Show me your M42 please!

[CraigT82]

Hi all,

As ive never actually been out to a real dark site with my scope, I'd like to get an idea of how big a difference a dark site can make.

I took the picture below using my 8" reflector from the balcony of my flat in London, and I think it fairly represents what I see through the eyepiece.

What I'd like to see is pictures other people have taken of this target, not long exposure but pictures that represent what is actually seen through the eyepiece. I'd like to get an idea of what can be seen in certain scopes from better/worse skies

So if you've got any pics of M42 like this please share them! If if you don't, please take a quick snap and whack it on here!

Thanks

Craig

M42 from London (bortle 8). 8" newt. 25mm BST. No filter. iPhone pic edited in Photoshop express.

[cotterless45]

Just from my light polluted back garden in a 6" refractor, it's a lovely sight and you don't need aperture under dark skies,

Nick.

[fondofchips]

Picture taken from the same light polluted skies as Nick (cotterless45) above.

Taken during the Lunar eclipse so no moonlight.

Skywatcher Esprit 100ED and Mallincam Extreme video camera.  Brightness/Contrast adjusted in Photoshop.

The video camera seems to deal with light pollution better than visual observing.

Cheers,

Fondofchips.

[estwing]

Can we have this in the imaging section pls this is an observing section!

[nytecam]

Can we have this in the imaging section pls this is an observing section!

 OP Craig did ask what M42 looked like and his phone snap is a fair topic for this forum - it's certainly not AP and no need to dump someone asking for help under onerous central London LP.  It's relatively dark, by comparison, from here in London zone 4 [even with ~10M neighbours!!] but I won't spoil it with what I snapped in 1s exp or maybe ;-)

Nytecam

[swamp thing]

Can we have this in the imaging section pls this is an observing section!

I understand your thoughts Cal but to be fair to the OP he did ask for images that represent what can be SEEN through the eyepiece.

I would ask anyone posting images to be aware of this please......

Thanks all. 

[RikM]

Here is a sketch I made a while ago showing how it looks to me with a 10" Dob from mag 5.5 skies on the south edge of Gloucester. I tried to show the difference a UHC filter makes as well. You will see that it doesn't make the nebula any brighter but it darkens the background sky enhancing the contrast.

[laudropb]

That's why I always use a UHC when viewing M42. Thanks for the illustration to show that point.

[estwing]

sorry that I may of sounded like a I was "dumping" on you Craig...it wasn't meant to cause offence. M42 can still be a wonderful object to observe even in LP areas..but I cant encourage you enough to take your scope to darker skies...the difference is unbelievable, so much so its the only place I go to observe!...clear skies!

[Scooot]

This is my sketch effort of about this time last year. A view with my 16" from my back garden, where I'm lucky if I can see all of little bear naked eye but more usually just kochab, pherkad and Polaris.

[CraigT82]

Some great sketches here, already I'm beginning to get an idea of the difference a darker sky makes.  I think it's interesting to try to somehow quantify the benefits of darker skies.  My wife is away this weekend so I'm going to try to drive out to darker skies and have another go at M42 to compare with what I get from my flat.

Also really useful to see the difference a UHC filter makes (on this target anyways)... I'm think one of those definitely needs to go onto my shopping list!

[estwing]

you are going to have to drive a few miles to get away from that horrible London glow...

[Stub Mandrel]

This is probably a fair approximation of what I see through low power binoculars

[PeterW]

I think "light years" is the correct unit of distance needed to escape London! With better skies M42 "billows", one side reaching around more than the other and delicate folds and puffiness in it... Darker skies, bigger scope.... Well worth it!

PeterW

[ollypenrice]

This is very difficult to do, but I've tried, here, to process an image approximating to what I see from my very dark site in a 2O inch F4.1 Newtonian. This would be on a night with an SQM reading of 21.6 to 21.9 or close to mag 7 for those with excellent eyes. In reality the image probably exaggerates, slightly, the structure that can be seen in the nebulosity but the stars are considerably crisper at the eyepiece than can be managed in photography. The view at the EP is more ethereal and in some places the contrast is higher while in others it is lower. But it gives an idea.

The truth is that a 4 inch scope at a dark site will trounce a 20 inch one in medium light pollution. Nothing, but nothing, beats a dark, clear site.

Olly

[CraigT82]

Incredible!  Do you see any colour to the nebulosity in those conditions in that scope Olly?

[ollypenrice]

On 22/1/2016 at 21:07, CraigT82 said:

Incredible!  Do you see any colour to the nebulosity in those conditions in that scope Olly?

None whatever in my case. I know some people do report it but, alas, I can't see any. Amongst the DS objects I've only seen colour in the small bright ones like the Bue Snowball. On extended ones I don't find any - but that could easily just be me. My vision is pretty poor.

Olly

[Stu]

On 22 January 2016 at 20:07, CraigT82 said:

Incredible!  Do you see any colour to the nebulosity in those conditions in that scope Olly?

Craig, I actually think colour is possible to see in much smaller scopes if you are not fully dark adapted. In this case your cones (the colour sensitive parts of the eye) are still stimulated and so you perceive colour more easily.

I've seen it on several occasions, in a 12" dob and more recently in my 4" frac, both times from my back garden which is generally around mag 4.5 NELM. It was more subtle in the 4" but definitely visible as a greenish hue to the nebula.

As I understand it, once you get to seriously big dobs, I guess 20"++, under dark skies, the nebula is bright enough to show colour other than green which must be pretty amazing.

[digital_davem]

Fascinating to see these pics and sketches. 

What I see is a bit like the OP shot: but the four little stars in the middle are much smaller and closer together - really close together with hardly any space between them but they don't look like round blobs like above, instead tiny pinprick points, small and sharp. 

I don't see any of that cloudy stuff extending beyond the stars. Basically, I see a collection of stars, one of which is that group of 4 stars very close together and a small faint fuzziness around the collection. No structure or shape or clouds. Didn't even imagine that was visible at the eyepiece. Olly's picture is amazing.

I looked at Jupiter again last night, a bit rubbish, if I'm honest, just a yellow disc with no detail. I think there was some kind of haze in the way because the moon was wearing a great big fuzzy halo.

Clearly there is much more to see under darker skies. I was beginning to wonder what all the fuss was about with stargazing, just a few points of light, nothing to really see, a bit boring after a while. Obviously, I need to get up to our summer house near Galloway, London is not a great observing site...

3" classic refractor (f16.4).

p.s. there is still something about seeing the Galeilean moons strung out in a line...

[swamp thing]

Colour?

Now that's a strange one with everyone seemingly having differing experiences. Some do, some don't. I used to but these days I don't seem to find it so easy. I've had a few people look through my larger scope and report colour in objects that I sure as hell can't see. A young lady said the of the veil "It's red" upon looking through the eyepiece. She then asked "What is it?". I was kinda  I believe dumbstruck is the expression.  

 

[Paul73]

Great thread.

Occaisionally, I can get shades of purple and green. Nothing spectacular.

Paul

[Beulah]

I can also report seeing colour in M42 - from my 16" in very dark skies; as well as the green/blue hints, also a pinkish neon outlined tinge to the lower part of the nebulae in the Trapezium (using Olly's excellent image as an example - wow!).

[John]

I've noticed that younger observers notice colour in deep sky objects a bit more than I do, judging by the comments I've heard from them when doing outreach events.

I'm an old codger compared to them though !

 

[ollypenrice]

37 minutes ago, John said:

I've noticed that younger observers notice colour in deep sky objects a bit more than I do, judging by the comments I've heard from them when doing outreach events.

I'm an old codger compared to them though !

 

 

Me too. I think that's the problem! It's like hearing bats. I used to hear them clicking away but now they seem silent. Ah well...

Olly

[HowardHopkinson]

The image below was taken using 20x30sec subs and 20x30 sec darks all at ISO 800, stacked in DSS and processed in PS. The image was taken from my light polluted location with an almost full moon as well.