M1 and its comparison to M33

[ve1drg]

Wondering if M1 is as difficult to see as M33,  where averted vision is necessary and the sky has to be very dark?

I am talking about viewing these objects with just the naked eye and or a pair of binoculars.

[andyboy1970]

Both are tricky, M1 is tough to see unless you have good dark skies and I have only seen it in a scope (its small).

M33 I have seen in my 20x80 binos on a really good night, that night M31 was just visible with the naked eye.

[John]

I would say that M1 is a little easier than M33 in a telescope but M33 is a lot larger though which, for the binocular viewer, reverses things. I've seen M33 in binoculars as small as 8x30's but I've not seen M1, at least convincingly, in less than a 15x70.

Neither are easy targets though and any light pollution, whether man made or lunar, really kills their visibility. 

[Paul M]

I've found M1 to be easy from my back garden in my old 6" newt whereas I didn't eventually net M33 until trying with bins from my dark sky caravan site in Cumbria.

No way could I see it even with my 10" newt from my back yard at home. You need a dark sky for M33!

[Mr Q]

   I agree with John - M33 is a fairly easy object in binoculars as a faint, large area of diffused glow (its core region) with at least 50mm objective or larger binoculars in dark sky conditions.

  M1, on the other hand, is not a binocular object since its small size would only appear as a very small fuzzy faint star. But, in even a modest size scope (100 mm objective or larger), M1 can be seen as a small diffused glow with filament structure in larger scopes. Since M1 lies within one LP field of view from a close bright star, its easy in fairly dark skies in a scope.

   M33, on the other hand, is very faint and needs dark skies to detect better with binoculars than with a scope. Even in the best sky conditions with bins, its still faint arms are very hard to detect in even large bins (70 mm or larger objective sizes).

   Paul - you probably DID see it with the scope but being so faint (the core region) and large, it is always easy to miss in a large scope. I tried several times with very dark skies (VLM of 5.8 high in the sky) with my 10" newt and at best, just detected the core area with averted vision.

   ve1drg - The below link will let you print out (for free) monthly sky charts that include naked eye, binocular and telescopic objects that should give you several things to try for each month with bins.

http://www.skymaps.com/downloads.html

[AlexB67]

Best/optimal magnification is key for M33 for a given aperture. From a fairly light polluted sky where I live I can always pick up M1 in the 10 inch Dob, not tried with the moon, but normally anyway.  M33 is sort of on the limit of detectability. I often see it as a yard stick to know how good my sky is for deep sky, or at least I used to, it is now sinking away later in the  evening. In the 5 inch I can often pick it up hints of M33 also with the same low power 25mm eyepiece, that only gives me 26x versus 48x with the larger DOb, exit pupil and therefore the brightness factor is very similar in both these configurations, albeit one scope has only 5 inch aperture versus 10.

Generally I would say I find M1 somewhat easier, I can make out the shape properly, but M33 it is just a hint of brightning of the sky background due to its lack of a bright central core and rather even surface brightness across its area.

Under darker skies M33 is much more straight forward.

[dick_dangerous]

M33 is easy under dark skies but impossible with even a little bit of light pollution. M1 on the other hand can be glimpsed in moderate light pollution but is, of course, easier in dark skies. I've seen both in my ST80, so with 20x80 bins you should also be able to see both of them.

DD

[Paul73]

I've found M1 to be easy from my back garden in my old 6" newt whereas I didn't eventually net M33 until trying with bins from my dark sky caravan site in Cumbria.

No way could I see it even with my 10" newt from my back yard at home. You need a dark sky for M33!

I second that.

M1 - easy spot in the 10". Not spectacular. Never going to cast a shadow, I grant you. But definitely there. Probably a big ask for the binos given its size and relative lack of brightness.

M33 I look every time that I am out. Nothing. Not a wisp. Not even a "am I just kidding myself that I can glimpse it? Can I claim that?". I'm beginning to wonder if it is just a made up object used to poke fun at us inexperienced observers?

I thought that I had reasonably dark sky's. I can see Andromeda (M31) with the naked eye if the moon isn't out. Surely this should be dark enough? Any hints greatly appreciated.

As you can probably tell. I'm beginning to get a bit frustrated by this one.

So. In answer to the original question. M1 might be an easier spot. But it is a lot lot smaller.

Paul

[Stu]

I can't see either from where I live. I tried for literally years to see M1, then found it very easily in a 4" scope from a dark site, it is all about the skies. I've seen M1 in 15x50 stabilised binos too, but only under very dark skies - by that I mean Milky Way very bright, double cluster and M31 naked eye objects and M13 also visible with averted vision.

Stu

[Paul73]

Don't you just hate it when, in the time that it has taken for you to type a post. The question is comprehensively answered making it look like you are some idiot who can't be bothered to read threads before posting.

M33 = Binoculars. Too big for a scope. Simple. Will I ever learn.....

Thanks guys.

Good thread Ted.

Paul

[Paul M]

As you can probably tell. I'm beginning to get a bit frustrated by this one.

So. In answer to the original question. M1 might be an easier spot. But it is a lot lot smaller.

Paul

I've spent hours looking for M33 from home. No matter how good the sky looked but as you say, not even a hint.

When I looked last October from my dark Cumbrian site I nearly fell over it, it was so obvious! Why I'd never tried from there before then I'll never know.

Thinking it might have just been a case of not seeing for looking too hard, I've tried from home again since and not found a hint of it.

[rory]

No way would I compare the two in my experience the crab is far easier to find and view.

At least under light polluted sky.

I gather m33 is a lot easier away from l/ p.

From my polluted town location I could see m1 with my old. 90 mm , however m33 I've only seen a glimpse of the core with averted vision . It really needs darker skies .

[John]

M1 can be "pepped up" a bit with a UHC or O-III filter. Galaxies just need really dark skies. 

[rory]

No way would I compare the two in my experience the crab is far easier to find and view.

At least under light polluted sky.

I gather m33 is a lot easier away from l/ p.

From my polluted town location I could see m1 with my old. 90 mm , however m33 I've only seen a glimpse of the core with averted vision . It really needs darker skies .

I too should have read the opening credits ! Doh !

Sorry .

[Moonshane]

what John said basically. I can see M33 on good nights from home more easily in my 7x36 bins than my 16" dob. from a dark site it's bordering on naked eye. M1 is straight forward from home even in a 6" newt but from a dark site I have seen knotty structure within the central regions with a 16" dob and Oiii. I have seen M1 in 15x70s at home too with averted vision. maybe my skies at home are not so bad after all

[Stu]

what John said basically. I can see M33 on good nights from home more easily in my 7x36 bins than my 16" dob. from a dark site it's bordering on naked eye. M1 is straight forward from home even in a 6" newt but from a dark site I have seen knotty structure within the central regions with a 16" dob and Oiii. I have seen M1 in 15x70s at home too with averted vision. maybe my skies at home are not so bad after all

Your skies can't be too bad if you can get m33 in binos Shane. Not a hope of either from where I live, thanks to Heathrow mainly :-(

Stu

[acey]

It's apples and pears - M33 is large with low surface brightness, while M1 is small with higher surface brightness. If the sky is light polluted then this places a limit on what sort of surface brightness will be visible, and may put M33 beyond reach, while M1 remains possible. At a dark site M33 is easy with binoculars, and people with excellent vision (good enough to reach mag 7) may even be able to see it naked-eye. M1 can be seen in a telescope at a light polluted site, though it may be a challenge. At a dark site it is an easy object in a small telescope. M33 is also an excellent telescopic object, assuming the sky is dark enough. A number of star clusters and HII regions can be seen with an 8" or larger scope, as well as the S-shape of the spiral arms. M1 gets its nickname from a supposed resemblance to a spider crab in the engraving made for Lord Rosse's paper in the 19th century - but the illustration is very inaccurate, and it looks nothing like a crab. A nebula filter (OIII or UHC) will enhance the view at a light polluted site.

[ve1drg]

Thanks guys for your input on M1 and M33.   I agree with all your thoughts and need to find a darker spot than I currently have.  So far things are limited with what I see under a lamp post in my yard.  Oh well.  I could always shoot that out but that will never work.

I was out the other night,   away from most lights and I was greatly surprised on how the skies looked.  I could swear that I could see M1 with my naked eye and when I told my wife about this she asked me how much I had to drink.

So there you go.  A slap across your head and you can see all kinds of stars..