More on M27 and a bit of M13.

[ollypenrice]

Once the imaging was under way we rolled off the shed covering our new baby, the 14 inch LX200, for some observing. The sky was not exceptional, SQM21.3, and clouded over around 3.00am.  Although I'd normally start at a lower power, the 13mm Ethos was in the scope when we slewed to M27. That's 269x with an exit pupil of 1.3mm. I almost took out the 13 without taking a look, to replace it with somethng more 'sensible,' a 26mm. I'm very glad I didn't because the view was astonishing.

Firstly M27 was, not surprisingly, enormous and almost filled the field of view which is visible in the Ethos without moving your head. By peering into the edges of the field stop the nebula was, though, seen to be surrounded by very black sky and tiny stars clean to the edge. Surface brightness was quite low so the nebula appeared gaseous rather than 'solid,' or opaque, as it can do at low powers. This transparent look was lovely, I thought, and gave the feeling that you were out in space and quite close to it, looking through it. The Dumbbell structure was clearly visible, though. I tried for the outer extensions seen in images without success.

The big surprise was the central star which was clearly visible in direct vision. In fact it was the first thing to strike me when I put my eye to the eyepiece. It was tiny but pin sharp and not in the slightest bit difficult. (It usually shows in the 20 inch but for some reason this was the best view of it that I've seen.)

This high power view of M27 was such a surprise, and so refreshing, that I didn't want to try it in the 26 for fear of losing the magic of the moment. I've never enjoyed this target so much and will be back to it ASAP.

M13. A post yesterday on another thread reminded us that stars don't scale in brightness like extended objects but get brighter with aperture, so I thought I'd try the 14 inch on M13. The view supported the theory. While it was a great view of M13 it didn't come up to that provided by the 20 inch, which always makes you gasp. Resolution was excellent into the core but it just wasn't as striking a view. However, the Propellor showed very nicely. It was best in averted vision. Direct vision seemed to make it fade, or reduced it to two rather than three blades.

So why was the central star so good in M27? No idea.

Focus: thanks to Steve Richards and the custom cable he made (and delivered!) we were able to try the motorized zero shift Crayford focuser for the first time. I tend to feel a bit 'disconnected' when using electric focusers in visual but this one did work well and moved fast enough to give you confidence that you'd hit the sweet spot. Certainly a keeper. It does help to have the mirror locked as well. So many thanks, Steve.

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Very nice report, Olly. The 20" is indeed amazing on M13, it will certainly leave the 14" behind, but then M13 is still a nice object in my humble C8, so I am not surprised the 14" still gave great views. M27, like many planetaries, can handle quite a bit of magnification, I have found. I frequently use either the 12mm Nagler or the 14mm Delos on such targets, and M27 is no exception.

[John]

Great report Olly - nice to read about a "bit of visual" from you

I've seen the central star of M27 a few times with my 12" dob. It's at least a magnitude brighter than the one in M57 I think. Still can be tough though.

M13 is simply gorgeous when the aperture reaches 10" or above I reckon !

[alan potts]

We normally see amazing photos from you, now reports. I guess there will not be a whole lot of difference between my 18 and your 20 but M13 is always a show stopper, I must try counting them all sometime. Great report Olly.

alan

[ollypenrice]

2 hours ago, alan potts said:

We normally see amazing photos from you, now reports. I guess there will not be a whole lot of difference between my 18 and your 20 but M13 is always a show stopper, I must try counting them all sometime. Great report Olly.

alan

I always stress the humble level of our 20 inch optics, Alan. It isn't a 'killer mirror,' it is, in the grand tradition of the classical Dob, a light bucket. But I have to love it. The 14 inch Meade is proving to have 'refractor-like' qualities which I really wasn't expecting but am delighted to discover!

Olly

[alan potts]

21 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

I always stress the humble level of our 20 inch optics, Alan. It isn't a 'killer mirror,' it is, in the grand tradition of the classical Dob, a light bucket. But I have to love it. The 14 inch Meade is proving to have 'refractor-like' qualities which I really wasn't expecting but am delighted to discover!

Olly

I am no expert but the mirror in mine from John Nichol is a stunner at 1/8pv, I am lead to believe he is very good a making smooth mirrors and this preforms way beyond what I had expected. A Meade SC with refractor like quilities, I didn't think you were a big fan. I feel my mistake with my 12 inch is I never let it cool properly, the few times I have used it a 3 in the morning the whole shooting match is tighter with regards to FOV. I wish I could have got a 14 secondhand but little chance here and new at the time was over 6000.

Alan

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, alan potts said:

I am no expert but the mirror in mine from John Nichol is a stunner at 1/8pv, I am lead to believe he is very good a making smooth mirrors and this preforms way beyond what I had expected. A Meade SC with refractor like quilities, I didn't think you were a big fan. I feel my mistake with my 12 inch is I never let it cool properly, the few times I have used it a 3 in the morning the whole shooting match is tighter with regards to FOV. I wish I could have got a 14 secondhand but little chance here and new at the time was over 6000.

Alan

No, I have always been a bit so-so about the SCTs I've had. They've had their virtues but haven't given me the aesthetic buzz of a really good Newt or refractor. This 14 inch has really changed my view. It's the darkness of the sky background and the small size of the stars that seem unfamiliar. One of our guests brought a 2xC11 based binocular down a few years ago and that, too, had this quality. However, both the corrector plates and the secondaries were of his own making so it wasn't a standard C11 and it was a binocular! 

All our scopes live outside but under well ventilated cover so may be less needy of extended cooldown. It's very hard to know. It's hard to distinguish between increasing cooldown and improving seeing as the land cools.

Olly

[alan potts]

9 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

No, I have always been a bit so-so about the SCTs I've had. They've had their virtues but haven't given me the aesthetic buzz of a really good Newt or refractor. This 14 inch has really changed my view. It's the darkness of the sky background and the small size of the stars that seem unfamiliar. One of our guests brought a 2xC11 based binocular down a few years ago and that, too, had this quality. However, both the corrector plates and the secondaries were of his own making so it wasn't a standard C11 and it was a binocular! 

All our scopes live outside but under well ventilated cover so may be less needy of extended cooldown. It's very hard to know. It's hard to distinguish between increasing cooldown and improving seeing as the land cools.

Olly

I agree Olly it is difficult to distinguish between the two. I n my case I was not very clever using a dark red roof cover for the observatory but here we can only use what we can get our hands on. There is no doubt that it can get hot inside there with hot sun. I know you are in southern France but I don't think you get temperatures of 44.6 like we had just over a couple of weeks back, it has topped 40 twice more since and often is in the high 30's. It also goes without saying this must have a dramatic heating effect on the land. Winter is always better than this time of year but I have always put this down to temperature as well. I think one can never labour the importance of good colimation enough either, it is only a few months back that I was using the LX, checked it gave it a small tweak and it was like a different scope. Really pleased you are enjoying the 14 inch anyway though I imagine it comes up short for those beautiful photographs you take with a F/L of 3500mm.

Alan

[ollypenrice]

2 hours ago, alan potts said:

I agree Olly it is difficult to distinguish between the two. I n my case I was not very clever using a dark red roof cover for the observatory but here we can only use what we can get our hands on. There is no doubt that it can get hot inside there with hot sun. I know you are in southern France but I don't think you get temperatures of 44.6 like we had just over a couple of weeks back, it has topped 40 twice more since and often is in the high 30's. It also goes without saying this must have a dramatic heating effect on the land. Winter is always better than this time of year but I have always put this down to temperature as well. I think one can never labour the importance of good colimation enough either, it is only a few months back that I was using the LX, checked it gave it a small tweak and it was like a different scope. Really pleased you are enjoying the 14 inch anyway though I imagine it comes up short for those beautiful photographs you take with a F/L of 3500mm.

Alan

Wow, the forties are getting seriously hot. Mid thirties is our norm for a summer afternoon during a hot spell.

Olly