Question on barlow

[galaxy_infinite]

<p>I have decided to get a barlow. I'am however at odds of which on I should get.&nbsp; I don't know which on to get</p><p>a 2x shorty</p><p>http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08711</p><p>&nbsp;Or a 3x trimag</p><p>http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08704</p><p>Can Someone tell me which on will be more effective? I wan the most useful magnification I can get but I'm afraid that if i get the 3x it won't work. its only $10 more. Is it worth getting the 3x for a Skyquest xt6 with 10mm and 25mm eypieces?&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Wolf873]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have decided to get a barlow. I'am however at odds of which on I should get.&nbsp; I don't know which on to geta 2x shortyhttp://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08711Or a 3x trimaghttp://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08704Can Someone tell me which on will be more effective? I wan the most useful magnification I can get but I'm afraid that if i get the 3x it won't work. its only $10 more. Is it worth getting the 3x for a Skyquest xt6 with 10mm and 25mm eypieces?&nbsp; <br /> Posted by galaxy_infinite</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I have the same question and would appreciate any suggestions. My telescope is Skyquest-XT6 and only accepts 1.25".</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>To add to that question, which one of these filters is better:</p><p>http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=filters/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=A5580</p><p>&nbsp;or</p><p>&nbsp;http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=filters/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=A0003</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Is the Color planetary Filter ok for its price? As that's the one Im leaning towards.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#3366ff"><em>The most merciful thing in this world is the human mind's inability to correlate all its contents.</em></font> </div>

 

[crazyeddie]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have decided to get a barlow. I'am however at odds of which on I should get.&nbsp; I don't know which on to geta 2x shortyhttp://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08711Or a 3x trimaghttp://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=barlows/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=08704Can Someone tell me which on will be more effective? I wan the most useful magnification I can get but I'm afraid that if i get the 3x it won't work. its only $10 more. Is it worth getting the 3x for a Skyquest xt6 with 10mm and 25mm eypieces?&nbsp; <br /> Posted by galaxy_infinite</DIV></p><p>I don't recommend the Shorty 2x. &nbsp;The Shorty-Plus 3-element, at $79, is much better, and worth the extra money.</p><p>I see no advantage to the 3x barlow. &nbsp;They are only useful if you have a short focal-length telescope. &nbsp;The Short-Plus is specifically designed to work with newtonian telescopes, but this 3x version probably wouldn't, it would require too much focuser travel.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[emperor_of_localgroup]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I don't recommend the Shorty 2x. &nbsp;The Shorty-Plus 3-element, at $79, is much better, and worth the extra money.I see no advantage to the 3x barlow. &nbsp;They are only useful if you have a short focal-length telescope. &nbsp;The Short-Plus is specifically designed to work with newtonian telescopes, but this 3x version probably wouldn't, it would require too much focuser travel. <br /> Posted by crazyeddie</DIV></p><p><font size="2">Eddie,</font></p><p><font size="2">I also have a question about Barlow. I have a 2x barlow but I haven't quite tried yet. I found online there are&nbsp; two ways to insert a barlow.</font></p><p><font size="2">1) Between the eye-piece and the star diagonal</font></p><p><font size="2">2) between star diagonal and telescope body.</font></p><p><font size="2">Is one&nbsp; better than the other all the time? Or one is better than the other in certain conditions? </font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[Wolf873]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I don't recommend the Shorty 2x. &nbsp;The Shorty-Plus 3-element, at $79, is much better, and worth the extra money.I see no advantage to the 3x barlow. &nbsp;They are only useful if you have a short focal-length telescope. &nbsp;The Short-Plus is specifically designed to work with newtonian telescopes, but this 3x version probably wouldn't, it would require too much focuser travel. <br /> Posted by crazyeddie</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Could you further explain what's wrong with Shorty 2x?&nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#3366ff"><em>The most merciful thing in this world is the human mind's inability to correlate all its contents.</em></font> </div>

 

[crazyeddie]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Eddie,I also have a question about Barlow. I have a 2x barlow but I haven't quite tried yet. I found online there are&nbsp; two ways to insert a barlow.1) Between the eye-piece and the star diagonal2) between star diagonal and telescope body.Is one&nbsp; better than the other all the time? Or one is better than the other in certain conditions? <br /> Posted by emperor_of_localgroup</DIV></p><p>Inserting it between the focuser tube and the star diagonal will result in a greater degree of tele-amplification at the eyepiece. &nbsp;It may actually give you 2.25x or 2.5x magnification. &nbsp;If this is desirable, you could certainly use the barlow this way. &nbsp;But depending on how the telescope and barlow are designed, you may actually be vignetting the light cone from the objective by doing this....in essence, reducing the amount of light reaching the eyepiece. &nbsp;It's hard to know without designing tests, so I'd say it's safer to use the barlow in the traditional fashion: between the diagonal and the eyepiece.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[crazyeddie]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;Could you further explain what's wrong with Shorty 2x?&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /> Posted by Wolf873</DIV></p><p>I recall reading reviews that the standard Shorty just doesn't have the degree of color correction that the Shorty-Plus has. &nbsp;Perhaps the false color it introduces to the final image won't be noticeable to the casual observer, but if you are trying to tease as much sharpness and contrast out of a planetary image as you can, why settle for less?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>