Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_30_second_exp_2_winners.thumb.jpg.b5430b40547c40d344fd4493776ab99f.jpg

timwetherell

Members
  • Content Count

    496
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by timwetherell


  1. 16 hours ago, DavidR100 said:

    Over two years on ....  I was wondering if you had any success with M69 and M70?

    Actually yes. it all came down to local sky quality. Even the slightest hint of haze will totally obscure them and we often have a very slight haze here. But on a particularly clear and haze free moonless night, they were relatively easy! So a bit like sirius B really, all seems to depend on seeing and transparency :)

    331225399_astronomynotebookM69M70.thumb.jpg.01adf7b952b19851537b30663a7fde54.jpg

     

    • Like 2

  2. 20 hours ago, John said:

    I have one of those as well. Out of production now apparently but mine has proved much more use than I thought it would be when I bought it :smiley:

     

    yes they're quite good aren't they! I tried a lot of fixed focus super shorts none of which really was a good as the nagler zoom.It's also handy when you're up at the silly magnification end to be able to tweak it up or down just a smidge

    • Like 1

  3. On 08/01/2020 at 19:02, LukeSkywatcher said:

    One show I saw on TV said that when Betelguese does go SN, the resulting SN or Nebula will completely fill the sky. We wont be able to see anything else.

    I imagine if it does go supernova during the initial few weeks it will be like having a permanent full moon so no one will get much of a view of faint fuzzies in that area of the sky! But I think the resulting planetary nebula will be relatively small and fairly dim? There's a bit of discussion about it's size up further up this thread :)


  4. 11 hours ago, JamesF said:

    Or if you want it to be, say as big as Jupiter at opposition (about 50 arcseconds?), it would take around thirty years.

     

    Yes, good idea to compare with the crab! I'd be thinking crab nebula 1000 years ago now 300 arcseconds across 0.3" per year. Ten times further away but because all the angles are small one can probably just use small angle approximation and say 3" a year (never did have a very comfortable relationship with radians! :D ) so maybe jupiter size in decade/s? I imagine it would be very bright though?


  5. 2 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

    Once Betelgeuse does go, it will be that bright I don’t think we’ll be seeing Orion at  all for a while but to see the result will more than make up for it 

    It would certainly be the brightest planetary nebula in the sky. I'm not sure how long it would be before it's angular diameter was resolvable in amateur telescopes though?

     


  6. 13 hours ago, barkis said:

    It may still be a bit presumptuous to expect the big fellow to go bang in the near future.
    He could well hang about for a few hundred, if not thousands of years yet.
    I'm not sure I want to see  Orion's right shoulder turn into a moon like object shining in our night,
    or daylight sky. It would be a sight to behold for sure, but I'm not that eager for it happen :sad:.
    Ron.

     

    I know what you mean Ron, It would be interesting to see but orion is such an iconic constellation it would be sad to see it without Betelgeuse!

    • Like 1

  7. 52 minutes ago, markse68 said:

    The background of the current image is a bit lighter than the older image so it’s even dimmer?

    Yes, I think it's a difference in sky brightness between the two nights perhaps - I didn't want to "massage" the images too much though for fear of changing the intensity of betelgeuse artificially  :)

    • Like 2

  8. 9 hours ago, Richard136 said:

    The 66 was  / is on the list; however I couldn't find one anywhere. Think the 70 or 72 may be preferred over the ZS61 on balance

    Yes I'm probably a bit out of date, haven't bought a scope in some years :) Was it the 71 triplet you were thinking of? Looks quite expensive from my brief research! but yes, I think 70ish would be slightly better than 61 especially if you can source one second hand. I'm using a TMB 40mm widefield ortho as an eyepiece - again another piece of astro-kit from the long, long ago. It has the advantage of the field stop being outside the optics so it's easy to install a crosshair.

     


  9. I use a WO66 and it's great - enough aperture to see most brighter Messiers and small enough to be able to achieve low magnification with normal EPs. It also has the advantage of accepting 2" EP,s  so with a 40mm ortho if gives almost 7 degree field which makes it an ideal finder. It's also a nice spotting scope in it's own right and a very capable wide angle astrophotography scope using the main scope as a guide. I actually use this scope as a visual instrument too, very large objects like M31 and the North America nebula look great - the latter especially with an OIII filter 


  10. 44 minutes ago, Nigella Bryant said:

    Thanks Tim for the info, will take a look. Where do you meet?

    The sitdown sessions are in the early evening at the Kildare Lodge Hotel in Minehead but we do observing sessions out at various places on Exmoor, North Hill and Webbers post being two favourites :)

    • Thanks 1

  11. Welcome to the West Country!  Lovely dark skies, lovely fluffy clouds, lots and lots of em :) I think your nearest club will be the North Devon Astro. Soc, but if you're ever a few miles further east on Exmoor you'd be very welcome to drop in to one of our Exmoor StarGazers meetings too.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  12. 7 minutes ago, Skipper Billy said:

    It would work but would need painting as epoxy is not UV stable - it will break down is sunshine (and its expensive!) 

    With the kind of summers we get, UV isn't likely to be a problem! :D But, you could maybe mix it with a pigment such as childrens black powder paint or as you say, paint over it anywhere it's exposed to a lot of light. It's not really much more expensive that most sealants, it's about £20 for half a litre on ebay :)


  13. On 11/11/2019 at 14:54, MoonNut said:

    Well done, you got to see it, many people will not be so lucky today sadly.

    I watched the first 50 mins or so before the sun set, nice sunny day here though.

    Managed some images with my modest equipment.

     

    Nice pics! You've captured the exact same prominence I saw through my H-alpha scope :)


  14. Morning observing can be very rewarding - though it's not something i generally do. I was able to see some surface features on mercury once with an 8" scope at 5am (An exceptionally cold still day with the slightest haze) On that occasion the scope had been in the house overnight so dew wasn't a problem for me. As a rule, I don't like mornings because your observing session is limited by it getting light whereas at night the longer you mess about the darker it gets :)

    • Like 1

  15. Yeah, my experience is similar. A 4" will begin to resolve globulars and give some quite decent views of brighter DSOs - I'm not saying an 80mm couldn't do that, but I've always found it much more of a struggle with a 3" refractor than a 4".  Back in the day when many of us had the ubiquitous 60mm,  a 4" refractor was classed as a "big" telescope!  :)

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.