messier 111

2 minutes ago, Jamgood said:

Pleiades for me. When I saw Halley's Comet as an 8yr old I was completely blown away and addicted to looking up at the stars. That little group together always fascinated me. It took a long time but now, finally, as a 42yr old, I can look at all these wonderful sights in the sky and photograph them. The fact that I can see anything from my Bortle 8 garden blows me away.

 

beautiful, wow.

incredibly beautiful, I prefer the second.

superb capture .

incredibly beautiful, details in very high resolution.

incredibly beautiful, very high resolution details, such as colors.

wow , really amazing, I love the details and the colors.

I love to use the contrast booster on mars, it is also good on other planets, a little less on saturn, my opinion.

I will add, the Pleiades and the Hyades, diamonds of a black sky.
of all beauty.

I wish you a pleasant sky every evening.

I hope it explodes in my life time .
and for those who say Orion will never be the same again, well, orion will be different that's all.
one star less, but a remnant of star gas like m1 maybe.
so something new to contemplate.

On 28/07/2020 at 18:21, John said:

Back in the 1980's forums did not exist so rumours of a drop in quality took a long time to percolate though the astro community. Also many who bought scopes had little or no experience of them so simply did not realise that their optics were not as good as they might be.

With forums such as SGL and Cloudynights I think the astro consumer is much better informed and information circulates really fast. I don't think a manufacturer would risk dropping their standards today. They would never recover their reputation.

 

I totally agree with your comment, we can add all forms of scocial media, fb, redit, etc ...

What I find fascinating while reading this article, which by the way is of professional quality, is your dedication to making us understand such a fascinating subject.

very pleasant to read, easy to understand.
I only have congratulations to give you.
it is members like you who make you want to come back to this site.
well done and thank you very much.

as I said rather,

the only problem with uhc, there are so many kinds,
uhc
uhc-s
uhc third generation.
let the red pass, don't let the red pass ouffff

sublim .

fascinating take .

the heart is splendid.

very nice result for 3 hours.

very nice animation .

here is my modest setup.

9 minutes ago, John said:

Having owned quite a few UHC's of varying quality I'm quite impressed with the Astronomik. I also have their O-III (in 1.25 inch) which is excellent, a Lumicon O-III (2 inch) also excellent, the Astronomik H-Beta (rarely used but it's shown me the Horsehead Neb) and an older Meade 4000 Nebular Filter (UHC equiv) which is surprisingly good. I'm covered for 2 inch and 1.25 inch deep sky filters now I think 

 

with which instrument did you see the horse's head and which eyepiece?

14 minutes ago, John said:

I've just been using an Astronomik UHC filter to observe M42 with a 130mm refractor. The moon was not far away so the nebula looked rather washed out without the filter but the UHC made a noticeable difference. Under dark skies with no moonlight about, I would expect even more contrast enhancement.

In an ED120 M42 looks pretty nice without a filter as well of course, as long as the moon is out of the way

the only problem with uhc, there are so many kinds,
uhc
uhc-s
uhc third generation.
let the red pass, don't let the red pass ouffff

I asked myself the same question ,
and my verdict was around 22 t4.
it is always available.

On 02/11/2020 at 16:34, bomberbaz said:

What he said basically. 

On the same note I would challenge anyone to notice any difference that would make a real difference to your viewing pleasure.

so it should be very difficult to see a change. That's what I think too .

thank you for your answer, it is very appreciated.

besides orion, there seems to be a difference between favorites.
I think the difference comes from those who do photography.