocs are great for bird watching and boating, or for folks who have difficulty holding anything steady. Remember that if you fall into the trap of high magnification, as the primary concern, any slight movement on your part is magnified by the same amount. My telescopes are 60 x 70 and a large 18 inch dia. Even those, securely mounted, are barely able to capture some of the astronomical wonders I would like to see.
1625661
With a reversed 50 mm lensa you'll get a magnification factor of about 0.4X. In other words, the linear dimensions of the sensor image will be about 0.4 times the real dimensions. That's quite enough for coins and such; not so good for small insects.