Horsehead Nebula questions

[Davey-T]

17 minutes ago, Davesellars said:

I think it's just that a lot of astro companies are pretty bad when it comes to packaging their product even if it's going to be thrown away.  ES use really nice strong boxes for all their EPs and nice to see the filters equally well packaged.  Costs next the nothing really after design etc.

This is true, expensive Astrodon filters come in the smallest possible plastic box with a bit of blue foam stuff that leaves dust all over the filter. 

Baader on the other hand come in a really nicely designed plastic container.

Dave

[Mark at Beaufort]

Joihn/Dave - Well I am looking forward to first light on these H.Beta filters. I really hope they do the business on HH.

[PeterW]

Took me ages to work out how to open the Baader box first time i bought one. Astronomik click box is fine, the coatings are hard so I can quite easily clean them and am not too worried about damaging them.

 

Peter

[Davesellars]

you're not the only one to take a while to figure out the Baader filter box! . I did feel like I was having a dim moment....

Talking about expensive filters coming in rather basic packing.  The Hutech IDAS filters are also guilty!

[alan potts]

I guess boxes are a little off topic unless the Horse's Head comes in one but when it comes to boxes Meade took the cream when it marketed its UWA and SWA 5000 range, I have bought shoes in smaller boxes, though ExSc also push hard for the big boxs award.

alan

[mikeDnight]

On 08/12/2016 at 17:53, Mark at Beaufort said:

Joihn/Dave - Well I am looking forward to first light on these H.Beta filters. I really hope they do the business on HH.

I've tried using an H-Beta filter for the horse head  on several occasions while using an NP101 but was unsuccessful. Probably 20 years ago while using a 6" reflector i tried using an occulting bar to block out Alnitak but again I was unsuccessful. I'd read about occulting bars somewhere and fancied giving it a go. For my occulting bar I stained a match stick with black ink and simply pushed the match up against the field stop. It worked a treat as far as occulting Alnitak, but on probably every occasion I underestimated the importance of thorough dark adaption. Though I've detected the flame on a number of occasions I could never find IC434, until last January, when after observing with a blackout blanket over my head for 20 to 30 mins I began to detect the nebulosity both light and dark. The horse head still eluded me but after about an hour at the eyepiece I'd convinced myself I could just detect a tiny notch of dark nebula where the HH was. I was using a 4" aperture scope.

Mike

[Davesellars]

Mike,  I think this is key - the preparation and time getting dark adapted is really crucial although this may be a bit uncomfortable covering yourself for 30 mins to reach optimal dark adaption it's most likely a pointless venture without doing this.

[Mark at Beaufort]

10 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

I've tried using an H-Beta filter for the horse head  on several occasions while using an NP101 but was unsuccessful. Probably 20 years ago while using a 6" reflector i tried using an occulting bar to block out Alnitak but again I was unsuccessful. I'd read about occulting bars somewhere and fancied giving it a go. For my occulting bar I stained a match stick with black ink and simply pushed the match up against the field stop. It worked a treat as far as occulting Alnitak, but on probably every occasion I underestimated the importance of thorough dark adaption. Though I've detected the flame on a number of occasions I could never find IC434, until last January, when after observing with a blackout blanket over my head for 20 to 30 mins I began to detect the nebulosity both light and dark. The horse head still eluded me but after about an hour at the eyepiece I'd convinced myself I could just detect a tiny notch of dark nebula where the HH was. I was using a 4" aperture scope.

Mike

Mike thanks for that information. I bought a blanket from TH several years ago mainly for viewing the Sun with my PST. As Dave stated above it may not be the most comfortable arrangement for 30 minutes but if you obtain the view of HH then I think its worth the effort.

[scarp15]

Consider to a target to observe leading up to engaging with the Flame and IC434. Perhaps the reflection nebula M78, an object that is quite dim. M42 for example is not a good choice as it will degrade slightly your dark adaption. 

[Davesellars]

True Iain, I'd considered this...  May well be a good idea to get your eye in (so to speak) working out on other objects increasing in difficulty before tackling the big one.  M78 I've found pretty easy in the past.  Perhaps the Running Man area is a good one also with its proximity to M42 to get around.  This would certainly be a good test of the required transparency and then move on to a couple of h-beta objects that are a little easier before going on to IC434.

[John]

On 08/12/2016 at 17:53, Mark at Beaufort said:

Joihn/Dave - Well I am looking forward to first light on these H.Beta filters. I really hope they do the business on HH.

Well I first lighted my ES H-Beta filter last night with some slightly surprising results when I compared the effects with my DGM NPB UHC-type filter and the Lumicon O-III. The scope was my 12" F/5.3 dobsonian (Orion Optics Newtonian Tube Assembly on Dobsonian type Mount by Moonshane = OONTADM ) and the eyepieces used were mainly the Panoptic 24mm, Delos 17.3mm and Ethos 13mm. The NELM was around 5.7 using the Ursa Minor test stars but it varies a lot in different parts of the sky here due to LP

This is what I found with the ES H-Beta filter:

- I can see pretty faint stars with it. The dimming effect that I noticed very much with the Lumicon and the 1000 Oaks filters that you (Mark) loaned me was much reduced.

- The effect on M42, M1 and M97 was more like a UHC filter than anything else. M42 expanded compared to the non-filtered view and some of the further flung tendrils became notably more contrasty. The central area of the nebula was not burned out like other H-Beta's that I've tried. M1 and M97 popped into view with the ES H-Beta but not quite to the extent that they do in my DGM NBP filter or a good O-III filter.

- The contrast of Flame Nebula was enhanced very slightly by the ES H-Beta. The filter also enhanced the glare from Altniak though which scrubbed some of the improvement off the Flame I felt.

- IC 434 looked more or less the same using the ES H-Beta as it did with no filter. Very, very, very subtle elongated brightened area of sky. I thought that I might have suspected a sort of slightly darker "thumbprint" against IC 434 in the position that Barnard 33 (the Horse Head) would be using averted vision at times but it was all so subtle that I'm not ticking that box yet. The detection of this did not seem to be helped or hindered by the ES H-Beta as far as I could see on this particular night.

In all honesty I'm not sure what to make of the ES H-Beta filter 

It's certainly not as "severe" as others I've used and the views of M42 in particular were rather nice with it. It does add a blue tint to stars and I'm sure that I recall other H-Beta filters adding a pinkish tint which adds to my slight confusion with the ES one

The band pass chart (pic below) that came with the filter shows a high % transmission but perhaps a rather broad pass width compared with some other H-Beta filters. I think it may partially straddle the O-III line as well as the H-Beta ?

Anyway it was an interesting evening despite the lack of certainty over B33

 

 

 

[YKSE]

John,

Your impression seem to be in good agreement with the band pass chart. The about 20nm FWHM cuts off less light, therefore less dimming of stars, and the first OIII line of 496nm seems to be transmitted about 50%, not exactly a barrow band H-beta filter.

Have you compared these filters on M43? When I checked my Astronomik filters, M43 is distinctly a H-beta object, OIII almost kills it totally, UHC shows better than without filter, while H-beta enhances it greatly.

[Mark at Beaufort]

Thanks John for that detailed report on the ES H.Beta filter.

The other night I tried to view the HH with the 1000 Oaks and started with the TeleVue zoom at the 24mm setting thinking that the 40 degree FOV would be best - it wasn't. I then used the 24mm ES 68 in the 12" Dob and I could see faintly IC 434 but not the HH. This reminded me when I saw HH before with the best views coming with the 19mm and 24mm Panoptic.

I did screw in the H.Beta into the 15x70 Apollo Binos (one eye) and could make out the California Neb so it would be interesting to get the ES H.Beta so that I could use both eyes.

So John you and I will get HH one day its just getting the best sky and transparency.

[ollypenrice]

My personal NELM here is about 5.8, not very good, but others have reached mag 7. (More accurately, one other person has reached mag 7 but he is an exceptional observer.) SQM has reached 21.9, but more often 21.6. I've seen the Gegenshein even with my dud eyesight - but only just. 

We have a 20 inch F4.1 in which I've seen the HH three times, once with an H Beta and twice in different UHC filters. I'm guilty of having called it a 'notch' in the past but at the powers we were using the term 'notch' does imply 'small' and it wasn't, it was quite large. For me the HH was the absence of something more than the presence of something. A little movemement - nodding - of the scope was a big help.

I'd love to have great eyesight but don't. At least I live at a nice dark site.

Olly

[scarp15]

I would like to enthuse my 15yr old daughter to get outside and take a look at Orion nebula and convey if and what colour she can see. No chance of that so just have to make do with my own observing eye and make the most.

Good luck with the horse head, edging closer considering that comment of slightly darker thumb print. Trialing different eyepieces besides those such as 19mm Panoptic which have the established reputation for this observation, is interesting. 

[John]

6 hours ago, YKSE said:

Have you compared these filters on M43? When I checked my Astronomik filters, M43 is distinctly a H-beta object, OIII almost kills it totally, UHC shows better than without filter, while H-beta enhances it greatly.

I did observe M43 with the ES H-B last night but I have to confess that I did not specifically study the effects of the O-III and NBP filters on it - too eager to move onto the Flame etc I guess

The H-B showed M43 well and the dark "V" shaped rift through it was well defined. It was also pretty good without a filter as well to be fair. On the next opportunity I will try the O-III and NBP filters as well and report what I see

Can't get out tonight due to Xmas period family socialising - it's our turn to host this year

[alan potts]

22 hours ago, John said:

Well I first lighted my ES H-Beta filter last night with some slightly surprising results when I compared the effects with my DGM NPB UHC-type filter and the Lumicon O-III. The scope was my 12" F/5.3 dobsonian (Orion Optics Newtonian Tube Assembly on Dobsonian type Mount by Moonshane = OONTADM ) and the eyepieces used were mainly the Panoptic 24mm, Delos 17.3mm and Ethos 13mm. The NELM was around 5.7 using the Ursa Minor test stars but it varies a lot in different parts of the sky here due to LP

This is what I found with the ES H-Beta filter:

- I can see pretty faint stars with it. The dimming effect that I noticed very much with the Lumicon and the 1000 Oaks filters that you (Mark) loaned me was much reduced.

- The effect on M42, M1 and M97 was more like a UHC filter than anything else. M42 expanded compared to the non-filtered view and some of the further flung tendrils became notably more contrasty. The central area of the nebula was not burned out like other H-Beta's that I've tried. M1 and M97 popped into view with the ES H-Beta but not quite to the extent that they do in my DGM NBP filter or a good O-III filter.

- The contrast of Flame Nebula was enhanced very slightly by the ES H-Beta. The filter also enhanced the glare from Altniak though which scrubbed some of the improvement off the Flame I felt.

- IC 434 looked more or less the same using the ES H-Beta as it did with no filter. Very, very, very subtle elongated brightened area of sky. I thought that I might have suspected a sort of slightly darker "thumbprint" against IC 434 in the position that Barnard 33 (the Horse Head) would be using averted vision at times but it was all so subtle that I'm not ticking that box yet. The detection of this did not seem to be helped or hindered by the ES H-Beta as far as I could see on this particular night.

In all honesty I'm not sure what to make of the ES H-Beta filter 

It's certainly not as "severe" as others I've used and the views of M42 in particular were rather nice with it. It does add a blue tint to stars and I'm sure that I recall other H-Beta filters adding a pinkish tint which adds to my slight confusion with the ES one

The band pass chart (pic below) that came with the filter shows a high % transmission but perhaps a rather broad pass width compared with some other H-Beta filters. I think it may partially straddle the O-III line as well as the H-Beta ?

Anyway it was an interesting evening despite the lack of certainty over B33

 

 

 

John,

I am beginning to think that HB actually stands for Horse' s Bolted, just need to find where now.

Alan

[John]

Had another bash at this area last night with the 12" dob. I stuck with the 24mm Panoptic and 17.3mm Delos and compared the ES H-Beta with the NBP and Lumicon O-III on M43 more carefully this time. M43 was best defined with the NBP filter, then it was pretty much a tie between no filter and the H-Beta on this target. The Lumicon O-III pretty much washed m43 away confirming Yong's point about it not being a suitable O-III target. The Flame was barely visible at all last night so, unsurprisingly, no Horsehead.

On M42 an interesting effect of the ES H-Beta filter is that a bar of nebulosity that was otherwise pretty indistinct unfiltered, with the NBP or O-III, became much more contrasty and noticable. I guess this points to this as a higher H-Beta emitting area. I've indicated this bar / band on this pic of M42:

 

[YKSE]

5 hours ago, John said:

Had another bash at this area last night with the 12" dob. I stuck with the 24mm Panoptic and 17.3mm Delos and compared the ES H-Beta with the NBP and Lumicon O-III on M43 more carefully this time. M43 was best defined with the NBP filter, then it was pretty much a tie between no filter and the H-Beta on this target. The Lumicon O-III pretty much washed m43 away confirming Yong's point about it not being a suitable O-III target.

 

Glad that you get it confirmed about M43.

As NPB transmits both O-III and H-beta, and we know M43 doesn't emit much OIII, so the enhancement compared to no filter should come solely from H-beta transmission. I'd guess your NPB is your best filter for H-beta objects.

[John]

10 minutes ago, YKSE said:

Glad that you get it confirmed about M43.

As NPB transmits both O-III and H-beta, and we know M43 doesn't emit much OIII, so the enhancement compared to no filter should come solely from H-beta transmission. I'd guess your NPB is your best filter for H-beta objects.

You may well be right Yong. I'm beginning to feel that the ES H-Beta is more of a partially emasculated UHC rather than a pure H-Beta filter 

 

[faulksy]

just to add to this topic boys/gals. last night at our dark site myself,mapster, dan-k and baz bagged the HH just using a uhc filter. we all seen it that was im my dob and damians dob, using a lumicon and astronomics uhc

[Mark at Beaufort]

John it would be interesting if you could view the California Neb with the ES HB filter because it suggests that the UHC and O-III filters should be avoided. I am thinking of getting this filter to screw into the Apollo binos to try and get to use both eyes on this object.

[John]

1 hour ago, Mark at Beaufort said:

John it would be interesting if you could view the California Neb with the ES HB filter because it suggests that the UHC and O-III filters should be avoided. I am thinking of getting this filter to screw into the Apollo binos to try and get to use both eyes on this object.

OK Mark, I'll give that a go when I'm next out

Too obsessed about the HH to look anywhere else in the sky !

 

[Mark at Beaufort]

1 hour ago, John said:

OK Mark, I'll give that a go when I'm next out

Too obsessed about the HH to look anywhere else in the sky !

 

John you and I must go observing again together. We were so successful the last time - perhaps we will see HH

[YKSE]

10 hours ago, John said:

You may well be right Yong. I'm beginning to feel that the ES H-Beta is more of a partially emasculated UHC rather than a pure H-Beta filter 

 

Yes, it certainly feels like that.

BTW, the trap section of M42 did look very much burn-out with Astronomik H-beta, just as you remembered with Lumincon H-beta.