Tips for watching Andromeda galaxy

[Baldor]

Hello everyone! I'm using a telescope for a few months till now and I want to try some new objects. I know that a few galaxies and nebulas can be seen kinda good with a beginner telescope, so I want to try it on the Andromeda galaxy or another object you can tell me about. I'll be happy if someone can give me some advices about it, because the internet doesn't help me much every time. Thanks to all and sorry if I made mistakes while typing, my English isn't really good. 
Telescope: Bresser National Geographic 114/900 AZ 
Eyepieces: SR4mm, H9mm, H25mm, 1.5X Erecting Eyepiece, Barlow Lens 3X

Edited October 19, 2020 by Baldor
Adding info for the telescope

[Waddensky]

Hi! Lots of great things to see with that telescope, even galaxies and nebulae. The Andromeda Galaxy is lovely but doesn't show much detail. Use the least magnification you can (the 25 mm eyepiece in your case). Other galaxies that are well worth a look are M81 and M82 (a nice pair but can be a bit difficult to find). If your location is dark enough, M51 is a very interesting target.

If you wait a few weeks (or get up early), the Orion Nebula (M42) is always wonderful to look at. Globular clusters are also nice targets, this time of year M2 and M15 are high up in the evening. Cruise around the Milky Way in Cassiopeia and Cygnus, lots of open clusters to 'discover'. Don't skip the Double Cluster in Perseus.

And of course, there is Mars! Good luck!

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

For the Andromeda Galaxy, I would first try to locate it using binoculars, as it is a huge structure in the sky. With a telescope of your focal length, even the 25x  gives you 36x magnification, which given the Huygens design of the eyepiece is going to give a 45 arcminute true field of view (0.75 degree). The galaxy is a few degrees across, so you can only see the core. Whatever you do, do not up the magnification by inserting Barlows or the 9 and 4 mm eyepieces. Those make matters worse for most deep sky objects. Personally, I would replace the Huygens eyepieces with equivalent Plossl eyepieces like this one:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p3960_TS-Optics-1-25--Ploessl-Eyepiece---25-mm-focal-length--50--apparent-field-of-view.html

Which will double your field of view, and don't cost very much

[John]

Hello,

Your English seems good to me and welcome to the forum 😀

Messier 31 / The Andromeda Galaxy is a large object so you want to use your lowest power eyepiece. That is the 25mm. Don't use the barlow lens.

This is how to find the Andromeda Galaxy:

The constellation marked 1 is Cassiopeia and the one marked 2 is Pegasus. You can "star hop" to the galaxy from either of those.

 

Edited October 19, 2020 by John

[Baldor]

Thanks for all the help people, I'm pretty thankful for all the support. Thanks once again! 

[bomberbaz]

Download and use this programme to help you with deciding upon things to look at. It is free and very good for planning things. All the objects mentioned above can be found in it plus many 1000's more

http://stellarium.org/en_GB/

Edited October 19, 2020 by bomberbaz

[Alan64]

Baldor, the galaxy in Andromeda is at least six full-Moons wide...

Therefore, the lowest power possible among telescopes is required to view it in its entirety, even through a pair of binoculars, and the lowest power of all with the eyes only.  The lowest power possible with your 114/900 is 28x, and with a 32mm Plossl; for example...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astro-essentials-eyepieces/astro-essentials-super-plossl-eyepiece.html

Not a bad view at all, and in almost encompassing the galaxy.  Even the galaxy's satellite-galaxies, M32 and M110, are visible within the view.  I would strongly suggest getting a 32mm Plossl.

Now, if you had the shorter 114/500 Newtonian, the 32mm would offer this wide a view of the galaxy...

As you can see, the galaxy is almost seen in its entirety, but your longer telescope is better for most objects in the sky; the planets and the majority of deep-sky objects, which are smaller and much smaller than the galaxy in Andromeda.

Incidentally, I got a telescope primarily and specifically to view the galaxy in Andromeda in its entirety, a 100/400 Newtonian...

This will be my own view of the galaxy when I get around to observing it with my 32mm Plossl(I haven't yet)...

As you can see, that little star-box can show the entire galaxy.  That 100/400 is the same as this one...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage/skywatcher-heritage-100p-tabletop-dobsonian.html

All in all, that should help you understand the nature of long-tube and short-tube refractors and Newtonians a bit better. 

Now, I'm not suggesting that you should've gotten a 114/500 or a 100/400 instead of the 114/900, for the short-tube refractors and Newtonians are not as observationally versatile as your own.  I would never suggest or recommend a short-tube refractor or Newtonian as a first and only telescope, but I would the one that you already have.  So, in my opinion, you made the best choice after all.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Alan64

[John]

When I was starting out I had a much less capable scope than yours - a 60mm refractor. Even with that I was able to find and observe a number of deep sky objects including the Orion Nebula, the lovely double cluster in Perseus, the great globular cluster in Hercules Messier 13, The Andromeda Galaxy (well it's core anyway). The first galaxies I managed to find with that scope were Messier 81 and 82 in Ursa Major. These are close together in the sky and with a low power eyepiece (the 25mm again in your case) you should be able to see both of them side by side in the view. 

So your scope can see lots of these objects but the trick is, as you have probably realised by now, is finding these targets in the sky and for a non-GOTO equipped scope this where star hopping comes into play. I provided a star hopping chart earlier for the Andromeda Galaxy. Here is one for the Messier 81 & 81 pair of galaxies. Do make sure that your finder scope is accurately aligned with your main scope - that is important for star hopping to be successful:

 

There is a good book called "Turn Left at Orion" that shows you how to find lots of objects with a small scope. Worth getting if you can find it.

 

[Baldor]

23 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

Download and use this programme to help you with deciding upon things to look at. It is free and very good for planning things. All the objects mentioned above can be found in it plus many 1000's more

http://stellarium.org/en_GB/

Thanks for the advice, I'm already using it and it helps a lot. 

[Baldor]

15 hours ago, Alan64 said:

Baldor, the galaxy in Andromeda is at least six full-Moons wide...

Therefore, the lowest power possible among telescopes is required to view it in its entirety, even through a pair of binoculars, and the lowest power of all with the eyes only.  The lowest power possible with your 114/900 is 28x, and with a 32mm Plossl; for example...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astro-essentials-eyepieces/astro-essentials-super-plossl-eyepiece.html

Not a bad view at all, and in almost encompassing the galaxy.  Even the galaxy's satellite-galaxies, M32 and M110, are visible within the view.  I would strongly suggest getting a 32mm Plossl.

Now, if you had the shorter 114/500 Newtonian, the 32mm would offer this wide a view of the galaxy...

As you can see, the galaxy is almost seen in its entirety, but your longer telescope is better for most objects in the sky; the planets and the majority of deep-sky objects, which are smaller and much smaller than the galaxy in Andromeda.

Incidentally, I got a telescope primarily and specifically to view the galaxy in Andromeda in its entirety, a 100/400 Newtonian...

This will be my own view of the galaxy when I get around to observing it with my 32mm Plossl(I haven't yet)...

As you can see, that little star-box can show the entire galaxy.  That 100/400 is the same as this one...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage/skywatcher-heritage-100p-tabletop-dobsonian.html

All in all, that should help you understand the nature of long-tube and short-tube refractors and Newtonians a bit better. 

Now, I'm not suggesting that you should've gotten a 114/500 or a 100/400 instead of the 114/900, for the short-tube refractors and Newtonians are not as observationally versatile as your own.  I would never suggest or recommend a short-tube refractor or Newtonian as a first and only telescope, but I would the one that you already have.  So, in my opinion, you made the best choice after all.

Thank you! Many people told me about the Plossls so in future I'll try to buy some. Thanks for the time you spent and clear skies! 

[Alan64]

On 20/10/2020 at 13:49, Baldor said:

Thank you! Many people told me about the Plossls so in future I'll try to buy some. Thanks for the time you spent and clear skies! 

At one point, a few decades ago, Plossls were considered to be premium eyepieces.  They still are to an extent, but currently they are among the most economical eyepieces you can buy.  They are now regarded as the minimum standard in performance-eyepieces.  Some beginner, entry-level kits include Plossls even, albeit the somewhat pricier kits.

Plossls perform well with practically every telescope, specifically the short-tube Newtonians which are the most demanding and picky as to the eyepieces introduced to them.  However, there is a catch: eye-relief, the distance that you have to hold your eye up to the eye-lens of an eyepiece to see the full field-of-view.  Plossls shorter than 9mm have rather tight eye-relief(6mm, 5mm, 4mm), whereby you almost have to touch the eyepiece with the eyeball itself to see the full view.  And to make matters worse, those shorter eyepieces are for the higher powers. 

One solution is to barlow one of the longer Plossls.  With a 3x-barlow combined with a 12mm Plossl, you get an effective, simulated 4mm; with a 2x-barlow and a 9mm Plossl, a 4.5mm.  With your telescope, that translates into powers of 225x and 200x, respectively.  You do retain the longer eye-relief of the longer eyepieces when barlowing them.  Sometimes the eye-relief is greater than that even when barlowing.  But know that the Newtonian's collimation must be spot-on to make use of the higher powers.  Fortunately, with your telescope at f/8, collimation is easier, than at f/5 or f/4.  

Edited October 22, 2020 by Alan64

[Jm1973]

On 19/10/2020 at 16:12, Waddensky said:

Hi! Lots of great things to see with that telescope, even galaxies and nebulae. The Andromeda Galaxy is lovely but doesn't show much detail. Use the least magnification you can (the 25 mm eyepiece in your case). Other galaxies that are well worth a look are M81 and M82 (a nice pair but can be a bit difficult to find). If your location is dark enough, M51 is a very interesting target.

If you wait a few weeks (or get up early), the Orion Nebula (M42) is always wonderful to look at. Globular clusters are also nice targets, this time of year M2 and M15 are high up in the evening. Cruise around the Milky Way in Cassiopeia and Cygnus, lots of open clusters to 'discover'. Don't skip the Double Cluster in Perseus.

And of course, there is Mars! Good luck!

Last night was completely cloudy so I went to bed early. I awoke around 4am with toothache, and went downstairs to look for painkillers.

After taking them I went out the back garden to check the skies and it was totally clear, and Orion was right overhead. It was so clear I could just about see the great nebula with the naked eye.

I would have got the telescope out but was worried I'd wake the missus and littleun.

Tonight I am going to set my alarm for 3:30 on the off-chance the skies are clear, and if they are I'll be trying to photograph the Great Orion Nebula. 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Jm1973

[Capt Slog]

I went out last night at around midnight after looking through the window and seeing that it had finally cleared. I'd been out to check several times since 6pm to find broken cloud.

So, midnight saw me dressed in lots of clothes and putting out the telescope.  I 'warmed up' by having a look at Pleiades, and then started to search.  I managed to find the Andromeda Galaxy*, but it was tricky to do (for me) being directly overhead. ( I suffer from a bit of vertigo or something, and looking straight up, or worse still, bending to look upside-down into a finder scope makes me nauseous.) 

*I should say, I THINK I found M31, it was around about the right place, and looked about what I'd seen in pictures, albeit not anywhere as detailed.  I can't say I saw much more than the core of it, it took a bit of imagination and averted viewing to see any elongation.  I know my sky is very light polluted, I have trouble seeing the milky way most of the time, and last night was no exception.  If I didn't see M31, was there something else near that patch of sky that i could have been looking?  (150 f700, 20mm ep)

I regarded my night as a success, and was in bed at 1 am, happy with what I'd seen.

[Waddensky]

21 hours ago, Jm1973 said:

It was so clear I could just about see the great nebula with the naked eye

Congratulations! Seeing M42 with the naked eye is awesome. Once you recognise this little hazy patch you'll see it every time you look at the constellation.

[John]

2 hours ago, Capt Slog said:

I went out last night at around midnight after looking through the window and seeing that it had finally cleared. I'd been out to check several times since 6pm to find broken cloud.

So, midnight saw me dressed in lots of clothes and putting out the telescope.  I 'warmed up' by having a look at Pleiades, and then started to search.  I managed to find the Andromeda Galaxy*, but it was tricky to do (for me) being directly overhead. ( I suffer from a bit of vertigo or something, and looking straight up, or worse still, bending to look upside-down into a finder scope makes me nauseous.) 

*I should say, I THINK I found M31, it was around about the right place, and looked about what I'd seen in pictures, albeit not anywhere as detailed.  I can't say I saw much more than the core of it, it took a bit of imagination and averted viewing to see any elongation.  I know my sky is very light polluted, I have trouble seeing the milky way most of the time, and last night was no exception.  If I didn't see M31, was there something else near that patch of sky that i could have been looking?  (150 f700, 20mm ep)

I regarded my night as a success, and was in bed at 1 am, happy with what I'd seen.

Sounds like M31 to me.

The eliptical fuzzy core is what we see unless the skies are really dark and transparent in which case it is possible to trace the galaxy further out from the core. In a low power field of view you should also see the small condensed fuzzy satellite galaxy of M32 and a little further out on the other side of M31, the much fainter small oval smudge of M110.  Worth looking for when you next have a go at this object 

Messier 81 and 82 in Ursa Major are well worth checking out as well.

 

[Tiny Clanger]

2 hours ago, Capt Slog said:

I went out last night at around midnight after looking through the window and seeing that it had finally cleared. I'd been out to check several times since 6pm to find broken cloud.

So, midnight saw me dressed in lots of clothes and putting out the telescope.  I 'warmed up' by having a look at Pleiades, and then started to search.  I managed to find the Andromeda Galaxy*, but it was tricky to do (for me) being directly overhead. ( I suffer from a bit of vertigo or something, and looking straight up, or worse still, bending to look upside-down into a finder scope makes me nauseous.) 

*I should say, I THINK I found M31, it was around about the right place, and looked about what I'd seen in pictures, albeit not anywhere as detailed.  I can't say I saw much more than the core of it, it took a bit of imagination and averted viewing to see any elongation.  I know my sky is very light polluted, I have trouble seeing the milky way most of the time, and last night was no exception.  If I didn't see M31, was there something else near that patch of sky that i could have been looking?  (150 f700, 20mm ep)

I regarded my night as a success, and was in bed at 1 am, happy with what I'd seen.

Sounds like M31 to me .

I managed to see it with the naked eye purely by accident back on August 12th when I took a camping mattress into my suburban garden and settled down to watch for Perseid meteors in clear patches between the ragged clouds that were scudding overhead. After about an hour of staring at the sky (and seeing no meteors) a fuzzy patch attracted my averted-sight attention, and it was in the right place for M31 ( not as high overhead then as it is now) . I had the binoculars outside with me , and saw the fuzzy patch was real rather than some incipient eye disease , so carried the 150mm dob. outside. to try for a telescopic view.

However, trying to point the thing at the correct spot using the stock red dot finder when I couldn't see M31 by looking straight at it, my attempts to line up the dot were doomed to failure (the widest ep I had at the time was the stock 25mm that comes with skywatcher scopes) I tried estimating distance from the right hand V of Cassiopeia, but failed with that too . The frustration of that was what put a RACI optical finder and a 32mm plossl on my shopping list.

I didn't manage to see a single meteor that night, the clouds rolled in and I fell asleep in the garden !

[Pixies]

6 hours ago, Capt Slog said:

( I suffer from a bit of vertigo or something, and looking straight up, or worse still, bending to look upside-down into a finder scope makes me nauseous.) 

Ever thought of a RACI finder?

[Capt Slog]

4 hours ago, Pixies said:

Ever thought of a RACI finder?

Yes.  It did occur to me that such a thing might be very useful, but being very new to the game I didn't realise that it existed  😀  ( I had to Google RACI finder).  I actually thought about making one.

Are they any good though?  Is not looking toward the bit if sky you're trying to 'find' in, a disadvantage?  Probably better than standing up straight and falling on your bum though.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Capt Slog

[John]

28 minutes ago, Capt Slog said:

Yes.  It did occur to me that such a thing might be very useful, but being very new to the game I didn't realise that it existed  😀  ( I had to Google RACI finder).  I actually thought about making one.

Are they any good though?  Is not looking toward the bit if sky you're trying to 'find' in, a disadvantage?  Probably better than standing up straight and falling on your bum though.

This recent thread shows how popular RACI optical finders are. Often combined with an illiuminated reticule finder:

 

[hoss]

Hello Baldor

Yes, I have the same desire as you.

First of all, visually in a telescope the Andromeda galaxy will look nothing like a photo graphic image.  The photo graphic images are either stacked images or a long exposure in fast (short focal length) telescopes.

Secondly, the Andromeda galaxy occupies a bit more than 3 degrees of arc in the night sky. 

In my 11 inch Schmitt Cassegrain at F10, all I see is a bit of white fuzzy light and I can make out no structure at all.

When I use an optical reducer to get F5 it is not much better.  But I am not at a very dark observing site.

The best I have seen Andromeda is with a third generation  night vision scope with attached magnifier. I was able to see the entire structure of Andromeda what it apeared as an oval dim which fuzzy object. It had  the rough shape as seen on photos, but it was very small and had no detail.

Here is what it comes down to.

Andromeda like all nebula are very dim. Some nebula occupy a large area in the sky, such as the North American nebula and Andromeda. Some occupy only a few arc seconds such as M57.

Large diffuse nebula require low power.  But a large aperture with a lot of light gathering capability is desirable to get more light to your eyes.

The problem is that a larger aperture results in a longer focal length which will reduce the true field of view of the telescope.

From my rough calculations, your maximum field of view with your telescope using your 25 mm eyepiece is about 1.4 degrees of true field of view. ( 900mm f.l., 25 mm e.p.=36x. I assume your eyepiece has a 50 degree apparent field of view, 50/36=1.38 actual field of view of the night sky.)

To see the entire Andromeda Galaxy requires a telescope with a short focal length, about 500 mm or so. These are referred to as fast telescopes, meaning that they have a small aperture to focal length ratio.

Now your telescope would need to have about a 500 mm focal length to be able to get  a wide enough view on low power.

 

I hope that helps.