Bushnell 420X60mm Refracter Is it good enough to view Mars?

Been looking, but only see a round orange ball. I understand filters
help, kinda costly if the scope is not strong enough. What would be
the best power to use with this small apeture?
Thanks
Glenn

Glenn wrote:

Been looking, but only see a round orange ball. I understand filters
help, kinda costly if the scope is not strong enough. What would be
the best power to use with this small apeture?

The 'conventional wisdom' on this issue would be to say that the
maximum useful magnification through a given aperture, under ideal
conditions, is 2X per millimetre or 50X per inch, so for a 60-mm
telescope this comes to about 120X. Assuming the "420" in your
subject line is the focal length of your objective lens in
millimetres, you shouldn't use an eyepiece with a focal length of
less than about 3.5 or 4 mm.

--
Odysseus

Odysseus wrote:

Glenn wrote:

Been looking, but only see a round orange ball. I understand filters
help, kinda costly if the scope is not strong enough. What would be
the best power to use with this small apeture?

The 'conventional wisdom' on this issue would be to say that the
maximum useful magnification through a given aperture, under ideal
conditions, is 2X per millimetre or 50X per inch, so for a 60-mm
telescope this comes to about 120X. Assuming the "420" in your
subject line is the focal length of your objective lens in
millimetres, you shouldn't use an eyepiece with a focal length of
less than about 3.5 or 4 mm.

My experience of the cheap refractors is that the "420" is actually the
maximum power of the combined eyepiece and barlow supplied. The scope is
probably one of the mass produced 700mm focal length scopes sold under a
myriad of names (I think it is actually a 402X60 in this case).