Esquimo Nebula ; NGC 2392

[cotterless45]

Yo, for all you planetary nebula seekers!

Quite tough to find, just a glow at x60. But at x200 a green/blue core. Couldn't see much more detail, but worth seeking out .

Had some really clear skies to make out most of the stars in Gemini, just swung down from Wasat ( red? double).

Anyone see any further detail ?

[Moonshane]

hi there

I observed this the other night with my larger scope. There was a bit more detail visible but with better seeing I'd expect more.

http://stargazerslounge.com/observing-reports/171285-observing-report-16-1-2012-planetaries-r-us.html

[bish]

I don't see much detail. A variation in brightness and some mottling. Still one of my favourites

[acey]

I can see the "hood" with my 12" and UHC, but no details on the "face".

Maybe nowadays we should call it the Inuit Nebula?

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I rather like the Eskimo Nebula. The first non-messier planetary I found, and one of the first objects I got on the Caldwell list (apart from those I had already picked up without knowing there was a Caldwell list, like the Hyades and Double Cluster). I should have another look. I got the Intergalactic Wanderer (NGC 2419) in the same session.

[RikM]

The Eskimo is a great planetary and one of my favourite objects. In my 10" I can se the central star, the brighter face and the fainter hood but no real detail beyond these three layers.

Haven't tried with with a UHC though. I am still waiting for one from 365astronomy

[DarkerSky]

I love the Eskimo. Seen a load of detail with my 12". The halo, a central brighter core and 3 brighter streaks that make the 'face'. I set about it with a 4mm eyepiece to yield x300 mag. It takes power well, and combined with good seeing, reveals its details.

[Moonshane]

I think that as with planetary observing, the seeing dictates what you see for sure as Seb says.

[John]

I tried an O-III filter on the Eskimo the other night with my 10" newtonian and I felt it rather spoiled things - the central star disappeared for a start and the disk seemed to loose it's graduated contrast and became rather "flat" looking. I definitely preferred the unfiltered view on that occasion. It will be interesting to see what a UHC would do on this object.

Normally the O-III has a positive effect on planetaries but not this time.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I found that the UHC help when I first got it. I could make out more detail, see:

http://stargazerslounge.com/observing-deep-sky/129462-4-messiers-3-caldwells-found.html

[rory]

okay, first off made a classic beginners mistake ( i think) i was star hopping and what i thought was pollux and castor,which in turn i could drop down to wassat. turned out to be capella and another star, so was in a different constellation !

but once id realised my mistake , i got back on track and found the eskimo, but no detail to be had in my 90mm with x62 . just a star really, no colour. shall revisit once ive a larger appeture:headbang:

[JonnyP]

but no detail to be had in my 90mm with x62 . just a star really, no colour. shall revisit once ive a larger appeture:headbang:

That's my experience. I found it but could see nothing more than a hint of nebulosity. Will revisit......

[MjrTom]

I was trying to find NGC2392 with my 102mm refractor last night under my light polluted and moon glow skies with no success.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I was trying to find NGC2392 with my 102mm refractor last night under my light polluted and moon glow skies with no success.

Using a UHC filter can help quite a bit on planetaries under those conditions.

[MjrTom]

Thanks Michael

Will give it another try on a more favourable night

[rory]

I was trying to find NGC2392 with my 102mm refractor last night under my light polluted and moon glow skies with no success.

i aso went back last night to test out an eyepiece, it was nothing but a faint star still at x83,under the moonlight.

but im getting to realise once youve found an object ,the starfield patterns around it stick in my mind ,and i find it easier to locate .

so for the eskimo i see a large group of stars to its north forming a letter"u" and just slightly south is a fainter group shaped like a letter "s" the eskimo is a little above that s shape, with a star right next to the nebula making it a marker.

so.... i can find it now, but need to pull out some detail.

[jasonbirder]

Its the only planetary i've seen so far!!!

Easy (ish) to find from Wasat to a little triplet of stars (brighter flanked by two fainter) then on again the same distance...

At 110x in my 200P it was a tiny little grey disk...obviously not stellar...longer viewing and averted vision gave the impression of a slightly brighter core with a slightly fainter "halo" surrounding it...

I'm waiting for this damn moon to go so i can try for some more planetaries...M76 in Perseus being first on my list!