What do planets look like through scopes?

[dirty_g]

I have only seen Jupiter and whilst its small through a scope you can definatly see its a globe with colours and a moons. How does Saturn compare?? Is it as big? Pretty much the same? It's smaller as obviously Jupiter is the largest planet. What do the other planets look like. Are they just star looking objects or very very small globes??

[Jason Thompson]

Mercury: A small globe that shows phases just like the Moon. Difficult to observe because of its proximity to the sun, but worth seeing. Just be very careful if you try looking for it when the sun is still above the horizon.

Venus: a featureless white globe that shows phases like the Moon. Easier to see than Mercury because it is the brightests object in the sky after the Sun and Moon. It ranges from a small, white, near-complete circle to a thin crescent almost as big as Jupiter in terms of diameter. It does look amazing in its thin crescent phase and is clearly visible in daylight, but again, care is required if searching for it when the sun is above the horizon.

Mars: Shows a great deal of variation in size because comparitively there is the greatest difference between its nearest and furthest points from Earth (The outer planets are obviously much greater distances, but the size of Earth's orbit in comparison with theirs is so small that relatively speaking there isn't that much difference between their nearest and closest approaches). It can be anything from a full bright disc about half the size of Jupiter to a tiny dot just barely resolvable as a disc. It can also appear like a gibbous Moon in phase. Even through a modest scope, at its closest you can make out some of the more prominent surface features such as Syrtis Major and the polar caps.

Jupiter: largest, and clearly resolved as a disc even in binoculars. Through a scope the bands are visible, along with the great red spot if it happens to be on the right side of the planet (I spent several months observing Jupiter and was frustrated to find that each time it was well placed for me to see it the red spot was round the back!). The four Galileian moons are clearly seen, along with their shadows when they are cast onto Jupiter itself.

Saturn: The disc is smaller than Jupiter's, of course, but with the rings it comes to nearly the same width. There are bands on Saturn that are visible but they are not so prominent as Jupiter's because there is less variation in colour. The rings look different year after year because the tilt of Saturn means that our angle of observation is changing. I think in 2009 we will see Saturn's rings 'edge on', so they will disappear entirely in all but the most powerful of scopes.

Uranus: Just visible as a very small bluish disc.

Neptune: Just visible as an even smaller bluish disc.

Pluto: Looks like a star. You need to observe over several nights and see if it moves to identify it.

Hope that was useful. :)

[Maksutov]

Pluto: Looks like a star. You need to observe over several nights and see if it moves to identify it....Remember, the question was about planets. http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

To dirty_g:

What detail you see on any given planet is a function of something called "seeing (http://schmidling.com/seeing.htm)". You might look and look and see blurs if the seeing is bad. But, if the seeing is good, you might for a second or fraction thereof see detail on Mars, Jupiter, or Saturn that is breathtaking.

[Kaptain K]

Remember, the question was about planets.
Pluto is a dwarf planet. Planet being the operative word.

[Dragon Star]

dirty_g:

If you go to Google-->Images, and type in the planet name you can see a picture of what it looks like.

[JAICOA]

This is a small example of what you can see thru a telescope, depending on equipment sizes difer, on the photos tells you about the equipment used. enjoy. Efrain

[dirty_g]

cool stuff. I like the fact that the 10 inch can produce the same size image as the Hubble. Obviously hubbles is better but the 10 inch did really well on that photo. Mind you it is an expensive meade isnt it!!

[Jason Thompson]

I like the fact that the 10 inch can produce the same size image as the Hubble.

Careful. There is no indication that the 10 inch could produce an image the same size, only that the images have been resized for comparison in the composite.

[aurora]

Also, images are more colorful than what you will see through a telescope.

[redshifter]

It looks as those are examples of pictures taken through a certain scope, not an example of what you can actually see through that scope.

[slotdrag]

Take a look at these they are through a 8 inch reflector.

[dirty_g]

Yeah thats cool stuff there. better than my 60mm. My 60mm is smaller in image size. And a fair bit less detail.