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.

stargazine_ep28_banner.thumb.jpg.b94278254f44dd38f3f7ee896fe45525.jpg

Stardaze

Summer month observations

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, markse68 said:

No pictures 🤔 

Where? On that website? That's right, it's just ratings and descriptions but very informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the difference that an O-III can make on the Veil Nebula. It is no exaggeration either, from my experience. A UHC does make the nebula easier to see as well but does not have the impact that the O-III does by any means. Worth the price of the filter alone IMHO. For quite a while the Astronomik O-III was the only deep sky filter that I owned. I still find that I use O-III filters more than UHC but I do have a number of each now and an H-Beta for good measure.

Celestron Oxygeb III Narrowband filter - Eyepieces - Cloudy Nights

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, John said:

This is the difference that an O-III can make on the Veil Nebula. It is no exaggeration either, from my experience. A UHC does make the nebula easier to see as well but does not have the impact that the O-III does by any means. Worth the price of the filter alone IMHO. For quite a while the Astronomik O-III was the only deep sky filter that I owned. I still find that I use O-III filters more than UHC but I do have a number of each now and an H-Beta for good measure.

Celestron Oxygeb III Narrowband filter - Eyepieces - Cloudy Nights

If I could get the first image with my oiii or uhc I’d be a happy man 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, markse68 said:

If I could get the first image with my oiii or uhc I’d be a happy man 😉

What are you using and how is your area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well I’ve got uhc and oiii now this year with 8” dob- only tried the oiii the other night but couldn’t see anything- will try the uhc. Area is pretty bad- don’t suppose there’s many worse- SE London, though the skies have been a lot better lately due to covid 

Edited by markse68
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, markse68 said:

Well I’ve got uhc and oiii now this year with 8” dob- only tried the oiii the other night but couldn’t see anything- will try the uhc. Area is pretty bad- don’t suppose there’s many worse- SE London, though the skies have been a lot better lately due to covid 

Are both your astronomiks? Probably got another 6 weeks until prime time really so I’ll get one of them soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oiii is astronomik, uhc Baader I think. The oiii is a ccd one but I don’t think that matters 🤷‍♂️

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I observe all year round and some of my most epic sessions on DSO's have been when observing Sagittarius in mid-summer. I also struggle with the cold so I'm happy to trade off lighter skies for a more civilised temperature.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both Astronomik UHC and Oiii filters and honestly I couldn’t say which I prefer. I tend to use the UHC first as it Tends to show ‘more’ overall. Then I will switch to the Oiii to pick out ‘more detail’ in the interesting bits. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/05/2020 at 00:01, Paz said:

I observe all year round and some of my most epic sessions on DSO's have been when observing Sagittarius in mid-summer. I also struggle with the cold so I'm happy to trade off lighter skies for a more civilised temperature.

Must admit, I was sat out last night till 1.30 in shorts thinking the same. I struggle with late nights, so the winter months are more convenient in that respect. Looking forward to Sagittarius later on in the summer. I can’t see any of that region at the moment due to a large tree. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know about anyone else in the UK but May has been the clearest month on record for me since one really cold, clear February in the 1980s. I’ve been out at least for a short while with my binoculars. The main issue that it doesn’t get dark enough till after 11pm (22:00 GMT), and even then it’s bright to  the north till after midnight. Next month will be even worse!

still, around 700 variable star estimates in one month is much higher than normal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shaun VS said:

I don’t know about anyone else in the UK but May has been the clearest month on record for me since one really cold, clear February in the 1980s. I’ve been out at least for a short while with my binoculars. The main issue that it doesn’t get dark enough till after 11pm (22:00 GMT), and even then it’s bright to  the north till after midnight. Next month will be even worse!

still, around 700 variable star estimates in one month is much higher than normal.

Proves how bad pollution has become and is a little disheartening. This year is going to my first proper, consistent, year of observing. It didn't really seem to improve until nearer 1am last night, but was excellent for a brief period. Not sure I have the stamina for that again tonight 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was out last night till around 1. Great views of the moon to start with. So clear, found the Areadeus Rille near the interesting rocky formations near crater Julia's Caesar.

Then lots of clusters in Ophiuchus sweeping over to M13 and M57 ring nebula which is quite bright if small. 

Finally comet Panstarrs (again). Its been such a reliable comet. Unlike a couple of others I could mention. 😂

Might spend some time with double stars another evening. So many, for some reason.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/05/2020 at 13:56, Stu said:

I’m an ‘observe all through summer’ chap, lunar, planetary, solar, doubles all keep me going.

Pretty much my take. The sky may be brighter but there's more chance of clear nights.

The binoculars this week have had a lot of use. They have provided some smashing wide field views around midnight.

Last night I popped out and during the first five minutes looking ESE around 70° alt, a huge flash streaked across the view from S - N. I quickly pulled the binos away and saw the most magnificent white coloured meteor streak across the sky before disappearing behind the roof. One of the best I've observed. The flash was so bright it may be classed as a fireball...

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2020 at 14:08, John said:

This is the difference that an O-III can make on the Veil Nebula. It is no exaggeration either, from my experience. A UHC does make the nebula easier to see as well but does not have the impact that the O-III does by any means. Worth the price of the filter alone IMHO. For quite a while the Astronomik O-III was the only deep sky filter that I owned. I still find that I use O-III filters more than UHC but I do have a number of each now and an H-Beta for good measure.

Celestron Oxygeb III Narrowband filter - Eyepieces - Cloudy Nights

Im still dithering over £200 for an O-III @John. I could do with two EP’s next month to fill the gaps, so an astonomik on top, is pushing it. I know you said that the ES one will work to an extent but, in your opinion, how much better is the Astronomic? If it’s above 50% I’ll have to swallow it. Want to see the veil next month ideally and I’d also like to capture the owl nebula and see what effect it has on the ring too whilst they’re all in favourable spots. 
As an aside, and thinking well ahead, what filter is best for M42 later in the year, assume a UHC? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stardaze said:

Im still dithering over £200 for an O-III @John. I could do with two EP’s next month to fill the gaps, so an astonomik on top, is pushing it. I know you said that the ES one will work to an extent but, in your opinion, how much better is the Astronomic? If it’s above 50% I’ll have to swallow it. Want to see the veil next month ideally and I’d also like to capture the owl nebula and see what effect it has on the ring too whilst they’re all in favourable spots. 
As an aside, and thinking well ahead, what filter is best for M42 later in the year, assume a UHC? 

Any UHC or O-III filter will show the Veil somewhat better than it appears without a filter.

I first saw it with a 100mm refractor and the Baader UHC-S filter which is a rather "mild" UHC filter but it still showed the Veil with that scope whereas removing the filter left nothing to be seen. It still took me a while to "learn to see" this large object, even with the filter.

I've since tried lots of UHC and O-III filters and they all worked on the targets you list, and others to some beneficial extent.

I would say get a mid-priced UHC (such as the ES) and at least you will be getting some benefits. You can decide later if exploring these objects are something which really grabs you.

I ought to say that there are many nebulae that I prefer to observe without a filter as well, M42 and M57 being a couple of those. It is actually interesting to have a UHC and an O-III in the tool box (eventually) because they bring out different aspects of the objects.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, John said:

Any UHC or O-III filter will show the Veil somewhat better than it appears without a filter.

I first saw it with a 100mm refractor and the Baader UHC-S filter which is a rather "mild" UHC filter but it still showed the Veil with that scope whereas removing the filter left nothing to be seen. It still took me a while to "learn to see" this large object, even with the filter.

I've since tried lots of UHC and O-III filters and they all worked on the targets you list, and others to some beneficial extent.

I would say get a mid-priced UHC (such as the ES) and at least you will be getting some benefits. You can decide later if exploring these objects are something which really grabs you.

I ought to say that there are many nebulae that I prefer to observe without a filter as well, M42 and M57 being a couple of those. It is actually interesting to have a UHC and an O-III in the tool box (eventually) because they bring out different aspects of the objects.

 

 

 

Thanks John. I hate scrimping but when you need to build a system, there’s lots of things that start to add up initially. I think I’ll do that and get the ES UHC, I’ll then add a quality O-III when a little more comfortable again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@John one last question, have you found light pollution filters of any use?. I’m in a bortle 5 area and whilst there’s LED lanterns being installed gradually, there’s still a lot of sodium around?

Edited by Stardaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stardaze said:

Thanks John. I hate scrimping but when you need to build a system, there’s lots of things that start to add up initially. I think I’ll do that and get the ES UHC, I’ll then add a quality O-III when a little more comfortable again.

It took me many years before I ever owned a filter of any type to use on deep sky objects :rolleyes2:

Building stuff up gradually is definitely the way to go. These objects will be there year, after year, after year so there is no hurry :smiley:

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

@John one last question, have you found light pollution filters of any use?. I’m in a bortle 5 area and whilst there’s LED lanterns being installed gradually, there’s still a lot of sodium around?

I've tried a few and some broadband filters (eg: Orion Skyglow) but found that they made little or no impact, at least for me.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, John said:

I've tried a few and some broadband filters (eg: Orion Skyglow) but found that they made little or no impact, at least for me.

 

 

That Orion one was the ‘must have’ in a write up I read somewhere - interesting. You do build up stuff in time, for sure. I’ve nearly got most of what I think I need for the year ahead. There’s always something though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

That Orion one was the ‘must have’ in a write up I read somewhere - interesting. You do build up stuff in time, for sure. I’ve nearly got most of what I think I need for the year ahead. There’s always something though...

There are different classes of filter. It's worth finding out a bit more about which filters fall into which class and the impact that they have on various types of target. This is worth a read:

https://astronomy.com/-/media/import/files/pdf/8/c/7/0805_nebula_filters.pdf

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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