M33 - continues to be tricky

[kirkster501]

Even with a reasonable sky and a 12" Dob, unless I knew it was there I would not have seen it..    I really need to get the Dob out to darker skies.  I have seen M33 visually many times but its always a tricky one I think personally.  I love it though - such a beautiful object

[cotterless45]

Definately a dark sky target. My 10" Dob showed so much structural detail and a surface brightness half that of M31, it was almost a photographic viewing image. I try and get out to a really dark site a few times a year to make up for dismal edge of town viewing, Nick.

[Mr Flibble]

I had a look in my 12" dob a couple of weeks ago and just got the faintest hint of some spiral structure. There was lots of dew that night which just made it all the more tricky.

[Reeny]

It's been on my jobs-to-do list for about 2-years now.

"Tricky" might be an understatement

[dick_dangerous]

I was amazed by how easy it was to find under dark skies. I think that's the real key - any hint of light pollution and it won't show up against the background glow...

DD

[Mike73]

M33 is a good test to see how dark your skies are, I've seen 4 NGC's within its spiral arms with my old 12" but I'm looking forward to trying it again with my 16" under darker skies this winter.

http://www.astronomy-mall.com/Adventures.In.Deep.Space/M33.HII-Star.Clouds.html

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

It is one of those objects that once found, can be found quite readily again, but is very tricky the first time round. And yes, it does need dark skies, but at those locations I have caught it often in my binoculars, and in my wide-field 80mm scope. The 8" has a rather more narrow FOV, but from a dark site M33 looks great in it, showing clear spiral structure. The best view I ever had was using the 80mm with 22 Nagler from an inky black site in France, close to Olly's place. It really stood out from the black background, and the full extent of the spiral structure showed clearly.

[Double Kick Drum]

I find M33 an easier binocular object. Its size and diffuseness (is that a word?) are sometimes lost with any real magnification. It is a subtle fuzz of a galaxy.

My zenith magnitude limit is usually between 5 and 5.4 and I can see it in 15x70s on any reasonable night.

Good luck with it!

[WayBig]

I've only managed to see M33 once, after midnight when the streetlights went off, and it was SO obvious, easily visible in bins and in the 10inch dob.

When the street lights are on there's not a hint of it. Amazing the difference.

[chiltonstar]

On haze-free, clear nights, it's a nice sight from here (rural, darkish towards E, S, W) with my ED80 at x24, -  clear nucleus and slight structure. 

 

Chris

[foundaplanet]

An over turned fried egg is how I would describe it..

I had it in my 10x bins last night whilst doing a bit of sea fishing off the Yorks coast. Easy with dark skies yes, it is not so simple from my back yard in town but I can still see it with my bins.

It can be seen naked eye from a dark site.

[Wyvern]

All ways an object that is easier to find in binoculars than a telescope. Friend was visiting from the light polluted S coast a couple of weeks ago and we targeted this Messier on a clear night. He just couldn't see the Galaxy in the 10"Meade even with the lowest magnification possible (x40).

Given a pair of 10x50 bins and "walked" into the right area by me, gave an instant "got it" response. Back to the Meade again but he still couldn't see it, so I tried a little trick and turned off the motor drive. All of a sudden he said, "Ah, see it now." 

When in doubt, switch off the technology!!!!!

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I got it yesterday night with my 15x70 bins from my suburban back garden (not that bad regarding LP, but not brilliant). It stood out quite well. Low magnification and a wide field is the way to go, otherwise you look straight through it.

[Reeny]

It's been on my jobs-to-do list for about 2-years now.

"Tricky" might be an understatement

Finally cracked it in the back garden last night.

200p Dob / 24mm Maxvision 68 degree / directly overhead near the Zenith.

No structure to the Galaxy. And it appeared as a very faint blurry glow only, on a dark part of the sky.

So if I didn't know it was there - I would have missed it (as I have done before for 2-years).

The 200p and good eyepieces have helped massively.

But dark skies will be needed to see it properly.

[swamp thing]

I got it yesterday night with my 15x70 bins from my suburban back garden (not that bad regarding LP, but not brilliant). It stood out quite well. Low magnification and a wide field is the way to go, otherwise you look straight through it.

Reckon Michael has hit the nail on the head here. I don't even bother pointing my scope at it unless it's from a good dark sky. From LP locations bins rule on this.

Bins will provide a fantastic view from dark sky sites too

[Andy_E]

From my back garden M33 looks a bit like a smear of Vaseline on my EP . Agree with the above that it can be tricky to find at first, but once located re-finding it becomes much easier. Dark skies (as always, yawn) make a huge difference, very easy to find even in a pair of 8x42s.

[AlexB67]

From my backyard I have seen it in my 5 inch numerous times, but when I say see it I really mean detect it.  Dark skies are needed for a good view. M33 is a tricky because it is all about optimising that contrast ratio and this depends on exit pupil and therefore magnification against a competing background brightness, and this is critical under poorer skies,  therefore a big aperture scope is not the whole story. 

Without turning it into boring figures, but if you have a mag 4.5 sky you may find you have a better chance of making the object stand out against the background in a higher power eyepiece, but under  a mag 6 sky a lower power will be better.  M33 of all objects is really sensitive to this due to its size and surface brightness. I read a case study by Clark's observing the deep sky that I finally got my hands on ( a book I can highly recommend) , and having looked at M33 numerous times, and what he says , it all begins to tally, as well as other sources around the web. I found it out by accident before I learned about such things when observing M33, but the calculations only hammer home and reinforce why I see it.  It is always a great moment when a bit of theory and practice come together.

I think perhaps not a bad way to put it in in some ways, to detect M33 is not so much a question of grab the biggest scope when under poorer skies, but have  you got an eyepiece to  match the optimal magnification to detect it, this is half the battle.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

From my backyard I have seen it in my 5 inch numerous times, but when I say see it I really mean detect it.  Dark skies are needed for a good view. M33 is a tricky because it is all about optimising that contrast ratio and this depends on exit pupil and therefore magnification against a competing background brightness, and this is critical under poorer skies,  therefore a big aperture scope is not the whole story. 

Without turning it into boring figures, but if you have a mag 4.5 sky you may find you have a better chance of making the object stand out against the background in a higher power eyepiece, but under  a mag 6 sky a lower power will be better.  M33 of all objects is really sensitive to this due to its size and surface brightness. I read a case study by Clark's observing the deep sky that I finally got my hands on ( a book I can highly recommend) , and having looked at M33 numerous times, and what he says , it all begins to tally, as well as other sources around the web. I found it out by accident before I learned about such things when observing M33, but the calculations only hammer home and reinforce why I see it.  It is always a great moment when a bit of theory and practice come together.

I think perhaps not a bad way to put it in in some ways, to detect M33 is not so much a question of grab the biggest scope when under poorer skies, but have  you got an eyepiece to  match the optimal magnification to detect it, this is half the battle.

That, plus ensure you have enough field of view to have dark enough skies with which to contrast the galaxy. If the galaxy fils most of the FOV you will have some trouble, especially as the nucleus of M33 is not that pronounced.

[AlexB67]

Agreed, FOV is a factor and I should have said, if there is no background to frame it sufficiently then houston we have a problem.

[jetstream]

That, plus ensure you have enough field of view to have dark enough skies with which to contrast the galaxy. If the galaxy fils most of the FOV you will have some trouble, especially as the nucleus of M33 is not that pronounced.

This is what I realized last night,using my new eyepiece.Having enough fov really enhances the contrast of the object if the mag is high enough & works well in the scope.

[faulksy]

I viewed it tonight, as andy said bit like a smear of grease on your eye piece, but to be fair theres a lot of wispy cloud around so will try again later