My eyes are blown away by...nothing special

[clafann1]

I've recently bought a 4.5 inch reflector telescope, so far, by looking at the eyepiece I didn't see anything special.

The sun and the moon have detail (not a surprise since the first is gigantic and the second is so close), but for everything else, I didn't see anything special. Jupiter was a fuzzy ball, no detail at all. Saturn was even more fuzzy, Andromeda was a small smudge smaller than the moon, and the Pleiades were brighter than the other dots, but they were still nothing but regular dots, same as all the others.

I have a simple question, on those internet topics that show what you can see with a small telescope, they're referring to the long exposure image you can get from a camera, not really what you can see directly on the eyepiece, right?

Edited January 8, 2022 by clafann1

[cajen2]

Not sure if it's your equipment or your expectations which are causing this.

May I ask what eyepiece(s) you're using? 

Also have a look at this thread; https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see/#comment-2060941

Edited January 8, 2022 by cajen2

[johninderby]

Too much magnification on the planets is a common beginners mistake. There is a “best” magnification with your scope on the planets and many beginners don’t realise that increasing the magnification makes things worse not better. Less is more.

[Broadymike]

I have a 4.5" newt as well. I was a little disappointed at first with the images I could see. Then I bought some half decent plossl EPs and it made a huge difference. The most important thing  when looking at jupiter/Saturn is not to over magnify. You actually see a far better image at lower power although what you see is obviously smaller in your FOV. As for DSOs like andromeda you probably won't see much more than a faint misty smudge. It's why they're colloquially known as fuzzies. For DSOs aperture is definitely king. I'm currently putting a bit aside each month to get something bigger for DSOs. 

[mikeDnight]

Often manufacturers use long exposure images on their packaging, which can be misleading to say the least. But, despite being only 4.5" aperture, visually you should be able to see all the Messier objects, hundreds of double stars, and be able to track comets. The problem for someone starting out in astronomy is that, like any hobby, it takes time to acquire observing experience. Seeing is a skill that will develop over time, and it would be helpful if you were able to observe from a dark site, or where you're shielded from surrounding lights. Dark adaption is essential for observing nebulae, galaxies, and comets, and you'll see much more through the eyepiece away from street lights. The Moon and planets are another matter altogether, where often the best views are obtained on mildly misty nights when the air is dead steady. Learning to allow your eye to naturally scan an object is important, and that applies to both deep sky and lunar & planetary targets. Staring directly at the object will cause the more intricate detail to disappear. 

Then there's the problem of choosing the right eyepiece type, focal length, magnification and field of view to frame the object.  It's a real Pandora's box, which I'll let someone else deal with. ☺

[PeterStudz]

I have a 4.5 inch & 8 inch reflector. As for Jupiter I could certainly make out banding plus (when facing earth) The Great Red Spot on my 4.5 inch. Sure, it was small and far better when viewed in the larger telescope but it can be done.

Seeing plays a big part especially, like this year, when Jupiter is so low in the sky. And personally I haven’t had good seeing on Jupiter since around mid-October. I last looked at Jupiter last Tuesday and on that night it didn’t give me much more than a fuzzy ball. 

[Peter_D]

One of my most memorable observations was M42 through a Vixen 114/900 reflector  (F7.9) - detail, contrast, really nice view. I had upgraded from a 60mm refractor so the increase in apperature was really striking. 

The Moon, Venus were also great in this scope as were double stars. I don't really use it anymore as I now have larger SCTs but still a very capable, lightweight scope that I will keep.

[clafann1]

Thanks for your bits, so, what I'm seeing is really what is supposed to be...

Good to be informed...

[PeterStudz]

1 hour ago, clafann1 said:

Thanks for your bits, so, what I'm seeing is really what is supposed to be...

Good to be informed...

That depends!

What make/model of telescope have you got?

Is your reflector collimated? It needs to be spot on for planets. 

Your location makes a huge difference. Go to a very dark site and you’ll see much more. 

Edited January 8, 2022 by PeterStudz

[Stu]

1 hour ago, clafann1 said:

Thanks for your bits, so, what I'm seeing is really what is supposed to be...

Good to be informed...

As Peter says, it depends.

There are many factors which affect what you see in planetary observing.

Telescope cooling and collimation

Seeing conditions, position of the Jetstream etc

Target altitude above the horizon (when objects are low down, you are literally looking through hundreds of miles of turbulent air which makes high magnification difficult or impossible)

Observing location; observing from hot concrete or tarmac, or over centrally heated house can cause havoc with the local seeing conditions. Try to observe on grass and away from houses if at all possible.

Eyepiece choice and magnification

Observer experience and time spent at the eyepiece. This can make a significant difference to what is seen through the same scope. A quick glance often shows very little detail, but observing over a longer period, and as often as possible will result in more detail being seen.

Even with relatively small scopes, a surprising amount of planetary detail is possible. It’s nowhere near as good as in larger scopes of course but is still possible. I’ve seen the Great Red Spot and shadow transits on Jupiter in scopes as small as 60mm.

Keep persevering, make sure your scope is collimated properly and see how you get on.

[Elp]

Everything makes a difference. I started with a 6 inch cheapish reflector and couldn't see anything through it even after taking it apart and adjusting everything, got a cheap refractor afterward and was blown away by the moon detail (even though the image wasn't fully sharp at the edges and the colour was yellowish) and got to see Mars and Venus which were fuzzy. Got an 60mm apo refractor now and the views of Jupiter though small are super sharp, the moon is also it's true viewing colour. Looking through different eyepieces even of the same power/magnification make a huge difference to the quality of your viewing. Got a different reflector now too but haven't used it yet to see the planets but I suspect the views will be even better than my 60mm.

I understand your opinion though, it's one of the reasons I concentrate on AP rather than viewing.

[clafann1]

Hmm, let's see

- I need a way to find if my telescope mirror is parabolic or not (is there a method that can be used?), telescope model is: Bresser Solarix 114/500 (I dont see that model on the list of "not to buy" telescopes, but you never know lol).

- The default eyepieces that came with it were "K9mm" and "K25mm", I assume they're bad quality, but i can't tell for sure. I have a plossl 4mm that I bought separately, but I cant compare with the others since their focal ratios are so different. The 2x barlow that came with it feels very light and cheap, but does its thing.

- I did some rough collimation check, most likely not spot on, need to get a cheshire and center spot the primary.

Edited January 9, 2022 by clafann1

[cajen2]

16 minutes ago, clafann1 said:

Hmm, let's see

- I need a way to find if my telescope mirror is parabolic or not (is there a method that can be used?), telescope model is: Bresser Solarix 114/500 (I dont see that model on the list of "to not buy" telescopes, but you never know lol).

- The default eyepieces that came with it were "K9mm" and "K25mm", I assume they're bad quality, but i can't tell for sure. I have a plossl 4mm that I bought separately, but I cant compare with the others since their focal ratios are so different. The 2x barlow that came with it feels very light and cheap, but does its thing.

- I did some rough collimation check, most likely not spot on, need to get a cheshire and center spot the primary.

Yes, if it were me, job #1 would be to upgrade the nasty Kellner eyepieces. There's a huge choice - check out FLO's range, work out your budget and get back to us for advice from people who have used the various EPs. There are some true eyepiece experts on here!

 

 

[Broadymike]

18 minutes ago, clafann1 said:

Hmm, let's see

- I need a way to find if my telescope mirror is parabolic or not (is there a method that can be used?), telescope model is: Bresser Solarix 114/500 (I dont see that model on the list of "to not buy" telescopes, but you never know lol).

- The default eyepieces that came with it were "K9mm" and "K25mm", I assume they're bad quality, but i can't tell for sure. I have a plossl 4mm that I bought separately, but I cant compare with the others since their focal ratios are so different. The 2x barlow that came with it feels very light and cheap, but does its thing.

- I did some rough collimation check, most likely not spot on, need to get a cheshire and center spot the primary.

Definitely upgrade those kellner EPs and the barlow. The ones that come with the scope are most likely terrible. Like I said in my earlier comment I'd be swapping them out for half decent plossls at least. The barow will most likely be worth changing as again they supply cheap rubbish to "get you started". 

 

Think about it like this decent EPs and barlows can give a reasonable image with mediocre scope, but bad EPs will make even the best scopes give terrible images. 

[Jiggy 67]

Let’s not forget, observing astronomical objects is a very challenging pastime. It is dependent on numerous factors including quality of equipment (you are right to upgrade ep’s, your current ones will be poor but eventually you will want to upgrade everything!!….it’s not a cheap hobby), seeing conditions and transparency which can spoil your obs regardless of equipment, light pollution levels……..and expectations. Visually Andromeda will only ever look like a dim grey smudge (unless you have very dark skies) as will all galaxies, most of which you won’t be able to see. The planets are heavily affected by seeing conditions, one night you will see Jupiter as nothing but a fuzzy disc, the next you may be able to see some banding which will require heavy concentration over a period of time with dark adapted eyes and good conditions….this hobby is not easy!!

You might wonder why anyone bothers….for me it’s the challenge of seeing something thousands of light years away and trying to tease as much detail out of it as possible, often resulting in failure…..but I’ll try again later.

The Pleiades maybe just a collection of bright dots but together they make for one of the most beautiful objects in the sky, all clusters are similar, they are bright dots against a darker backdrop, they will never be anything different…..but many of them are stunning.

Keep at it and you will enjoy the effort required for some very small wins

[Elp]

Regarding collimation, save your money and buy a collimation cap, it's all you really need and it's very cheap.

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @clafann1 and welcome to SGL. 

12 hours ago, clafann1 said:

Hmm, let's see

- I need a way to find if my telescope mirror is parabolic or not (is there a method that can be used?), telescope model is: Bresser Solarix 114/500 (I dont see that model on the list of "not to buy" telescopes, but you never know lol).

- The default eyepieces that came with it were "K9mm" and "K25mm", I assume they're bad quality, but i can't tell for sure. I have a plossl 4mm that I bought separately, but I cant compare with the others since their focal ratios are so different. The 2x barlow that came with it feels very light and cheap, but does its thing.

- I did some rough collimation check, most likely not spot on, need to get a cheshire and center spot the primary.

Is the barrel 0.965" or 1.25"? - if it is 0.965" you can purchase an adapter to use 'modern' 1.25" e/p's from well known online auction sites and online warehouses.

Just for comparison, I have attached an image of a 0.965" eyepiece and 1.25" adapter below...

left: 0.965"      right: 1.25"

Link for a collimation cap... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/rigel-aline-collimation-cap.html as suggested by @Elp above.

[clafann1]

Collimation cap?

I've read that you cant collimate a f/4 telescope with a collimation cap.

 

@Philp R: It's 1.25", no adapter needed.

Edited January 10, 2022 by clafann1

[Peter Drew]

13 minutes ago, clafann1 said:

Collimation cap?

I've read that you cant collimate an f/4 telescope with a collimation cap.

Really?  fancy collimation tools have only been available for a couple of decades, we always managed before then with collimation caps.  Final fine tuning is usually conducted using a real star.      🙂

[maw lod qan]

My advice would be to not get disappointed! Remember what you are looking at is billions of years old and isn't going anywhere!

Seeing, equipment, you learning will all fall into place. Don't expect to do what others have spent years learning. 

I get a thrill every time I look at the Moon!

It gets better, then you get better equipment and it gets even better!

Then you find you are on the slippery hole we all get into!

Enjoy!

[Giles_B]

I agree. I'm not quite a year into observing, but it just gets better and better. Part of this is getting the right equipment, for me, part of it was calibrating my expectations: once I realised the limits of what I can see I could stop trying to recreate the hubble telescope in my back garden.

I bought my scope wanting to see the planets, but I more and more I've found myself drawn to the DSOs and Open clusters. The latter get a lot better with good eyepieces, you can see a lot of intricacy that isn't present otherwise. DSO are just so mysterious they draw me in. Also have a look at the emission nebula in Orion. There is so much to see, so don't give up.

[clafann1]

By zooming on a bright star and going out of focus, I cant see any circular pattern, all I see is the shadow of the secondary.

The oddest thing is that shadow looks concentric at the center of the eyepiece field of view, but when I move it to the edge of the field of view, it's no longer concentric.

Edited January 11, 2022 by clafann1

[DhamR]

I asked this question about concentric rings, I think you only get those at high mag.  

I was told that if when the star is dead centre, you get a good secondary shadow, your collimation is ok.

[Cosmic Geoff]

On 09/01/2022 at 12:52, clafann1 said:

telescope model is: Bresser Solarix 114/500

That is a rather short focal ratio (f4) better suited to low power work eg viewing star clusters etc.  It is likely to be quite demanding of eyepieces so I suggest you buy some decent ones (which can also be re-used with a future scope purchase).

[Spile]

For alignment of your secondary mirror I would recommend a Cheshire eyepiece and sight tube combination tool as the cross hairs and tube make it easier to confirm that it is placed under the focuser. Aka https://astro.catshill.com/collimation-guide/