Light Pollution

[Goldfinger]

Hello Everyone 

First I want to say this is a great forum and am pleased with all the help I've received with my questions.

THANKS!!!!

But in my situation this should have been the first question I posed when I joined.

I live downtown in a major city with little ability to get away due to medical reasons and the fact I no longer drive. The building I live in is 16 stories high with  a rooftop patio. There's a ring of lights around the patio that automatically comes on as it becomes dark.

So there's two issues of light pollution..one from being downtown in a major city and the lighting in the immediate area on the patio.

Would you even advise me to purchase a telescope in such circumstances?  I was thinking perhaps a 6" Celestron or a 10" Dobsonian as both would fit my budget.

 I don't expect much but would like to observe the moon, the planets and perhaps some stars and galaxies.

Are there any members here that have similar circumstances? Any opinions would be welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nik271]

43 minutes ago, Goldfinger said:

Hello Everyone 

First I want to say this is a great forum and am pleased with all the help I've received with my questions.

THANKS!!!!

But in my situation this should have been the first question I posed when I joined.

I live downtown in a major city with little ability to get away due to medical reasons and the fact I no longer drive. The building I live in is 16 stories high with  a rooftop patio. There's a ring of lights around the patio that automatically comes on as it becomes dark.

So there's two issues of light pollution..one from being downtown in a major city and the lighting in the immediate area on the patio.

Would you even advise me to purchase a telescope in such circumstances?  I was thinking perhaps a 6" Celestron or a 10" Dobsonian as both would fit my budget.

 I don't expect much but would like to observe the moon, the planets and perhaps some stars and galaxies.

Are there any members here that have similar circumstances? Any opinions would be welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your light pollution situation makes observing faint DSOs impractical but fortunately there are other choices to observe.  You are right to focus on planets, perhaps also double stars as  these are very resistant to light pollution. I think a Dob will not work for you, best get a good quality refractor or a Mak on an alt az go to mount. This  will be easy to transport, quick to set up and the go to will make finding objects easier in the light polluted sky.

[Peter_D]

Hi,

I have two Led street lamps right next to my garden as well as living in a bottle 6 area. I use parasols in the winter to block out the local glare from them (in summer, foliage blocks out most of the light, thankfully).

I have  a couple of SCTs: a non-Goto Meade 8 inch for Moon, planets, brighter DSOs I can easily find and a 6 inch Celestron 6SE with Goto for everything else. I've started using the 6SE a lot more since I got a planetary camera because it's allowed me to dip my toes into EAA (Electronically Assisted Astronomy - a halfway house between visual and long exposure Astro-photography). I miss the aperture sometimes but the 6 inch is well suited to the SE mount and has been a good performer for me.

Peter

[Jiggy 67]

I agree with what’s been said, a decent refractor will enable you to see a lot. As mentioned double stars are good in light polluted skies and there are hundreds of them to see, many of them very very beautiful. Some of the brighter planetary nebulae should work as well and the planets will be fine. I would recommend a GoTo mount though as Star hopping can be challenging in light polluted skies 

[bottletopburly]

Do you know where the fuse box is lols, maybe your landlord could adjust lighting to be more ambient ,maybe low level lighting and turning outer lighting off after a certain time ,or get a few neigbours in on it to back you up .

[Basementboy]

I'm in a very similar situation, and although still a relative newcomer to this pursuit – so take what I say with a big grain of salt – I have learned a few things you might find useful.

I live in a relatively central bit of London, classified as Bortle-9 (the worst of all Bortles) for light pollution, and to make matters worse the roof of my building is only three storeys high, meaning I am surrounded by the light of nearby apartment blocks, some of which glare all night long. (No patio lights, at least!)

To start with the good news: the planets are so bright that they shine right through the light pollution. (In fact the Moon is sometimes so bright that it becomes, after the city glow and nearby lights, the third source of light pollution, washing out the whole sky.) You'll get breathtaking views of the Moon easily. Mars is the next closest object, but considered tricky to get much detail out of – but as long as you don't expect too much (no Martians!) you'll be able to see it as an obvious disc or (with some imagination) even a sphere, and possibly identify the polar caps: though think of that as an future observing goal rather than an immediate possibility. You should also be able to see detail on Jupiter (banding) and Saturn (ie the rings, and maybe the Cassini gap between them) – although unfortunately they're below the horizon (at least at London's latitude) right now, and only rise a few degrees above the horizon this summer.

This raises another big problem with city light pollution: it obliterates the sky anywhere near the horizon. So your best bet is to look higher up ... which is often where the planets are not. What is up there? Among other things, galaxies. But here's the bad news:

Galaxies (and nebulas) are tough in light pollution. They're faint. Normally the solution with faint things is to get a telescope with a bigger aperture, to collect more light – but in major cities, more light also means more light pollution. People have told me that anything above 6"/150mm can be a problem in this regard, with the tradeoff between extra light and extra light pollution becoming no longer worthwhile. If your city is very bright, you'll be very lucky to see galaxies as anything other than a very faint smudge, I'm sad to report. As for nebulas, the Orion nebula, at least, is quite bright so you'll be able to enjoy seeing it (and the "trapezium" of 4 stars at its heart), but nowhere near as well as you would in darker skies. 

The other very annoying thing about trying to find faint objects in light pollution is that even locating where they SHOULD be is hard, because the sky is so washed out that it's difficult to navigate. (You can get around this by using a Go-To mount, so at least you'll be 100% sure that you can't see that galaxy.)

So what CAN you see? 

-Star clusters. These are things like the Pleiades or the Beehive: sparkling groups of neighbouring stars, which can look very beautiful and are relatively easy to find.

-Globular clusters. Unlike other DSOs, these faint fuzzies (tens or even hundreds of thousands of stars in a tight ball) are comparatively bright, and visible as glowing fuzzballs. (With good telescopes you can start to resolve individual stars.)

-Double stars. Personally I've never been too excited by double stars, although they are beautiful in their own right (different colours etc) and a nice "challenge" to split ... though ultimately you're still only seeing two points of light instead of one.  

Long preamble leading up to your question about what telescope to get:

Caveat: I don't have an answer. Every telescope does some things well and others not so well. But you can narrow it down a bit .......

To start with, one thing that DOES help (at least a bit) in light polluted skies is contrast: the difference between dark sky and light object. Refractors give excellent contrast. But big refractors also produce some colour distortion ("chromatic aberration" or CA, visible as anything from a purple fringe that I think looks fine or even appealing, to a more bizarre, almost kaleidoscopic wrongness on very bright objects like the moon ... maybe this is why people used to say it was made of green cheese?) You can avoid CA – and get better contrast, too, theoretically improving views through light pollution – by purchasing an apochromatic refractor, but they're expensive. As in, exponentially more expensive per millimetre of aperture. 

Newtonians/Dobsonians are a much cheaper way to get more aperture, but we know that more aperture can be somewhat counterproductive in bad light pollution. And the contrast isn't as good. So while normally they are a terrific choice – the Heritage 150 tabletop Dob gets great reviews – I think they're less of a winner in very bright cities. 

Maksutovs are great at planets and the moon. So if you want to prioritise them, a Mak is a good choice. The downside is that it's more difficult to navigate with Maks because their long focal length means you get a very narrow field of view, which means it can sometimes be hard to know for sure which specific bit of sky you're actually looking at, extremely annoying when the sky is light and you can't identify star landmarks and you're just lost up there. (But again, a Go-To mount will solve this problem. Or get a good finderscope, eg a 9x50 ... a simple RDF won't cut it.) Maks will also make some objects like globular clusters look less bright, but that's less of a problem with moon+planets because they're already so bright to begin with. They also aren't as good on wide star clusters (Pleiades etc) because they're quite narrow and not as "contrasty" as refractors. Lastly, as I'm sure you know, they need to cool down for a while to work best.

SCTs I've never used, but they're a similar design to Maks, so would, I imagine, have similar advantages and disadvantages for visual observation under light pollution.

So, again, long way to get to your original question – what telescope should you get for fighting through light pollution?

Well, a good bet is a Mak (or SCT) to focus on what you CAN see well through light pollution: the moon and planets. The Skymax 127 is one option I've tried and liked. Just bear in mind that the Moon and planets aren't always visible (and some planets stay hidden for months) and that navigation can be a little difficult without Go-To and that they require some cooldown time.

Or get a similarly sized refractor (eg the Startravel 120, even the bigger Altair Starwave 150 if you can handle its huge size) to get nice wide views of star clusters, split doubles a little more easily and maybe stand a tiny bit better chance of resolving faint fuzzies. Just bear in mind that views of moon and planets won't be quite as good as Maks, and brighter objects like planets can have some problems with colour and sharpness. (If you have lots of money you could get a 6" apochromatic refractor for the "best of both worlds", but these can be thousands of pounds, before you even start buying accessories like eyepiece upgrades etc – and you WILL buy accessories.)

Regardless, either get a Go-To mount or a good finderscope that actually magnifies (at least 6x30, recommend 9x50) so that you can navigate the haze.

Three other points:

1. Light pollution filters are considered a bit of a waste of money because they are designed to block out the light from sodium streetlights, but many cities now use LED streetlamps, as indeed do most car headlights, apartment building lights – and I would imagine your automatic patio lights, too. A filter might help reduce the skyglow a little bit but don't expect much.

2. You'll find plenty of nice things to see if you keep your expectations realistic – which it sounds like you are, so that's great.

3. Wear a hood.

Good luck,

Chris

 

[RT65CB-SWL]

19 hours ago, Goldfinger said:

Hello Everyone 

First I want to say this is a great forum and am pleased with all the help I've received with my questions.

THANKS!!!!

But in my situation this should have been the first question I posed when I joined.

I live downtown in a major city with little ability to get away due to medical reasons and the fact I no longer drive. The building I live in is 16 stories high with  a rooftop patio. There's a ring of lights around the patio that automatically comes on as it becomes dark.

So there's two issues of light pollution..one from being downtown in a major city and the lighting in the immediate area on the patio.

Would you even advise me to purchase a telescope in such circumstances?  I was thinking perhaps a 6" Celestron or a 10" Dobsonian as both would fit my budget.

 I don't expect much but would like to observe the moon, the planets and perhaps some stars and galaxies.

Are there any members here that have similar circumstances? Any opinions would be welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I suspect the ring of lights is to protect the building from low flying aircraft or let people know where the edge is. Sixteen storeys high is a long way up or a long way down.

Depending on what storey/floor you live on to reach the rooftop patio maybe a bit of a chore if you have a health condition and have to setup a 6" or 10" 'Newtonian'/'Dobsonian'... (though the 6" maybe not so much)... and what if the elevator is out of use due to planned maintenance, etc.?

I live in a small apartment build, [two storeys/floors... ground and first floor] and I use either a 70mm refractor, 105mm Mak., or a 6" SCT and take up very little storage space when not in use. All are manageable and easy setup on my own. I think anything bigger than an 8" or 9.25 SCT you would need at least two people to attach it to a suitable mount. As an alternative, have you thought about or considered a pair of binoculars and monopod or tripod?  

BTW - the 105mm Mak., is a 're-modded' Meade ETX105.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Philip R

[Tiny Clanger]

23 hours ago, Goldfinger said:

Hello Everyone 

First I want to say this is a great forum and am pleased with all the help I've received with my questions.

THANKS!!!!

But in my situation this should have been the first question I posed when I joined.

I live downtown in a major city with little ability to get away due to medical reasons and the fact I no longer drive. The building I live in is 16 stories high with  a rooftop patio. There's a ring of lights around the patio that automatically comes on as it becomes dark.

So there's two issues of light pollution..one from being downtown in a major city and the lighting in the immediate area on the patio.

Would you even advise me to purchase a telescope in such circumstances?  I was thinking perhaps a 6" Celestron or a 10" Dobsonian as both would fit my budget.

 I don't expect much but would like to observe the moon, the planets and perhaps some stars and galaxies.

Are there any members here that have similar circumstances? Any opinions would be welcome.

 

OK, unlike (the no longer aptly named )Basementboy, I've never observed from my rooftop (I'd fall off, it slopes !) , and I'm lucky enough to be right out on the edge of a small city, where light pollution is not as awful as it could be , but still  Bortle 6 skies , far from ideal.

You will  absolutely be able to study the Moon, it is bright enough to even be visible in the daytime, so light pollution at night won't be a problem. Most of the planets will be visible, when their, and the Earth's orbits have them well placed . I had major difficulty at first seeing Uranus,  and have not managed to see Neptune yet (but I shall ... ) both are comparatively faint , distant , and challenging in polluted skies., but the other planets are bright enough to be seen easily, even without a telescope .  There are bright star clusters and double stars you will be able to see , but many nebulae and galaxies are simply too faint to distinguish from the bright light polluted city sky.

Should you buy a telescope ?  That's a choice only you can make . If you are interested, and sustain your interest, and can live with the limitations of your location, it may be worthwhile for you. I'd suggest if you haven't done so already, you should spend some evenings up on the roof looking with just the naked eye, or possibly some binoculars if you have some . After half an hour or so your eyes adapt to the relative darkness and you may see more than you expected. If that whets your appetite, maybe a telescope would  be a good investment. A star map , either printed , or a planisphere, or a 'phone app will help you find your way around the sky.

If you decide you would like to buy a telescope, consider how easy it will be to get to the roof : a 10" dobsonian or a 6" SCT  is a heavy thing to carry around, I just checked and a 6" Celestron SCT is reputedly about 30lbs , and I know (because I have discounted being able to carry one myself , even in two pieces) that a 10" dobsdonian is over double that , e,g, https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-10-dobsonian-telescope.html

If your health issues make carrying large awkward objects a challenge, a 'scope like either of those may not get used often, and unless you have plenty of storage space I'd say no full sized dob. would work for you. I'll agree with several  of the previous posters , a refractor on a simple alt az mount would be easy to store, convenient to carry to the roof and quick to set up, and would give you great views of the Moon, the easier planets,  and some brighter other objects.

Heather

Edited May 17, 2021 by Tiny Clanger
improving the sense .... a bit .

[KP82]

9 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

If you decide you would like to buy a telescope, consider how easy it will be to get to the roof : a 10" dobsonian or a 6" SCT  is a heavy thing to carry around, I just checked and a 6" Celestron SCT is reputedly about 30lbs , and I know (because I have discounted being able to carry one myself , even in two pieces) that a 10" dobsdonian is over double that , e,g, https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-10-dobsonian-telescope.html

While a 10" dob could be a chore to take up to the rooftop, I wouldn't dismiss a 6" SCT/Mak so quickly. The 30lbs you saw was most likely the figure for the whole setup including the mount. The OP can get a 6" OTA on its own and pair that with an alt-az mount.

[Tiny Clanger]

2 hours ago, KP82 said:

While a 10" dob could be a chore to take up to the rooftop, I wouldn't dismiss a 6" SCT/Mak so quickly. The 30lbs you saw was most likely the figure for the whole setup including the mount. The OP can get a 6" OTA on its own and pair that with an alt-az mount.

I confess to knowing nothing about Celestron telescopes, and the OP did not give detail of what model / type , so I just did an online search for "6" Celestron weight", and that was what came up . I suspect from their message that they will be thinking of buying buying a whole ready-made package

I know that a person with medical  challenges might even struggle to carry, for example, my 127mm  mak on an AZ5 mount, which (without a sturdy tripod, which obviously needs to be added) weighs over 6.5kg (14lbs + ) which is not particularly heavy for a fit young person to shift, but may be for the OP. Apparently a skywatcher 150 mak OTA alone comes in at 6.3kg .

Perhaps a 100mm ish mak , which would be lighter, require a lighter mount, a lighter tripod ,and be far easier to move around would be an alternative to a refractor, especially as it would be compact, but for all round, general  purpose 'see a bit of everything'  I think a refractor would be more forgiving

Heather

[AstroMuni]

On 16/05/2021 at 15:11, Goldfinger said:

I live downtown in a major city with little ability to get away due to medical reasons and the fact I no longer drive. The building I live in is 16 stories high with  a rooftop patio. There's a ring of lights around the patio that automatically comes on as it becomes dark

Hi, As you are quite high up you should be able to avoid a bit of the light pollution if you are looking at objects that are high up in the sky rather than closer to horizon. If you dont wish to take the plunge directly by investing in a telescope then you have a couple of options - join a local astronomy club and perhaps they can let you borrow their equipment (a lot of clubs have that facility) or buy a decent but inexpensive 50x10 binoculars and take a look at the skies. If you have a DSLR then thats another good one to try out - get a good tripod and start taking pictures of the sky. You can also try this with your phone camera! 🙂

Good luck.

Edited May 17, 2021 by AstroMuni

[Goldfinger]

Thanks Everyone. 

You've all been a big help and I really appreciate it. A BIG KUDOS TOO ALL.!!!!!

It's not just a matter of if I buy a telescope anymore. I do plan on it so it's a matter of when. I just have to decide what type.

Here's a question I'd like to pose. What are the odds of finding a star, galaxy, nebula without even looking for it? By that I mean just aiming the telescope anywhere in the sky and finding-seeing something without knowing what it is? I would guess the answer would partially  depend on how powerful your telescope is. I guess one might call this "blind searching".

So even if the light pollution is terrible and I can't visually see anything in the sky, could I still find stars, galaxies and nebula even if I don't know what they are?

 

 

[Dark Vader]

I spend hours looking at things in the night sky without knowing what I am seeing 😂 I will just pop in a low powered eyepiece and pan around. Should I spot anything I'll hold my phone up to that area of the sky and try to identify it with Sky Safari. Then try and find it again next time out. Spent 18 months with binoculars doing just that.

The planets are less affected by light pollution and in a couple of months Jupiter and Saturn will be up in the evening. 

Galaxies and nebulae will be trickier the worse the light pollution gets but you should still see plenty of stars, doubles, and not forgetting the moon. You'll see that no matter how light polluted it gets, and it's a thing of beauty.

Andy 

[Goldfinger]

40 minutes ago, Dark Vader said:

I spend hours looking at things in the night sky without knowing what I am seeing 😂 I will just pop in a low powered eyepiece and pan around. Should I spot anything I'll hold my phone up to that area of the sky and try to identify it with Sky Safari. Then try and find it again next time out. Spent 18 months with binoculars doing just that.

The planets are less affected by light pollution and in a couple of months Jupiter and Saturn will be up in the evening. 

Galaxies and nebulae will be trickier the worse the light pollution gets but you should still see plenty of stars, doubles, and not forgetting the moon. You'll see that no matter how light polluted it gets, and it's a thing of beauty.

Andy 

Love the username.😅

That method seems  more educational then having a go-to system where everything is identified for you. Under your method, it seems like you would actually learn more.

Being a total newbie, that will probably be my primary method of searching in spite of the fact I plan to purchasing a go-to system.

Thanks

Edited May 19, 2021 by Goldfinger

[Pixies]

Finding stuff 'by hand' is half the fun of it - for me. I know that opinion isn't shared with everyone, and with obvious reasons. Especially if you suffer from light pollution, you will have a lack of guide stars to help you find your way around.

Do you know what your sky quality is, where you are? You can try using https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/ to get that info. Sorry of this has been asked before.

As for randomly finding galaxies... there are parts of the sky, around Virgo/Coma Berenices where you can just point your scope and not help but see them. However, that will require dark skies and a largish aperture.

 

[Goldfinger]

12 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Finding stuff 'by hand' is half the fun of it - for me. I know that opinion isn't shared with everyone, and with obvious reasons. Especially if you suffer from light pollution, you will have a lack of guide stars to help you find your way around.

Do you know what your sky quality is, where you are? You can try using https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/ to get that info. Sorry of this has been asked before.

As for randomly finding galaxies... there are parts of the sky, around Virgo/Coma Berenices where you can just point your scope and not help but see them. However, that will require dark skies and a largish aperture.

 

No...I wasn't aware of the light pollution map. Thanks for that.  I'm in a 8-9 bortle area with 10 being the absolute worst I assume.

Oh well....still plan on purchasing a go-to system and hope for the best. I don't plan on doing astrophotography so that make things easier for me.

[Tiny Clanger]

9 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Finding stuff 'by hand' is half the fun of it - for me. I know that opinion isn't shared with everyone, and with obvious reasons. Especially if you suffer from light pollution, you will have a lack of guide stars to help you find your way around.

 

I'll second that . The sense of achievement from actually eventually managing to see some elusive tiny faint thing is enormous for me. And I actually enjoy the process , an exercise of various strategies to (I hope) overcome environmental difficulties .

I'd liken it to travelling to a fairly distant destination by train , it takes time, but if you can enjoy the journey as well as the destination and may see some interesting things along the way , it's a lot more satisfying to me than being delivered there by 'plane , which is admittedly faster and more efficient, like go to ...

[Basementboy]

While I agree that randomly scanning the skies is fun, I think the problem is that it's definitely more fun in dark skies, when there's lots to see.

In light polluted skies, there aren't many objects easily visible. So you'll probably spend a lot of time seeing "nothing" – ie, no special objects – although of course just scanning the stars themselves can be entertaining. For a bit. 

But that doesn't mean you need Go-To, either ... a good finderscope and a book like Turn Left at Orion (which I've used) can help find some of the easier things to see in light pollution, like globular clusters, open clusters and double stars – things you're very unlikely to "stumble" across when the sky is washed out

[Stu1smartcookie]

Start observing , what you CAN see from your site ... the Moon is a fascinating object to view  , catch a glimpse of the inner planets Venus and Mercury , you wont see detail but you can see the phases . Planning is key ... something i never realised when starting out . Just scanning the skies is ok (ish ) but you want to know what you are looking at .  Mind you with skies the way they are this month i think living in a bortle 8 you have an advantage , after all just think how frustrating it must be living in bortle 3-4 and total cloud cover  

[Padraic M]

There's lots of good advice above already. It might be useful to separate the problem out into two parts - the light around you, and the light above you.

The light around you (the ring of lights on your patio and any lights from surrounding buildings) that stops your eyes acclimatising to the dark is a real distraction, and can stop you being able to see those fainter night sky objects. The best advice here is to wear a hood, and protect your eyes from the light as much as possible. It helps to do that even in dark skies, but definitely in a built-up area it's essential (I live in Bortle 8 city centre/suburbs). You can even buy a 'Hooded Observing Jacket' which sounds like a joke but I've been tempted! I've reused an old sports hoodie that I use both for the cold and the light protection and I grandly tell my wife that it's my hooded observing jacket. Sounds so posh.

https://astronomy.com/observing/product-reviews/2010/11/dark-skies-apparel-vest

For the light above you, there's less that you can do. This is the light of the city reflected off any cloud or moisture in the air. On bad nights this will reduce your visibility to where it may not be worth the bother setting up at all. I'm not convinced by filters - as mentioned above, they may not be effective for LED light, but they also make dim objects even dimmer, with the benefit of enhanced contrast. If you're struggling to see the objects in the first place, this might not work for you.

Google for "Top 10 astronomy targets" etc. and you'll find many good lists of what you can see, from almost any location. The moon and the major planets are usually top of the list. After that, I would recommend star clusters. Globular clusters are joys to behold, and can be seen well even in LP areas. M13 and M3 are both easily seen at the moment. Open clusters take a little getting used to as they look just like over-populated star fields, but you can get to know the star patterns in them and learn to recognise them. The beehive cluster in Cancer can be seen at the moment, and depending on your orientation, you might be able to scan Auriga which contains at least three great open clusters.

The Orion nebula is very bright and worth looking at when it's around - it's a winter sight though. You'll do well to be able to see any other nebulas in city light.

Similarly with galaxies - you will probably make out Andromeda very faintly, but a lot of people don't realise just how big Andromeda is. You're better to use a good pair of binoculars for it, as with most telescopes you're just looking at the core, and there isn't enough contrast to make it stand out. I don't think you'll see any other galaxies.

Bright planetary nebulas are a possibility but I don't know. They're quite small so you might need more power to see them.

I think the best value would be from a 80-100mm refractor or a 130-150mm Newtonian with a sturdy Alt-Az mount. 

I know you said you don't want to do astrophotography and we all said that at the start! (laughing nervously and waiting for the bank manager to call). AP can work well from city centres - but narrowband, rather than broadband is best. There are some superb examples on these pages of deep sky photos taken from large cities.

[PeterStudz]

I live in Southampton and have had a telescope since the end of December. A small 4 inch reflector on an equal small EQ1. Where I am is Bortle 8 and I’m not far from the docks which is lit up like a Christmas tree all night and every night. Still, I’ve been able to see or capture quite a bit inc:

Orion Nebula 

Pleiades

Beehive Cluster

M81 & M82 Galaxies

Leo Treo - Galaxies

M51 Galaxies

M3 Globular Cluster

M13 Globular Cluster

Apart from M81, which I could just make out by eye, the other galaxies have been, for want of a better term, smartphone assisted. I’ve used the phone camera in night mode on a 30 sec exposure. To help with this I have a small economy motor drive - £28 - not meant for photography but it lets me obtain 30 sec exposures with minimum star trailing. And it’s actually exciting and magical pointing the thing at what appears a blank sky and to see a galaxy appear in real-time 30 sec later. Even if rather fuzzy I’ve even managed to capture the spiral arms of m51. 

Still much to learn and discover. I’d say go for it. If it turns out not for you then it’s not that difficult to sell up. You want lose much.

[Stu1smartcookie]

1 minute ago, PeterStudz said:

I live in Southampton and have had a telescope since the end of December. A small 4 inch reflector on an equal small EQ1. Where I am is Bortle 8 and I’m not far from the docks which is lit up like a Christmas tree all night and every night. Still, I’ve been able to see or capture quite a bit inc:

Orion Nebula 

Pleiades

Beehive Cluster

M81 & M82 Galaxies

Leo Treo - Galaxies

M51 Galaxies

M3 Globular Cluster

M13 Globular Cluster

Apart from M81, which I could just make out by eye, the other galaxies have been, for want of a better term, smartphone assisted. I’ve used the phone camera in night mode on a 30 sec exposure. To help with this I have a small economy motor drive - £28 - not meant for photography but it lets me obtain 30 sec exposures with minimum star trailing. And it’s actually exciting and magical pointing the thing at what appears a blank sky and to see a galaxy appear in real-time 30 sec later. Even if rather fuzzy I’ve even managed to capture the spiral arms of m51. 

Still much to learn and discover. I’d say go for it. If it turns out not for you then it’s not that difficult to sell up. You want lose much.

A Prime example of making the most of the equipment . 

[Peter Drew]

+1   

[AstroMuni]

On 19/05/2021 at 14:13, Goldfinger said:

I don't plan on doing astrophotography so that make things easier for me.

I think you should not rule out going the astrophotography route as there are no issues about getting your eyes adapted. Also its a matter of taking more and more images to extract the detail and there is software out there to help you reduce the background illumination. If you have a DSLR (or a better phone camera even) just point it at a high point in the sky, set the exposure to the longest and see what you get. I think you will be very surprised.

[AstroMuni]

19 minutes ago, PeterStudz said:

And it’s actually exciting and magical pointing the thing at what appears a blank sky and to see a galaxy appear in real-time 30 sec later.

Yes, its an amazing sight indeed. Here is my experience in Bortle 6ish skies and streetlights around 40ft away that dont help with visual observations