Some nice galaxies from last night

[RobertI]

A rare clear night last night allowed me to bag the some nice galaxies. These were captured at F4.5 using the RC6. Hope you enjoy.

NGC2403 in Camelopardalis - This was really unexpected; bright and fizzing with lots of detail, I spent a long time studying this. I will give it a go with the C8 to see if I can extract more detail. Part of the M81 group.

NGC925 in Triangulum - A lovely barred spiral again, with plenty of detail and more detail just asking to be teased out. Part of the NGC1023 group (see below).

NGC1023 in Perseus - This was frustrating compared to the others as it seemed to have a high dynamic range and didn't show much detail. Non-linear stretch didn't really improve matters. It's a barred lenticular galaxy (apparently!).

NGC2146 in Camelopardalis - much smaller and with what I believe is the prominent dust lane clearly visible.

I have been lent a different F3.3 reducer (thanks to the wonderful generosity of Peter Drew) and I am planning on giving this a go next time out, I'm hoping it may reduce the coma issue.

Rob

[WaveSoarer]

Great work. I really like imaging galaxies and I'll look these ones up when I get the chance.

[laudropb]

Nice set of Galaxy images. Thanks for posting.

[Astrojedi]

Very nice captures. I viewed 1023 a couple of nights back with my C8 and it did not provide any additional detail. You need integration times much longer than what we use in EAA (i.e. 30min+) to see any more detail.

[aparker]

All nice captures. I have visited all of these recently (my observing location pretty moch limits me to positive DEC, so the northern sky is my friend). Agree that 2403 is an impressive sight, very bright for its compact size. Let us know if you have a go at longer integration on 1023...

[Martin Meredith]

Great to see these galaxies Rob. Pulling out the detail of each on its own is worth a fair amount of observing time.

NGC 2403 is quite large and and I can see that you've caught a lot of the surrounding halo. I'm going to put this on my list.

By the way, I'm pretty sure you've captured NGC 2146A, with the much larger and brighter NGC 2146 lurking just out of shot at the top right (you have to excuse me, but I can't resist looking for faint objects in shots like this which is when I noticed; good mental exercise doing the field identification…). Which means you're getting an impressive amount of detail from a mag 13.5 galaxy as opposed to NGC 2146 which is 3 full mags brighter. I haven't seen either. NGC 2146 is also listed as a peculiar galaxy (V-V 1156) and looks (from ALADIN) very interesting indeed (a bit like Centaurus A). That's another for the list!

Martin

[mdstuart]

Your pics are great on cloudy nights when I cannot get out to look through the eyepiece...Mark

[RobertI]

Thanks everyone for your comments.

Alex - I am in the same position as you regarding restricted view, I am restricted to a strip of sky from the zenith to around ten degrees below polaris. This means finding any little celestial gems is all the more rewarding. I also have two very bright street lightswithin twenty feet - I was considering starting a thread entitled 'Do I have the worst observing site in the world?'!

Martin - I think you are right about capturing the halo around 2403, I thought there appeared to be wispy extensions visible. As for 2146 that would expalin why Astrometry.net managed to identify the stars but didn't identify the galaxy. Thanks for pointing that out. It's good news actually as it means I can look forward to finding the real 2146 next time.

[RobertI]

A couple of the shots with different 'eyepiece' simulations just for fun:

[Astrojedi]

Very nice. Like the second one.

[Martin Meredith]

Hope you don't mind Rob but I wanted to resurrect this thread with an image of NGC 2146 since your capture of its neighbour 2146A inspired me to look for it the last time I was out. And a right weird galaxy it is too! It appears strangely cut off at the lower right. with hints of the faint tail curling back underneath. It really needs a longer FL as there is an awful lot of stuff going on.

Martin

[RobertI]

Hi Martin, thanks for posting this as I didn't get around to this one on my last session, although it was in my list. It is interesting indeed and a fine capture. Looking at some higher res images on the net the dark lanes form a network which look like a river delta or arteries (is this the 'hand' which gave rise to it's nickname of 'dusty hand'?). Apparently caused by an interaction with its smaller companion. As you say a longer FL might bring these out nicely, might try if I'm feeling brave!

EDIT - zooming in on your capture I can see you have caught some of the network of dark lanes.

[Chris]

Brilliant captures both Rob and Martin. 

 

[RobertI]

Martin's capture of NGC2146 made we want to track this down too, finally managed to bag it last night, and what an interesting object it is, plenty to see. My capture not of the quality of Martin's but interesting to compare the same image with different setups. Sadly the coma seems to have reappeared in my system for some reason, but I will have to disassemble it all soon to install my new filterwheel and RGB filters.

Also bagged NGC3359, another attractive little galaxy with two very faint arms:

 

[Martin Meredith]

I think they're very similar in quality Rob. The main difference I see is from focal length. I hadn't heard the name Dusty Hand but I see what you mean -- kind of long fingered spooky hand? A proper AP image of this and its companion has just appeared on CN. Maybe it should be called the Red Hand? Its interesting to compare what extra details (and colour) can be achieved in a 5.6 hour exposure.

What surprises me (it shouldn't, I guess) is how consist the images are that I get from night to night, and also in comparisons like this. Sure, exposure times are different, but what matters in the end is how much detail can be pulled out in a reasonable amount of time. I don't know about you, but 5-10 minutes can fly by when I'm observing an object as interesting as this, or a Hickson group, for example. 

Martin

[RobertI]

Yes the time does seem to fly by, it's a sign we're having fun, but the late nights are killing me!  

[Astrojedi]

Rob,

If you are experiencing coma on the outer edges check collimation. I imaged with a RC few years back and in my experience they require precise collimation otherwise you get a lot of coma off axis especially with FRs.

Hiten

[RobertI]

8 hours ago, Astrojedi said:

Rob,

If you are experiencing coma on the outer edges check collimation. I imaged with a RC few years back and in my experience they require precise collimation otherwise you get a lot of coma off axis especially with FRs.

Hiten

Thanks Hiten, shall do that, I do need to get into the habit. I don't know whether I knocked the scope out of collimation because everything seemed fine on the previous sessions. I am familiar with collimating my C8 using an eyepiece but would appreciate some advice on the RC6. I have read that adjusting the secondary on the RCs is good enough for most purposes, and adjusting the primary is really not required unless it's way off. Is that your experience? Also should I be able to collimate using the Lodestar in place and using the defocussed image of a star on the monitor? I have downloaded Al's collimating aid which superimposes adjustable concentric rings on the screen to help accuracy during adjustment. Does this all seem like a reasonable approach?

Thanks

Rob

[Astrojedi]

Rob,

That sounds about right. With RCs just need to make sure you check collimation frequently. Once every 4-5 days (or more often if you move the scope a lot). The Celestron SCTs hold collimation for years as they are indexed but RCs lose it pretty quickly (I would say they are somewhere in between SCTs and Newtonians when it comes to holding collimation)

Hiten