Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_lunar_landings.thumb.jpg.b50378d0845690d8a03305a49923eb40.jpg

Recommended Posts

Globular clusters, whenever I point my scope towards 95% of them they come out as a hazy patch. The only two globulars I can see kind of clearly are the Hercules cluster and Messier 3 in Canes Venetici. All the rest look fuzzy, What aperture would you need to see them clearly? I have a 4.5" reflector.

Thanks

Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Globulars get better the more aperture that you turn on them. Personally I think an 8" starts to show the brightest well and at 10" - 12" many have good resolution and the brigtest can look almost like their photos on a good night. I once viewed M13 through a 20" scope and the view stayed with me for a long, long time ! :shocked:

 

Edited by John
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think darker skies help too. At home in my 8" M15 is a fuzzy smudge, but stars start to be resolved under darker skies. In a 22" it looks amazing!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4" frac can give you enough contrast to increase magnification and get lots of resolution,

Nick.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon 8 to 10" would give you an excellent view of the bigger globs, with good resolution of the stars.

As Nick says, a 4" frac will show a decent view, but you need a good sky and probably averted vision to pull the stars out clearly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually to my taste, there's such a thing as too much aperture for globulars. In my friends 24" Newtonian the bigger ones are too bright so they look rather "fake". My 7" refractor will definitely resolve most pretty well but probably something around 12 to 14" is the Goldilocks zone in IMHO. Though I accept that the conventional wisdom and general consensus is the bigger the better :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, timwetherell said:

Actually to my taste, there's such a thing as too much aperture for globulars. In my friends 24" Newtonian the bigger ones are too bright so they look rather "fake". My 7" refractor will definitely resolve most pretty well but probably something around 12 to 14" is the Goldilocks zone in IMHO. Though I accept that the conventional wisdom and general consensus is the bigger the better :)

I think you might be on your own there....too much aperture?!!!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, timwetherell said:

Actually to my taste, there's such a thing as too much aperture for globulars. In my friends 24" Newtonian the bigger ones are too bright so they look rather "fake". My 7" refractor will definitely resolve most pretty well but probably something around 12 to 14" is the Goldilocks zone in IMHO. Though I accept that the conventional wisdom and general consensus is the bigger the better :)

never ever heard that before, bigger is always better :icon_biggrin:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, niallk said:

I have a 10", and it gave me a wow for sure on M13 :) But still a bit dim...

However, stepping up to a 15" has been a revelation - especially on globs

http://www.obsessiontelescopes.com/m13/index.php

There is an interesting row in the table of data on that page called " Contrast Limit: (minimum diameter before a nebular object fades from view) ". The limits start at 11 arc minutes for the 12.5 inch aperture and reduce to 3.4 arc minutes for the 25 inch. I'm having difficulty getting my head around what this actually means in practice although I'm sure its significant ? :icon_scratch:

 

Edited by John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John said:

There is an interesting row in the table of data on that page called " Contrast Limit: (minimum diameter before a nebular object fades from view) ". The limits start at 11 arc minutes for the 12.5 inch aperture and reduce to 3.4 arc minutes for the 25 inch. I'm having difficulty getting my head around what this actually means in practice although I'm sure its significant ? :icon_scratch:

 

It looks like these numbers are deducted from Rayleigh Resolution limits the row above. they are all roughly 16x(Rayleigh limit). Don't know where 16 comes from though. if it's related to Rayleigh limit, then my guess is that for 8", globula smaller than 11' can't be resolved because of nebulosity, while for 25", this limit is 3.4', or something in that style.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With an 8" SCT most Globular Clusters in the Messier catalogue resolved (at least something) with some exceptions.  Some are really great like M13, M92, M10 and M12.   But outside of the Messier objects they get difficult to resolve anything.  I haven't had enough time with the 12" to see how much difference the jump to this aperture is on the fainter objects - however M13 was a revelation for the brief period I caught it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BeanerSA said:

I would recommend a southern declination. We have the 2 best globs ;-)

Omega Centauri and 47 Tucanae?  The latter is my favourite globular in the whole sky, something about the condensed core and wispy outer shell. It's one of the things I miss about Australia! I don't really know why, but Omega doesn't do that much for me to be honest. It's definitely by far the biggest out there though and one to tick off every skywatchers bucket list :) 

I read an interesting article somewhere about some guys in Yorkshire observing Omega Centauri on a hill top when it was 2 or 3° above the horizon - Might give it a bash myself from Somerset if the clouds ever clear!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/12/2016 at 17:46, A budding astronomer said:

Globular clusters, whenever I point my scope towards 95% of them they come out as a hazy patch. The only two globulars I can see kind of clearly are the Hercules cluster and Messier 3 in Canes Venetici. All the rest look fuzzy, What aperture would you need to see them clearly? I have a 4.5" reflector.

Thanks

Adam

Adam, try getting thoroughly dark adapted by blocking out any stray light from entering your eye from the side. A sheet of black material over your head and eyepiece can greatly improve the views of fuzzy objects. Don't even look at an illuminated hand controller! Allow your eye to naturally scan the field of view. Also, using averted vision will help to bring out the finer detail. It will take you 20 minutes to attain dark adaption but the difference it makes can be astounding.

Mike

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, timwetherell said:

Omega Centauri and 47 Tucanae?  The latter is my favourite globular in the whole sky, something about the condensed core and wispy outer shell. It's one of the things I miss about Australia! I don't really know why, but Omega doesn't do that much for me to be honest. It's definitely by far the biggest out there though and one to tick off every skywatchers bucket list :) 

I read an interesting article somewhere about some guys in Yorkshire observing Omega Centauri on a hill top when it was 2 or 3° above the horizon - Might give it a bash myself from Somerset if the clouds ever clear!

Yup, that's them. I'm always stunned by Omega Centauri, because it is a naked eye object. I can see it without the aid of binoculars or telescope.

Let me know how you go with your hilltop observation attempt!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2016 at 22:20, niallk said:

I have a 10", and it gave me a wow for sure on M13 :) But still a bit dim...

However, stepping up to a 15" has been a revelation - especially on globs

http://www.obsessiontelescopes.com/m13/index.php

I like that graphic, and it appears to demonstrate the Principle of Diminishing Returns.

So my next 'scope might well be a 16" maximum!

Doug.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to say it but it's completely impossible to see Omega Centauri (declination -47.5) from the UK, even on a mountain with a sea horizon. Was the article about the stars Theta and/or Iota Centauri (which theoretically just rise south of about 54N, though I've never seen them)? Or possibly M7 (ditto)?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Walshie79 said:

Hate to say it but it's completely impossible to see Omega Centauri (declination -47.5) from the UK, even on a mountain with a sea horizon. Was the article about the stars Theta and/or Iota Centauri (which theoretically just rise south of about 54N, though I've never seen them)? Or possibly M7 (ditto)?

 

Just looked on Stellarium and yes, you appear to be 100% correct! Perhaps it was Theta or Iota they observed and I'd remembered it wrong (which is entirely plausible!) Or perhaps they were smoking something. Either way, yes, one would have to be down in France to stand a chance :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Globular clusters start looking good in a 10 inch telescope, however omega Centauri  or O my God Centauri we called it, looks great in binoculars when observed in Australia.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Phillips6549
      With several clear nights over the past week,  I've been playing with the Synscan Pro app (Android) in conjunction with a Synscan WiFi adapter on an EQ3Pro mount.  I have to say I'm generally quite impressed.  Much cheaper than buying a traditional handset.  
      However,  this evening I was trying to "creep up" on the Andromeda Galaxy by star hopping towards it via Mirach,  Mu Andromedae and Nu Andromedae.  Mirach was no problem but the other stars were not available for selection in the app.  Am I missing something?  I couldn't find any way to enter an SAO number or any other catalogue number to find the minor stars.  
      Is this a limitation of the app?  Or the adapter perhaps?  Or is it me? 
      Clear skies, 
      Mark. 
    • By codeman
      NGC6559 at the center of the milkyway is a photo I created from RGB filters only and at BIN1.

      Telescope: ASA 12'' F3.6
      Mount: DDM 85 Unguided
      Camera: FLI 16200 Mono
      Filters: Astrodon
       
      Thanks for watching
      Haim Huli
       
      My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/101543943@N04/
    • By Kronos831
      Here is my sketch of m81 and m82
      sketched in good seeing and in my light polluted backyard
      (Spiral arms fainter than the sketching , could just make them out as a halo outside of the core
    • By Stu Todd
      Hello fellow astronomers,
      Proudly announcing the southern hemispheres NZ  astronomy main event opening every Sunday from 7.30 pm, from the 7th April.
      We welcome visitors and can accommodate you in our beautiful, dark, southern town.
       
      Please contact dunedin.astronomy@gmail.com 
       
      Kia Ora! 
       
      p.s This is Dunedin, New Zealand, not Dunedin, FL!
       
    • By JaydenvdH
      National Geographic 90/1250 maksutov is my telescope  and thanks for all the replies and support of my previous post it helped me alot and i figured out how to see the moon for example in beautiful quality
      but there's the problem i have. I can only see good views and a sharp sight of the moon but that's about it. Do i need a better lens that can zoom even more out or is this the limit of my telescope?
      Please let me know if you know a solution to this. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.