What's the overall magnification of this telescope?
830197
You multiply the two numbers, so 58 x 10 = 580 total magnification.\n\nGood luck!!
861642
That's the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico.  It isn't aimed - it can only observe objects that pass overhead.  It has a small area overhead it can see, and as the Earth turns, we see different things with it.
784963
Lots of options and opportunities to specialize in that price range.\n\nA few possibilities: \nCatadioptric: 12" Meade LX200R http://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp/catalog_name/Astronomics/category_name/SH2RX8FAHP0M9KU9QPNE5T8P61/product_id/12210RU\nDob-Newt: 14.5" Starmaster\nhttp://www.starmastertelescopes.com/new14.htm\nor 15" Obsession\nhttp://obsessiontelescopes.com/telescopes/index.html\nRefractor: 130mm TMB Signature (you'll have to skimp on the mount to stay under $5k; maybe a used GM-8)\nhttp://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp/catalog_name/Astronomics/category_name/X9S97ENNVDED9JVW6C3HAN0S10/product_id/TMB130\nor a 102mm Stellarvue and plenty left for a good mount\nhttp://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=11163&m=93
761501
If nothing else,you can use this but I am not positive.  "A telescope can refract images."
937717
A lot.  Only 1% or less of the light actually makes the image.  This is why digital photography is so much better when it comes to astronomy.
49711
this is subjective - but - Celestron has been having financial troubles, and was bought by another Far east company, whereas Meade seems to be doing pretty well, and has invested quite a bit in new automated manufactuting in Calif. So if you are talking about their SCT scopes, I think current Meades are likely better than current Celestrons, but the scopes are not all "exactly" the same, and you might find an example of a new celestron that does have better optics. There smaller non-sct scopes are in general, made in the far east and are likely pretty much the same quality.  Again, this is highly subjective, and 10 people will give you 11 opinons.  Meade has just introduced there new RC line, which the current issue of Sky and Telescope raves about as really superior to the SCTs.
583537
Adding to the above... If you can afford it and you want more than about 7x magnification, you should consider buying IS (image stabilizing) binoculars.   These need batteries, but dynamically correct for the shaking of your hands.  You can get them up to 15x magnification.\n\nAlso, it's important to consider what you want to use the binoculars for.  If you're going to use them at comparatively short distances, you don't want a pair that magnify too much because you'll have to keep moving the glasses around to see entire objects.  (That's why opera glasses, which are a form of binocular, are such low magnification - typically 2-4x).   Also, if you plan to use them at night or in low light, you want a large objective lens size (50mm or larger) because that allows the glasses to gather more light.\n\nLastly, if you'll use them in unstable situations (like a moving boat), consider the size of the exit pupil.  This is the objective diameter divided by the magnification, and measures the diameter of the image which your eye looks at.   This is important because it affects how precisely your eye has to be lined up with the eyepiece for you to see the image.
1170213
It depends on what you need telescope for.  Things like Jupiter, Saturn, the Moon, the Orion Nebula will look great.  This is a great out of the box scope but it isn't a large one.  If you want to do a lot of deep space exploration you need a bigger/different scope.  There is an article at Sky & Telescope about chosing the right scope.\n\nhttp://skyandtelescope.com/howto/scopes/article_241_1.asp
941839
Make sure you don't have a lens cap blocking the other end.  Try aiming at distant objects, not close ones.  It may be that it is focussed for eyes that have a different tolerance than yours, so trying working the focus knob.  Failing to accomplish anything, I suggest you contact the nearest planetarium or science center and ask for help.  If they can't help, they should know members of a local astronomy club who can.
976467
http://www.c2gr4s1r.com/results.php?keyword=Setup+For+A+Bushnell+Telescope+78+3650
740323
Assume a flag is 1 meter across, and the moon is 3.6x10^8 m distance at perigee.  Your telescope needs a resolving power of 1/3.6x10^8 radians.  \n\nThe resolving power of a typical telescope is ~1.22lambda/D radians where lambda is the wavelength of light being observed and D is the diameter of the telescope.  \n\nSolve for D;  D= 3.6x10^8*1.22*lambda  \n\nAssume a visible light telescope sensitive at 600nm = 6x10^-7 m\nand your telescope must be 263m in diameter.  You will want to orbit that puppy or phase errors from turbulence will kill you, with current adaptive optics technology.
878102
Do you know the aperture and what kind of a telescope it is, or where it is made?\n\nI've attempted several web searches and cannot find any "Novus" brand telescope. Is this something you got off of eBay? Because I hope you didn't pay very much for it. It is more than likely that it is toy junk.\n\nGood luck. Add more details to your question and you might get more info.
111046
The Bradford telescope at the website below is the best:\n\nhttp://www.telescope.org/
752656
The size of an object you can resolve with an optical system has a theoretical limit given by the wavelenght of the light you're using divided by the diameter of the optics multiplied by 1.22. If you plug the numbers in you find for a 1 foot diameter optical system at visible light (~400 nm) at an altitude of 100km, the smallest thing you could see is on the order of a foot, give or take (rough calculation). You could definitely not read a postage stamp or a wrist watch. Maybe a license plate with some bigger optics, but this is ignoring all sorts of atmospheric scintillation which screws things up.
874137
pi*r^2 is the area of the mirror\n\nActual light gathering power depends on the size of the CCD, but if we assume the two scopes are the same in that respect, \n\n3.14*(8.3)^2/3.14*(2.4)^2 is the ratio, about 12 times for the Subaru.\n\nSo Hubble's a wimp!\n\nBut the distortion from the ATM makes Subaru have blurry vision.
1089369
I think an 8" dob is an excellent choice. I haven't seen this particular model, but from what I've heard I think it's a good one. Orion Telescope and Binoculars (www.telescope.com) is another good source for this type of scope. The Yahoo telescopes group, and the Cloudy Nights forums are a couple of good places to go for more information and opinions.\n\nI think these scopes usually come with a 25mm eyepiece. A 10 or 12mm eyepiece would be a good next eyepiece. Or buy a 2x Barlow lens; that will double the power of any eyepiece. Eventually, you might also want to get a wide-angle eyepiece around 30mm in 2" size. These are great for panoramic views of the Milky way, and also handy for finding things.\n\nHere's wishing you clear skies!
890617
Small observatory class telescopes can be as cheap as tens of thousands of dollars. The Keck telescopes, which are among the largest in the world, cost $94 million and the Hubble Space telescope, which is actually smaller, cost $1.5 billion.