Galaxys

[Yidoboy]

I have made a decision...it's time I looked at something other than the usual suspects - Jupiter, Mars...blah, blah, blah.

I feel like I'm wasting my 'scope and need to see exactly what it can do. I only have what's listed in my signature and would love to know what galaxys I should expect to be able to see, and what would be the best e/p to use? Should I use the barlow or does this just give too much mag'?

Just out of interest the picture below shows what I have to contend with in terms of factors out of my control......this is the panoramic view from my back garden!

[Mike Hackenbacker]

i know just how you feel,my viewing are is just as cluttered and streetlamps at the end of my garden

[cs1cjc]

M31 is far to the north at the moment so I would suggest M81 and M82 which are reasonably bright for galaxies and together should just about fit in your 25mm. I locate them with a red dot finder extending the line from Phecda to Dubhe by the same again and a little more and just a little to the left, but I am sure there are easier star hopping ways.

[Thirdway]

Chances of seeing a galaxy in medium light pollution and unguided are approaching zero IMO. You need as much contrast as you can get. I use a 32mm panaview and being realistic you need a dark site and a well set up scope. That should give you an idea that these things are actually fairly large, but incredibly diffuse. If you use a strong mag, even 25mm then you end up seeing straight through them. I'm afraid it's time to get the telescope in the car, make sure there is no moon and no clouds ( that's about 6 days a year by my calculations ).

[rory]

Don't use high mag , you want low to medium. Remember there are globular clusters and nebula too, all doable with your scope. Have you a copy of turn left at orion ? That would be a good companion for you .

[pajr777]

Chances of seeing a galaxy in medium light pollution and unguided are approaching zero IMO. You need as much contrast as you can get. I use a 32mm panaview and being realistic you need a dark site and a well set up scope. That should give you an idea that these things are actually fairly large, but incredibly diffuse. If you use a strong mag, even 25mm then you end up seeing straight through them. I'm afraid it's time to get the telescope in the car, make sure there is no moon and no clouds ( that's about 6 days a year by my calculations ).

Have to disagree with that. I've only owned a 'scope since last Monday and I've seen M81 & M82 from my suburban back garden, including last night with quite a lot of moonlight on top of the streetlights.

In my 25mm eyepiece M81 and M82 can be seen in the same field of view, and either can take quite a bit of magnification before they fade.

The best way is to print star maps using Stellarium.

Just like making a car journey to somewhere new in the days before GPS, use Stellarium to find your way before you attempt to drive the telescope! It really helps to set up oculars in Stellarium to match your kit, and actually do the star hop in occular view. Think of it as a telescope simulator

Identify the stars Dubhe and Merak in Ursa Major - hop to the almost parallel pair HIP 48319 and HIP 46733. Follow the line these two make Northwards by the same distance to reach the right angle triangle of HIP 44390, HIP 45038A and HIP 44857. Move on a line formed by the latter two in a NW direction until HIP 46977 is in the finderscope. Now, using just your naked eye look back where you started with Dubhe - put HIP 46977 at the edge of the finderscope view closest to Dubhe (I am assuming you have a simple finderscope that flips on both horizontal and vertical axis).

You should have M81 in the opposide side of the finderscope view, with M82 just below. Center on M81 and switch to a low magnification eye piece in the main scope.

[Thirdway]

That's of course supposing that everyone has a good view North ! That's rather the point, our house has really bad access to north and excellent access South. This means I can spend a lot of time with planets but not so great for DSO. Andromeda would be reasonably easy if there wasn't a dirty great sycamore tree and a well lit supermarket in the way.

It can be very frustrating for newbies when viewing isn't ideal. I'm not saying its impossible, just that for many, the ideal conditions don't exist. You also seem to be very proficient with Stellarium, directions and aiming the scope. My experience being that most of that doesn't come naturally and my wife just can't figure it out at all, she aims it at what she can see easily and has no clue to finding something like the Orion nebula.

It's just about getting people's expectations at the right level, otherwise you get lots of frustrated new telescope owners getting fed up because they can't see what everyone else says is very easy. This is exactly my experience, so, while I don't say it isn't possible, the reality is that its definitely not easy.

[stevetynant]

I think like most things it gets easier the more you try. M81 and M82 are pretty easy from my light polluted back garden but the scope is pointing nearly vertically so it takes a lot of the obstructions out of the equation.

I think the garden is where most of us do our viewing but unless your lucky and live in a fairly rural location- theres nothing like takig your scope to a dark sky area- you can become bewildered by the amounts of stars on show which converesly is the opposite problem of navigation from your garden.

Perservere and don't give up - its not like everythings going to disappear if you haven't got every Messier obect by May

[Astro Imp]

I know we all want to to see the faint fuzzies everybody goes on about but there are lots of other objects out there well worth seeing. With the moon getting quite bright double stars and the brighter open clusters should keep you busy for a few nights, well until the clouds roll in

Have fun and good luck.

[Scott]

I have made a decision...it's time I looked at something other than the usual suspects - Jupiter, Mars...blah, blah, blah.QUOTE]

Not sure if m42 is one of the blah, blahs but its quite easy to find and its in the south west. Also m45 is good although a wide angle e.p. is needed. i find it looks nice through the finderscope.i know they're not galaxies but nice none the less.hope this helps

Scott

[Scott]

Have to disagree with that. I've only owned a 'scope since last Monday and I've seen M81 & M82 from my suburban back garden, including last night with quite a lot of moonlight on top of the streetlights.

In my 25mm eyepiece M81 and M82 can be seen in the same field of view, and either can take quite a bit of magnification before they fade.

The best way is to print star maps using Stellarium.

Just like making a car journey to somewhere new in the days before GPS, use Stellarium to find your way before you attempt to drive the telescope! It really helps to set up oculars in Stellarium to match your kit, and actually do the star hop in occular view. Think of it as a telescope simulator

Identify the stars Dubhe and Merak in Ursa Major - hop to the almost parallel pair HIP 48319 and HIP 46733. Follow the line these two make Northwards by the same distance to reach the right angle triangle of HIP 44390, HIP 45038A and HIP 44857. Move on a line formed by the latter two in a NW direction until HIP 46977 is in the finderscope. Now, using just your naked eye look back where you started with Dubhe - put HIP 46977 at the edge of the finderscope view closest to Dubhe (I am assuming you have a simple finderscope that flips on both horizontal and vertical axis).

You should have M81 in the opposide side of the finderscope view, with M82 just below. Center on M81 and switch to a low magnification eye piece in the main scope.

c'mon now you're just bragging. joking. i think we found M81/M82 on the same night.

[pajr777]

c'mon now you're just bragging. joking. i think we found M81/M82 on the same night.

I tried using Turn Left At Orion instructions and failed - after two attempts on separate nights I asked for help on here and got loads of good tips plus the star hop route I posted above - it's much easier than the book and although it sounds complicated in writing, it really isn't hard to do in the field