109 down, 1 to go...

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Agreed. The limit at 25x (lowest power eyepiece) is 11 for my scope (in a very light polluted area!), and 13.8 at high power. Although, below Mag 10 will usually be easier to find, and makes the list much smaller!

Maybe, but I just like to see how far I can stretch the scope. Then when I buy a bigger one, my wife cannot say I haven't tried to get everything out of the existing equipment before succumbing to aperture fever.

[Naemeth]

Maybe, but I just like to see how far I can stretch the scope. Then when I buy a bigger one, my wife cannot say I haven't tried to get everything out of the existing equipment before succumbing to aperture fever.

You and JamesF could probably go down as far as magnitude 14 .

Hope that gives you an idea of some lists you could do , you could even make some up James, based on the faintest objects that are visible from the UK.

I hope I haven't steered off the topic too much .

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

You and JamesF could probably go down as far as magnitude 14 .

Hope that gives you an idea of some lists you could do , you could even make some up James, based on the faintest objects that are visible from the UK.

I hope I haven't steered off the topic too much .

Mag 14 stellar, perhaps. Faintest DSO so far: Quasar OJ287 at mag 13.9. Very hard indeed. Faintest galaxy: NGC 3605 at 13.2 (some sources list it as 12, but it is definitely fainter than nearby NGC 3599 at 12.8).

[Naemeth]

That's interesting. But I suppose it makes perfect sense: Light from a star is concentrated into a single point source, this is spread out for galaxies, so if the entire galaxy were the size of that point of star, the magnitude would be 14.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

That's interesting. But I suppose it makes perfect sense: Light from a star is concentrated into a single point source, this is spread out for galaxies, so if the entire galaxy were the size of that point of star, the magnitude would be 14.

Precisely. This is why finding near stellar planetaries at mag 13 is a doddle compared to finding galaxies at the same integrated magnitude (and you can do it in moonlight using a UHC filter). I think my faintest PN is mag 13.5.

[KevUU]

Looks like an interesting book. It might have to go on my list of birthday present ideas.

Just a quick follow up on the book.

Mine arrived from Amazon this week, but it's the 4th edition not the latest 5th. Basically has a few less objects and no lunar section. I was going to return it and find a 5th edition but that seems to be harder than I expected unless I pay $40. So I may just keep the one I have. Just thought this may be useful to those who were interested.

[JamesF]

Just a quick follow up on the book.

Mine arrived from Amazon this week, but it's the 4th edition not the latest 5th. Basically has a few less objects and no lunar section. I was going to return it and find a 5th edition but that seems to be harder than I expected unless I pay $40. So I may just keep the one I have. Just thought this may be useful to those who were interested.

That's useful to know. I might hold off ordering for a while then.

James