B2-B3: What might I actually see?

[OK Apricot]

I have a couple of trips planned this year, the dates of which will be around New Moon so I can do some imaging from quality skies. I posted over on the American astro forum about one of these trips and many suggested I take binoculars. I'm very much warming to this idea... 

With a very hard earned and honest 200 British pounds to spend, I'm probably looking somewhere around the Celestron "Pro" line or Opticron for a 70mm aperture jobby. I'm also not going to be using a tripod because of limited luggage side. I'm not a particularly experienced observer, so I'm just wondering really - I am most open to suggestions: Just what might I be able to see under very dark skies? According to lightpollutionmap I'm going to be under B2 skies, and we're going in June and October, so will have the milky way core area, Cygnus, cass etc.. The question is if any of these targets might be visible with such a small aperture. Are filters recommended with binos?

What are your experiences? 

[John]

The year before last we spent a week in a tiny hamlet in the middle of Dartmoor. No lights for miles around and the darkest skies that I have experienced for a long time.

I had 11x70 (Opticron) binoculars with me and had a lot of fun cruising around the summer sky. I can recall seeing Messier 13 with the naked eye and M31 was really clear without binos. The milky way extended practically across the whole sky and it's dark rifts were very apparent.

The binoculars showed me a number of galaxies including M33 quite easily, dozens of open and globular clusters and the eastern portion of the Veil Nebula. The North American Nebula near Deneb was quite clear in the binoculars as well, especially the "gulf of mexico" part and I glimpsed the nearby Pelican Nebula as well. I did not use filters although it is possible to use them with binoculars I believe. The density of the star clouds in and around the milky way were quite something and showed how dark the skies were.

Even my other half was very impressed with those skies and it takes a lot to do that !

Well worth taking decent aperture binoculars to dark skies. Goodness knows what the views would have been like with something like an 8 inch dob if I had managed to get one of those down there 😲

Take a decent sky atlas as well to show you "what is up" when you are there. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by John

[Nik271]

I have been in dark sites several times with just a pair of  humble 10x50 and they showed a lot more of the extended nebulae than my telescopes at home ever do. I think 70mm aperture for hand held bins is a sweet spot, still just light enough to hand hold. But also note that the more premium binoculars tend to be on the heavier side because they don't cost cut on prism sizes and glass. You may be looking at the prospect of hand holding a 2kg binocular for a long time, at least consider bringing a folding monopod.

I'm my experience you won't need filters for the more conventional targets in dark site, eg Veil, NAM, milky way dark lanes. 

If you try for the horse head well that's another matter, I've never even tried it but from I hear a Hbeta is very helpful.

But honestly any binoculars will do a great job in such dark location.

[OK Apricot]

Thanks chaps, much appreciated 🙂

[PeterStudz]

From my limited experience of going to a Bortle 1-2 site (this was end of Aug 2022) is that you don't need much. I had some 8x42 binoculars and they were enough. Personally I find anything more that 10x difficult to hold steady. And my daughter was there too and I wanted something easy. Although we did push the boat out and also took a small 4.5” reflector. 

I’d also suggest trying to have a plan on what to look for. There’s so many stars that we had trouble with orientation. The Milky Way casting a slight shadow. As it’s bright we were draw to the Milky Way core. A few examples - I could make out the Swan Nebula naked eye. The Lagoon Nebula looked more obvious than I’d ever seen Orion. In the binoculars we could easily see the Lagoon and Triffid together in the same field of view. Even in the reflector at 20x we could see both together. However, the Lagoon Nebula in the reflector at 40x was stunning. I’ve never seen anything like it. I did have a UHC filter for the reflector. It helped but the view without was so good anyway. There didn’t seem much point in going over 40x and majority of the time 20x which with the reflector was the lowest power. 8x binoculars would keep us happy all night. 

And another suggestion. If possible take a small tripod for your phone. We had a small telescopic selfie tripod from Amazon for about £15. This is a picture (didn’t take many) using my old iPhone 12 and will give something to remember your trip. Just point and shoot with an exposure of 30 sec.  A more modern phone or camera would do much better.

Edited March 25, 2023 by PeterStudz

[bosun21]

I used to travel all over the Highlands and Islands of Scotland salmon and sea trout fishing. I always carried a pair of 8x42 binoculars changing in the later years to 7x50. There was many nights when the skies were simply too much to take in. The remoter the better obviously. In bortle skies 1-2 the true majesty of the heavens are unveiled to us, and they are sights I will remember forever. I don’t fancy handholding a 70mm binocular for any length of time and would also recommend a lightweight folding tripod or monopod. I hope that the weather gods are in your favor.

[Stormbringer]

you may be better forgetting the 70mm bins and look at 10x50

£200 ish could get you the Nikon Action EX 10x50 or the Opticron I magic 10x50 they are better quality than the Celestron pro,s and they are a lot easier to handhold

[jjohnson3803]

The last time I was in a B2, there were so many objects visible in my 10x50s that I didn't bother using my scope.  My only regret was I had left my 15x70s at home.