First published in the Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of South Australia,
August 2014. Expanded version
(www.assa.org.au)
by Martin Lewicki
August 2014. Expanded version
(www.assa.org.au)
by Martin Lewicki
Telescope users are usually well aware of the benefits of advanced optics available in their instruments today. Compared to the primitive optics that astronomers contended with in the early days of telescopic astronomy, today's high precision optics yield sharp, high contrast views that we now take for granted.
Prior to the invention of achromatic lens in 1733 early astronomers had to contend with views plagued by chromatic aberration, often referred to as “false colour”. Chromatic aberration and to a lesser extent spherical aberration are natural image defects of simple lenses. They produce views of celestial objects surrounded with unwanted colour fringing due to the inability of a simple lens to bring all colours of an image to the same focus. This results in lower image contrast and washed out colours. Yet these telescopes opened up a new universe that included the revolutionary discoveries of Galileo with his small 15mm (1/2-inch) aperture lens. Later larger versions up to 200mm (8-inch) objective lenses were built by Huygens, Cassini and Hevelius. These telescope makers realised that extremely long focal ratios were required to diminish the chromatic aberration suffered by these simple objective lenses. They discovered that if aperture was doubled then focal length had to be squared, (or four times longer) to keep the chromatic aberration in check! As a consequence of desiring larger apertures their telescopes correspondingly grew to unwieldy lengths, up to 46 meters such as Hevelius' “150-foot telescope”!
Hevelius' 150-foot (46m) 8-inch (200mm) Telescope 1673 |
I purchased a surplus 30mm plano-convex
lens over the internet for a few dollars. After a trip to Spotlight
for some spent cardboard material tubes of the right diameter I made
a cardboard cell for the objective lens, fitted it to one end of a
cut-to-length “three-foot” tube and inserted a smaller diameter
draw tube for the eyepieces in the other end. The flat side of the
plano-convex objective faces inward. The plano-convex lens is preferred
as it has less spherical aberration than the more common double
convex lenses. Indeed, two of Galileo's surviving telescopes have
plano-convex and plano-concave for the objective and eyepiece
respectively, though this may have been to simplify
fabrication by fashioning one instead of two curves on each glass.
The eyepieces I use are old Tasco of
the Huygens design in keeping with the type used in the 17th
century invented by Christiaan Huygens himself. The Huygens eyepiece
comprises of two short focus plano-convex lenses appropriately spaced
with flat sides facing the eye to give a wider field of view than a
single lens. My eyepieces are focal lengths of 38mm, 23mm and 12.5mm
giving 26x, 43x and 80x. Finally a light baffle was placed in the
tube to reduce internal light scatter. In all, the optics of my three-foot
telescope use simple lenses; no achromatics, no coated lenses, in
keeping with the 17th century theme.
It was time to try my scope out on
objects in the celestial firmament. First targets were stars. I was
surprised to find they could be focused sharply enough so that the
airy disk (sometimes known as the diffraction disk) was apparent.
Savvy telescope users know this is a sign of good optical
performance. Point sources like stars will focus at best to a small
disk thanks to the wave-like properties of light. Only a slight amount of false colour was
evident surrounding the stars. Brighter stars and higher
magnifications show more false colour but the airy disk was still
clearly evident.
Next was the Moon. Again, surprisingly
good with only slight false colour fringing around the lunar limb and
shadowed craters. I felt the view at 26x was quite acceptable with
sufficient contrast revealing a wealth of detail in craters and
mountains. Saturn was next. At 26x its ball and ring were easily
evident and at 43x the ring was distinctly separated from the ball.
But one could understand how Galileo was perplexed by the
'handles' of Saturn. If I had not known that they were rings my
first impression would have been rather like that of Galileo. Some
false colour fringing was seen as a blue and red halo around the edges of
the planet and its ring which increased at higher magnifications. Later in the year Jupiter was visible.
The four Galilean moons at 26x were crisp points and the disk of
Jupiter itself just barely hinted at the equatorial belts. Like
Saturn, Jupiter showed a certain amount of false colour around its bright
disk.
Snapshot of moon at 26x with camera at eyepiece. Some colour fringing is evident around the lunar limb and craters. |
Snapshot of Venus 26x |
Sketch Alpha Centauri and Crucis at 80x |
Next were deep sky objects. Under light
polluted urban skies they were pale versions of themselves due to the
small aperture. But away from light polluted skies at 26x the Orion
Nebula showed a diffuse mist with its characteristic structure but
with only three of the four trapezium stars apparent. Clusters such as
such as M7 and M41 look like a fine sprinkling of stars with no hint
of false colour. Eta Carina nebula clearly revealed its “L-shaped” misty form
and the Jewelbox its “A” shaped asterism. In December 2014 Comet Lovejoy (C/2014 Q2) graced the evening sky. From my light polluted suburban location I was pleased to pick the comet at 26x shining at magnitude 7.5 drifting through the constellation Puppis. The sketch reveals stars down to magnitude 8 (labelled without the decimal point). An advantage of long focal ratio telescopes is that the background sky darkens more than a star making fainter stars more visible than otherwise.
Finally,
in order to get the best sharpness out of my 17th
century telescope I attached a modern photography-grade deep orange
filter to the eyepiece. These filters were not available to 17th century
observers. But the filter made an immediate difference. The light through the filter is now nearly monochromatic and
can be sharply focused. The Moon looks perfectly sharp with virtually
no trace of false colour! The outlines of Jupiter and Saturn snapped
into sharpness along with brilliant Venus showing clean views of its
phases with little false colour. However for such a small aperture
the orange filter blocks more than half of the light so it is next to
useless for faint stars and deep sky objects. Had 17th
century astronomers been able to make precision optical glass flats I
imagine they would have benefited with “stained glass” versions as
filters to sharpen the views through their much larger light-capturing apertures.
Comet C/2014 Q2 Lovejoy with field stars to magnitude 8 |
An orange filter dramatically improves sharpness. |
Clearly
these 17th century telescopes were capable of revealing
detail in planets and stars that paved the way for new discoveries.
Essentially, a simple lens telescope will perform to the same
resolution and almost same contrast as an achromatic lens of the same
aperture - if the focal ratio is long enough. This enabled
17th century astronomers to make significant discoveries
with their simple glasses at the end of their long tubes. Discoveries of Saturn's moons Titan, Tethys, Dione and Rhea, the ice caps of
Mars and Cassini's division in Saturn's rings were made with these
pre achromatic telescopes. These telescopes were used by the likes of
Edmund Halley, and Robert Hooke who discovered Jupiter's Great Red
Spot and William Gascoigne who invented the
filar micrometer in 1633 and used it to prove the Moon's orbit is
elliptical. Even when the colour-corrected achromatic lens finally became widely available in the 1750's the long telescope persisted for some years because
flint glass, one of the components of the achromatic lens, was
difficult to manufacture with consistent quality to make large
aperture objectives.
Snapshot of Sun through eyepiece. |
Notes:
- Objective lens obtained from Surplusshed http://www.surplusshed.com/
To see this simple lens act as a 1000mm telephoto lens see:
https://sites.google.com/site/simplelenstelephoto/
What's Next?A test rig with 2-inch (50mm) planoconvex lens objective x focal length 2500mm
working at f50
(update 9 February 2016)
Materials from hardware shop and piece of timber from garage. Total cost is about AU$20 for tube assembly. The 50x2500mm planoconvex objective from OptoSigma US$49.50. They have 50mm up to 5m focal length!
_________________________________________________________________________
References
Sky and Telescope
Astronomy’s Neglected Child- The Long refractor – R. Berry, Feb 1976
A Telescope of the 17th Century - A Binder, Apr 1992
Books
Stargazer - Fred Watson
Seeing and Believing – Richard Panek
All About telescopes – Sam Brown 1975 (Edmund)
Telescope/Optics linkshttp://www.telescope-optics.net
Wikipedia sources
Articles
Could Jean-Dominique Cassini see the famousdivision in Saturn’s rings? arXiv:1309.1711v1
Software
http://www.atmos-software.it/Atmos.html
http://www.lambdares.com/oslo
Optical Suppliers
http://www.surplusshed.com/
including various sources of miscellaneous lens
Hello Martin
ReplyDeleteCongratulations ,very good ,very interesting article.
Looking forward to read about the bigger 2 inch singlet refractor project.
Regards, Mircea
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAmazing work !
ReplyDeleteI have made a 28/1250 mm refractor the lens was made by a optician and its a biconvex lens with a very high quality.
I was eable to split the double stars: Castor, Algieba, Almach, Mizar, Albiero and many more.
The highest magnification used is 125x with a 10mm plossl.
Excellent! You like myself were surprised what such simple optics can show. So far my observations with my new 50x2500mm are "hand-held" with one end braced on the eave of the house. Views of the moon at 50x are much brighter with higher resolution which indicates the lens is good quality. For double star and planetary work however will require making a mount. Looks like some version of the 17th century mast design will be in order.
ReplyDeleteexcellent, can i use with this singlent lens 30mm/1000mm FL any eyepieces (plossl 4 elements) or is work just with huygens eyepieces that are not availables today.
ReplyDeleteYou can get inexpensive Huygens eyepieces on eBay. Eg
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ebay.com.au/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xhuygens+eyepiece.TRS0&_nkw=huygens+eyepiece&_sacat=0
Since your telescope operates at very long focal ratio (~f33) these eyepieces will perform very well. I find the Huygens give sharp stars right to the edge of their 30-degree apparent field in my telescope.
You can of course use modern eyepieces like Plossl that will give a wider field of view, better contrast and colour due to their modern glasses and anti-reflection coatings. But I find part of the instructive fun of it all to use the simpler classical Huygens to replicate the viewing experience of the 17th C.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMartin try to diaphragm the 30/1000mm objective at 25mm and see how the image looks.
ReplyDeleteAnd the 50mm objective at 40mm diameter.
Make some diaphragms with different diameters.
The Moon at 26x has to mutch CO at that power so if you reduced the objective size the image will be mutch cler, the same with de 50mm objective.
Ovidiu, yes I have tried a range of diaphragms on the 30mm and found the best overall performance was still at the full 30mm. While a smaller aperture stop reduces chromatic aberration it increases the size of the airy disk thereby reducing resolution and dimming the image too.
ReplyDeleteI have run the my lens specs through the optical analysis software OSLO for my scope as well as the lens of Galileo, Huygens and Cassini telescopes. I found as they did, the best compromise was a circle of confusion about three times the size of the airy disk (3:1) that gives gives optimal performance. This is the ratio found in my 30x1000mm lens. By this criterion my 50mm lens should really be 2700mm fl rather than 2500mm to achieve this performance. So you are correct that a slightly a smaller, in this case 47mm stop should match this ratio for my 2500mm FL scope. I will have to wait until I have the mount built put this to the test.
I am going to build a new refractor with a diameter of 40mm and 2400 focal length this one will be a aerial telescope like used by Huygens.
ReplyDeleteI put your lens specs in OSLO and it reports a spot ratio (circle of confusion to airy disk) of 2:1 which should give better relative chromatic suppression than my 30mm scope (3:1).
ReplyDeleteI ordered a biconvex simplet objective witha very high quality made by Tavi F. the Romanian optican
ReplyDeleteLens specifiications here:
A. Optical glass BK7 lenses
Type 1. Specifications:
- focal length (nominal) in G-channel: F = 2400mm (+10/-5mm);
- total diameter: Dt = ~49.5mm;
- center thickness: tc = ~8mm;
- high precision optical diameter: Duseful = 40mm;
- relative opening ("focal ratio"): N = F/Du = 60;
- the chromatic aberration coefficient: x = N/Du = 1.5
I will make an aerial telescope unsing this objective, making a tube and a mount for it is to hard for my resources.
Do you have a email adress or gmail ?
How is your 50/2500mm project ? That board which you mounted the lenes in time will bend, its very difficult with long boards becaue you need 2 mounting points one close to the objective and the last close to the eyepiece, you can try a Aerial telescope design at this length.
ReplyDeleteFor the 50mm you will need a solid cardboard tube mounted on a board and supported by two frames,the firt one close to the objective will be a high ladder with 7 steps and the last mount a tripod adjustable height and with left and right adjustments.
Very challenging it will be, i prefer the Aerial telescope method for my objective at 2.4m length.
Amazing work with de 50mm, greate idea
ReplyDeletein this lens 30/1000 is difficult to distinguish witch face of lens is plano and witch face is convex : with naked eye faces of lens are similar. there is any method to do that ??
ReplyDeleteAmazing work. I've been experimenting with these simple telescopes for some time. My current project telescope, a 50mm f/20, is based on the Telescope 1609 Galilean, though I've modified it to take 1.25" eyepieces. Back in 2008, I did make something of a Galilean facsimile using a 30mm f/35, but it rarely gets used. Tonight, I have stopped the 50mm down to 30mm for some additional experimentation.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing!
Satish Patil Jalgaon India.
ReplyDeleteThanks for reminding me the struggle of Galilio
Hello, Martin.
ReplyDeleteEnjoyed your link immensely! Can you post the Cloudy Nights thread?
I can't find it again.
Was thinking of purchasing a 50mm dia x 1500mm objective lens, and a 20mm dia x 60mm eyepiece lens, both PCX; to make a hybrid of sorts. (magnification to be 25x)
Many thanks! I find these simple scopes fascinating.
It's in this thread.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cloudynights.com/topic/404751-post-your-home-made-scope/page-35?hl=%2B17th#entry7193781
I have yet to return to my 50mmm x 2500 scope project. Biggest problem is making the mount. so far I just lean it on the roof eave and wander around to suitable targets hand held. A ground frame to hold and steady the eyepiece end woulds be the first task I think.
Mano esse telescópio de 1000mm de distância focal deveria ter uma abertura de 15mm para a imagem ser nítida e esse de 2500mm é melhor uma abertura de 38mm isso é a formula que Galileu usou nos telescópios dele a abertura tem que ser 65 ou 66 vezes menor que a distância focal da objetiva se for menor que isso vai dar aberração cromática e não precisa quadruplicar a distância focal se dudlicar a abertura isso eu já esperimentei é um mito detonado abraços!
ReplyDeleteHi Robercetis
DeleteYes the longer focal ratio of course puts more of the light into the airy disk thereby theoretically improving resolution. I have experimented with aperture masks of 10mm, 15mm to 25mm on the 1000mmx30mmm. However they enlarge the airy disc and reduce resolution and dim the image. Close binary stars were no longer split and planetary detail lost. So I find the viewing result is better without the aperture masks even if there is some excess chromatic aberration. Grant it, if it were 2000x30 the rule would work well and for larger aperture telescopes.
A Huygens usava abertura de 59 vezes menor que a distância focal da lente objetiva, mas nunca experimentei com 59 só experimentei com 65 e 66.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete