I hope someone on the forum can assist me. I ordered several of the Galileoscopes for friends and family, and received them last week. We put them together using the easy and clear directions included, but we are stumped as to how to focus the telescope at 50X. We can get it focused just fine at 25X, but 50X is a blur, despite all of our manipulation of the eye piece! Help! Even at 25X the moon is pretty awesome, but I want to see the craters and look at Jupiter and Saturn too!

I can’t help with that, but if the company has a website, you may be able to ask them for additional instructions.

Occam

Occam - 09 August 2009 08:32 PM

I can’t help with that, but if the company has a website, you may be able to ask them for additional instructions.

Occam

I looked, it didn’t help…Well, there is an awesome Observatory 15 min from my home…time to give them another visit.

No idea; however if your Galieoscope is a semi-accurate reproduction of the actual telescope that Galileo used (and that is in the science museum in Florence, except while traveling on exhibitions), it is unlikely to resolve well at 50x. That’s pretty high powered, and Galileo’s telescope has a small objective lens and optics of pretty poor quality. It was amazing he could see the things he could with it. It’s certainly possible that you’re doing the best you can with what you were provided. Although I’d be interested to hear if you can get help from the manufacturer ...

I Agree with Doug. Getting a good image at 50X requires fairly good optics. Galileo’s homemade optics were pretty good for his day but crude by todays standards. It sounds like a good idea to check with the folks at the observatory though. It couldn’t hurt and you might learn a bit about optics while you’re at it.

You might find the review in this thread helpful

Asanta, I went to the website and looked over their stuff. I’m actually quite impressed with what they have accomplished for $20. And I’m VERY impressed with the unconventional split-tube design—that really shows people how a telescope works!

The problem you’re facing is that the Barlow lens that you use to get 50X extends the focal point of the objective further back. So the first question is, are you going in the right direction? Are you trying to get a focus by moving in or out? The focus should be further out than the normal focal point. How far back can you go?

The next question may sound silly, but it really does matter: are you sure that you got all the lenses facing in the correction directions? It really does matter if the lens is backwards. Also, make absolutely certain that you build the system properly. For example, the Barlow lens is a two-part lens; if you left out one of the two lenses, you can’t get a focus.

Next, I want to advise you that more magnification isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. With more magnification, the image shakes more violently from tiny movements. The image is dimmer and not as clear as at lower magnification. I have a big 8” Celestron, and I always use it at the lowest possible power—about 40X for this telescope, which is mounted on a very stable mount and has excellent optics. Only rarely do I take it up to higher magnification, and even then the highest magnification I use is about 120X.

Chris Crawford - 10 August 2009 08:31 AM

The next question may sound silly, but it really does matter: are you sure that you got all the lenses facing in the correction directions? It really does matter if the lens is backwards. Also, make absolutely certain that you build the system properly. For example, the Barlow lens is a two-part lens; if you left out one of the two lenses, you can’t get a focus.

Next, I want to advise you that more magnification isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. With more magnification, the image shakes more violently from tiny movements. The image is dimmer and not as clear as at lower magnification. I have a big 8” Celestron, and I always use it at the lowest possible power—about 40X for this telescope, which is mounted on a very stable mount and has excellent optics. Only rarely do I take it up to higher magnification, and even then the highest magnification I use is about 120X.

Good advice.

Agreed on the magnification. Without a really big objective lens, a very stable mount and good seeing, high magnification is pretty worthless. Some of my best amateur experiences were with an enormous dobsonian telescope (basically a big, cheap, can reflector without a drive) at low magnification.

Chris is right.  The forum link I gave you up above gives a link to instructions that the author claims, are much better than what came with the scope. Take a look here and see if it helps. Thre’s a very good photo/diagram of the barlow lens to show how its supposed to go together.

macgyver - 10 August 2009 08:24 AM

You might find the review in this thread helpful

Thanks!  That information is what I needed!
I figured that it was a great buy so I purchased 3 of them, one for each of my sons and myself. I bought early, so I got it at the $15 price. I can locate the planets, it takes more finesse to locate them through the telescope as opposed to the naked eye, even on a tripod! After I check out the planets (and get tired of looking at them) I’ll start on the constellations and galaxies!

asanta - 10 August 2009 08:18 PM

macgyver - 10 August 2009 08:24 AM

You might find the review in this thread helpful

Thanks!  That information is what I needed!

Right site, I think, but I just came up with a bunch of error messages.
At the second link I couldn’t find anything about a telescope.

Chris good info, interesting.

I know this is late Asanta, but you aren’t going to have much luck galaxy hunting with a small telescope. You’ll be able to see the core of the Andromeda Galaxy, but it will look like a fuzzy patch in the sky. That’s about it. Even a high quality four-inch refractor has a hard time with M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy. And no matter how large your telescope you’ll need to get far away from any city to see galaxies. My eight-inch Dobsonian reveals more galaxy structure in West Texas than our club’s 16-inch Cassegrain at Lake Buchanan 65 miles from downtown Austin. If you really want the “wow factor” on galaxies you’ll need at least a 12-inch telescope under pristine skies.

But do not despair. Aim your little telescope at the Orion Nebula and you may be surprised. When Sagittarius rises late this spring look that direction and pan around. You’ll be looking back toward the center of our galaxy through the local spiral arm, and may be able to detect some beautiful star clusters and nebulae.