Hard to find DSO's

[Unicronicus]

Hi all,

We went out stargazing last night, since it was relatively nice and clear, and our goal was to look at nebulae with our UHC filter and galaxies with our 6mm wide fov eyepiece using our Skywatcher 130p telescope.

The problem we had was finding targets in the first place and figuring out that what were looking at was not just a faint star. We don't know what a nebula, like the heart and soul, rosette, dumbbell etc... are meant to look like with a scope like ours so therefore we don't know what to look for. On the same note though, we did have success with the cigar galaxy and bodes but that took some finding and scouring of the sky. Bodes also did not fair well with our UHC filter, it actually made it too dark and was better with it removed.

So has anyone got any tips on finding galaxies and nebulae? Are there better EP's for our scope that will work better with them? We don't mind spending the money on something decent to do the job. It's just that we always end up looking at the planets whereas I like the appeal of DSO's. Clusters on the other hand are not an issue, they are just hard to focus!

Dan.

[Moonshane]

this might help

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/197640-collimation-and-star-hopping/

[Dreadz]

In my very limited experience, nebulae are difficult to track down and view if you're in an area with light pollution, galaxies and clusters less so. There are loads of atlases, programs and apps available to give you the coordinates of all the various celestial objects so its either a case of using those coordinates with yr mount or star hopping through the sky using a chart or map until you track down what yr looking for.

You may find it easier to use a lower magnification ep to find things, I generally use a 25mm as my finder and then up the mag as appropriate

Sent from my GTi9300 using random spelling mistake generator!!!!

[Unicronicus]

this might help

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/197640-collimation-and-star-hopping/

It helps a little, but I tend to use the Stellarium app to navigate around the night sky and some of those star names in your article are not mentioned on this app... Would you recommend that I ditch the app and use a proper star map with your circle finder method? I am also going to buy a head torch! Good call on that!

[Unicronicus]

In my very limited experience, nebulae are difficult to track down and view if you're in an area with light pollution, galaxies and clusters less so. There are loads of atlases, programs and apps available to give you the coordinates of all the various celestial objects so its either a case of using those coordinates with yr mount or star hopping through the sky using a chart or map until you track down what yr looking for.

You may find it easier to use a lower magnification ep to find things, I generally use a 25mm as my finder and then up the mag as appropriate

Sent from my GTi9300 using random spelling mistake generator!!!!

I was amazed at how bright the cigar galaxy and bodes nebulae was, I'm just wondering whether other objects are just as bright...

[brantuk]

Your 650mm focal length divided by 6mm = 108x magnification. This is probably a little too much for dso hunting and will narrow your fov quite a lot. I use between 30x to 50x for a nice wide view initially - then if more magnification is necessary I up it a bit once I've found the object.

For observing I wouldn't use any filter at all except maybe an O3 on something like the Veil Nebula to darken the background and make it stand out a bit more cos it's very faint. You really need to discover what's best for each type of object before using filters or you lessen your chances of finding it.

Best thing to use though is a totally dark site on a moonless night. Hth

(Oh a good book to help with finding and familiarisation is Turn Left At Orion)

[johnd]

Hello, I'm new also but suspect that you have much less LP in Scilly and will have a much easier time of it. But, I concur with Moonshane the Star-Hopping guide is packed with very good advice and the one that has really helped me is the FOV templates and using the Star Maps. I downloaded a free 100+ page Deep Sky Hunter Altas and put it into a binder and then made 5 and 1 Degree Templates. As I have more LP I'm also looking at Double Stars.

http://www.deepskywatch.com/files/deepsky-atlas/Deep-Sky-Hunter-atlas-full.pdf

[Moonshane]

I find a star map more useful but I don't really do technology at the scope. I even dislkie having a fan to be honest !

bear in mind that using a phone etc at the eyepiece destroys your night adaptation unless you have a night mode.

[AlexB67]

I was amazed at how bright the cigar galaxy and bodes nebulae was, I'm just wondering whether other objects are just as bright...

Given your location which should be pretty good I would think, lots of galaxies should be visible in a 5 inch instrument. though they will be faint most of the time. Bodes M81/M82 are sort of the textbook examples  and are as bright as they come, in most cases they will be fainter than that.  The Andromeda galaxy M31 will be the most  obvious  and is huge, where you are M31 should be visible with the naked eye if away from lights at the right time of year.    

As Brantuk said, a UHC filter is no use on a galaxy, expect perhaps a light pollution or sky glow filter if you have light pollution. UHC filters are useful only on certain types of nebulae, like emission nebulae, but not reflection nebulae. 

[Unicronicus]

Hello, I'm new also but suspect that you have much less LP in Scilly and will have a much easier time of it. But, I concur with Moonshane the Star-Hopping guide is packed with very good advice and the one that has really helped me is the FOV templates and using the Star Maps. I downloaded a free 100+ page Deep Sky Hunter Altas and put it into a binder and then made 5 and 1 Degree Templates. As I have more LP I'm also looking at Double Stars.

http://www.deepskywatch.com/files/deepsky-atlas/Deep-Sky-Hunter-atlas-full.pdf

Cheers for that link, I'll print that off and make some templates up.

As for the 6mm being too small, it only becomes a bit defunct when used with a 2x Barlow. But when the Barlow is turned into a 1.5mm everything becomes a lot clearer. We have the skywatcher 60 degree wide 6mm eyepiece btw.

[PorkyB]

Some of these objects are very indistinct and hard to see even when you are looking in the right place.  Others are much more easily seen.  If you are staying up late try the Ring Nebula in Lyra (M57), easy to find between two bright stars, or the Dumbbell Nebula (M27) which requires a bit more star-hoping effort.  While we still have them, earlier in the evening, have a look at the galaxies between Leo and Virgo, quite a few can be picked out visually on a good night.

[johnd]

As a good test or confirmation of how good your skies are have a look at M65-M66 they are just below Chartan in Leo. If you find Chartan in a 4-5 degree FOV and position it to the very top i.e. 12oclock position you'll see a little crescent of stars half way in your FOV. M65-M66 are just to the left in a normal view or upside down and to the right in mine (I find this difficult). I'm guessing that on a clear night you will have no problem were as I have only seen a faint presence once despite a few visits to the same location?

[rwilkey]

Hi all,

We went out stargazing last night, since it was relatively nice and clear, and our goal was to look at nebulae with our UHC filter and galaxies with our 6mm wide fov eyepiece using our Skywatcher 130p telescope.

The problem we had was finding targets in the first place and figuring out that what were looking at was not just a faint star. We don't know what a nebula, like the heart and soul, rosette, dumbbell etc... are meant to look like with a scope like ours so therefore we don't know what to look for. On the same note though, we did have success with the cigar galaxy and bodes but that took some finding and scouring of the sky. Bodes also did not fair well with our UHC filter, it actually made it too dark and was better with it removed.

So has anyone got any tips on finding galaxies and nebulae? Are there better EP's for our scope that will work better with them? We don't mind spending the money on something decent to do the job. It's just that we always end up looking at the planets whereas I like the appeal of DSO's. Clusters on the other hand are not an issue, they are just hard to focus!

Dan.

Hi Dan, the heart and soul and rosette are some of the most difficult nebulae to spot, plus I think an OIII filter works on these better as for the dumbbell, that is quite an easy one so carry on trying to find that one.  There are no filters made for galaxies so don't use the UHC, it will not help as you have found.  I think you need to do a bit more research, especially on finding some of the easier nebulae, M42, the Great Orion Nebula below Orion's belt is the most obvious easy one. 

You should find a lower power eyepiece is better for DSO hunting, I always start off with my lowest power then go in higher as and when the object demands.  I rarely go above medium power, say a 14 or 15mm, though the 12.5mm is a very handy ep.

My main message is, don't be too ambitious, the 130P will struggle with feint nebulae like the heart and soul etc

[Daniel-K]

as said above trying to find anything with a 6mm EP is going to be very hard a nice low powered EP to scan around first and locate the DSO then you up the power. the130P will be great for low powered views of star clusters. good luck next time out. try upgrading your finder to a telrad or red dot.

[LukeSkywatcher]

As others have said, its best to start off hunting galaxies with a low powered EP. My personal choice is either a 25-30mm Vixen NPL/NLV as they offer great contrast and for me make it so much easier to detect the faint smudges that galaxies present at this magnification. It will be tricky using a 130mm scope but once you find something you can use a higer powered EP. I think 6mm is a bit too much magnification for the scope. Something between 10-15mm would be better after already having scanned the skies with a low power EP.

[Unicronicus]

Thanks for the tips, for the record though, I never used the UHC filter for galaxy hunting, I bought purely for bringing out the contrast of nebulae. I'll check out those vixen EP's, because the highest we have got is the bog standard sky watcher one. And we already use the method of finding a target with a low powered eyepiece and then homing in on it with a smaller one. In fact, I didn't realise I had the 6mm fitted when I found bodes and cigar! Haha.

[Paul73]

Might be worth having a go at the Ring Nebula in Lyra. It is pretty bright for a nebula and a relatively easy hop to find. It will show as a small but distinct ring of smoke.

Paul

[LukeSkywatcher]

Might be worth having a go at the Ring Nebula in Lyra. It is pretty bright for a nebula and a relatively easy hop to find. It will show as a small but distinct ring of smoke.

Paul

I can vouch for it being visible in the 5" scope. I found it by accident, and even as small as it is @ 5 inches, you know exactly what it is and what you are looking at. 

[Unicronicus]

Crazy. You see, looking on stellarium it tells us that the ring nebula is relatively dull at a magnitude of 9.00 whereas ones that I thought we might be able to see with ease (such as the soul and heart nebulas at magnitude 6.50) are virtually impossible to see... I'll have a peak at the ring and dumbbell nebulas next time it's clear. I did try to star hop to the dumbbell nebula but I kept on losing my way with my naked eye as I went down the fainter stars from Vega as it was quite low down towards the east at the time. We never tried the ring though because of the reason I mentioned at the start... We will now though! The nebulas of Orion are also a pain to see as well this time of year, it's falling down towards the west as the sun is going down, it's above a lit up town and there is a tree belt in the way! We have seen it though briefly and it did look pretty amazing! Just wish we bought the 150 or 200mm version of the skywatcher series...

[LukeSkywatcher]

The Ring and Dumbbell are visible in a scope without any filter.The Heart/Soul neb or the Rosette give off a different light wave and need am OIII to make them visible.

A UHC filter enhances the visible (to the naked eye) nebs.

An Oiii makes nebs invisible to the naked eye,visible.

Example: The Orion nebula is visible to the naked eye, a UHC filter enhances the View.

The Rosette is invisible to the naked eye, but an OIII filter makes it visible.

[Unicronicus]

I see, but will an O3 filter work with a 130p?

[neural]

Crazy. You see, looking on stellarium it tells us that the ring nebula is relatively dull at a magnitude of 9.00 whereas ones that I thought we might be able to see with ease (such as the soul and heart nebulas at magnitude 6.50) are virtually impossible to see... 

I know, confusing isn't it. The thing is that nebulae, galaxies and so on spread their light out over an area, unlike stars which are points (at low magnifications anyway). Wikipedia says that the Rosette nebula for example is 1.3 degrees across and has a total magnitude of 9. So imagine you're looking through your scope at about 40x; a typical eyepiece will have a field of view about the size of the Rosette. Now imagine there's just one star in the field, and it's mag 9. Now unfocus the scope until the fuzzy star expands to fill the entire field of view, spreading its light out very thinly indeed. That's how bright you're expecting to see the Rosette. 

It's often more useful to know how bright a nebula is *per unit area*. There is a word for this: 'surface brightness'. So for example the Rosette is large but has low surface brightness, while the Ring nebula is small with high SB. 

By the way, I can see the Ring and Dumbbell nebulae easily in my 100mm scope from south London, so the only problem you should have is (a) finding them, and ( spotting that they're not stars - the Ring especially is quite small. 

Good luck!

[neural]

... that was supposed to be ( b ) ...

[impactcrater]

hi...nebulae live up to their name...the carina nebula is a big thing and one expects to see this lovely red cloud-like material. in practice , it is more lots of lovely stars and some vague whitesish 'softness' around them. similarly, the rosette nebula is certainly not rose to look at and indeed my viewing barely saw it...it is a brighter part of the sky in Oz which makes it tougher...I must give it another try if it is still visible here.

[impactcrater]

neural.... "to be or not to b , that is the question" . similar to what aparists struggle with !