Visual Trials

[PeterC65]

Last nights session was my first visual session since January, having been lured away recently by the pleasures of EAA. I wanted to check that I still enjoyed visual, and to check some kit to decide whether it was worth keeping.

Since the Moon was bright, and Saturn and Jupiter were visible, I set up the Skymax 127, which hadn’t seen action since last October (it’s too slow for EAA). The sky was clear, with the Moon below the horizon initially, so I started with some fainter objects and finished with Jupiter and the Moon.

Saturn managed x195 but looked fuzzy above that. I could just make out the gaps in the rings beside the planet, but no other detail. I tried the binoviewer but could not get the images to merge.

The Moon managed all the way up to x365, although by then the craters were getting quite wobbly. Things looked better at x123 and with the yellow filter which I prefer to the blue, mainly because the colour looks more natural. Both are much better than the Neodymium. Switching to the binoviewer, both with and without its x1.6 Barlow, the Moon looked amazing, much better than with an eyepiece and still benefiting from the yellow filter.

Jupiter also managed x195. I could see two cloud belts and four moons, but not the GRS, which should have been on display. This time I did get the binoviewer images to merge, perhaps because I had just been successfully observing the Moon, but the view wasn’t any better than with an eyepiece.

The Binoviewer is great for the Moon but nothing else. Worth keeping, but I’m not sure I would buy one now.

In between Saturn and Jupiter I observed a bunch of star clusters, staring with some smaller ones, M2, M15, M71, then some larger ones, Cr399, M29, M39, M52, NGC7789. The small globular clusters looked best at x71 and x143, when I could just make out that they were composed of individual stars. For the larger open clusters I switched to the 2” diagonal (my Skymax 127 has been modified to provide a 2” visual back) and the Baader Hyperion Aspheric 36mm.

This eyepiece has been a real disappointment in faster scopes, with the stars obviously distorted across the outer 60% of the field of view, but at F12 the field was flat. Used with the Skymax 127 the Aspheric 36mm was a revelation, increasing the field of view from 0.9° (with the Explore Scientific 68° 24mm) to 1.5°, so that I could properly observe larger objects within their context. With the 2” eyepiece I could just see all of the stars of the Coathanger (Cr399) and even M45, which I don’t usually bother to observe with the Skymax 127. So the Aspheric 36mm is worth keeping, but only for the Skymax 127

Carloine’s Rose Cluster (NGC7789) is one of my favourite EAA objects as its shape and the star colours look so beautiful. This was the first time I had observed it visually. I could make out the shape, just, but there was none of the colour. The Moon and Planets are much better observed visually, but for everything else you see so much more via EAA.

I’ve had an Astronomik OIII filter for a while, bought initially for visual, but never used, and moved instead into the EAA filter wheel. It works for EAA, but turns everything green, and I much prefer the UHC filter, so the OIII filter is now back in the visual filter wheel. I decided to give M27 a try, not expecting much, but there it was, with no filter, better with the UHC filter, and even better with the OIII filter. With both filters I could make out the dumbbell shape, more so with the OIII filter, which made the background black and pretty much removed the stars. So the OIII filter will be staying in the visual filter wheel.

It was nice to get back out under the stars, but other than when observing the Moon and Planets I was seeing much less than with EAA, and I did miss being able to check what I was supposed to be looking at via Stellarium.

 

[RobertI]

1 hour ago, PeterC65 said:

Last nights session was my first visual session since January, having been lured away recently by the pleasures of EAA. I wanted to check that I still enjoyed visual, and to check some kit to decide whether it was worth keeping.

Since the Moon was bright, and Saturn and Jupiter were visible, I set up the Skymax 127, which hadn’t seen action since last October (it’s too slow for EAA). The sky was clear, with the Moon below the horizon initially, so I started with some fainter objects and finished with Jupiter and the Moon.

Saturn managed x195 but looked fuzzy above that. I could just make out the gaps in the rings beside the planet, but no other detail. I tried the binoviewer but could not get the images to merge.

The Moon managed all the way up to x365, although by then the craters were getting quite wobbly. Things looked better at x123 and with the yellow filter which I prefer to the blue, mainly because the colour looks more natural. Both are much better than the Neodymium. Switching to the binoviewer, both with and without its x1.6 Barlow, the Moon looked amazing, much better than with an eyepiece and still benefiting from the yellow filter.

Jupiter also managed x195. I could see two cloud belts and four moons, but not the GRS, which should have been on display. This time I did get the binoviewer images to merge, perhaps because I had just been successfully observing the Moon, but the view wasn’t any better than with an eyepiece.

The Binoviewer is great for the Moon but nothing else. Worth keeping, but I’m not sure I would buy one now.

In between Saturn and Jupiter I observed a bunch of star clusters, staring with some smaller ones, M2, M15, M71, then some larger ones, Cr399, M29, M39, M52, NGC7789. The small globular clusters looked best at x71 and x143, when I could just make out that they were composed of individual stars. For the larger open clusters I switched to the 2” diagonal (my Skymax 127 has been modified to provide a 2” visual back) and the Baader Hyperion Aspheric 36mm.

This eyepiece has been a real disappointment in faster scopes, with the stars obviously distorted across the outer 60% of the field of view, but at F12 the field was flat. Used with the Skymax 127 the Aspheric 36mm was a revelation, increasing the field of view from 0.9° (with the Explore Scientific 68° 24mm) to 1.5°, so that I could properly observe larger objects within their context. With the 2” eyepiece I could just see all of the stars of the Coathanger (Cr399) and even M45, which I don’t usually bother to observe with the Skymax 127. So the Aspheric 36mm is worth keeping, but only for the Skymax 127

Carloine’s Rose Cluster (NGC7789) is one of my favourite EAA objects as its shape and the star colours look so beautiful. This was the first time I had observed it visually. I could make out the shape, just, but there was none of the colour. The Moon and Planets are much better observed visually, but for everything else you see so much more via EAA.

I’ve had an Astronomik OIII filter for a while, bought initially for visual, but never used, and moved instead into the EAA filter wheel. It works for EAA, but turns everything green, and I much prefer the UHC filter, so the OIII filter is now back in the visual filter wheel. I decided to give M27 a try, not expecting much, but there it was, with no filter, better with the UHC filter, and even better with the OIII filter. With both filters I could make out the dumbbell shape, more so with the OIII filter, which made the background black and pretty much removed the stars. So the OIII filter will be staying in the visual filter wheel.

It was nice to get back out under the stars, but other than when observing the Moon and Planets I was seeing much less than with EAA, and I did miss being able to check what I was supposed to be looking at via Stellarium.

 

Nice report of a nice session Peter. Regarding your last comment about not being able to check what your supposed to be seeing via Stellarium, I can throughly recommend the Starsense App and gizmo, which not only guides you to the object manually, but also gives you everything you need to know, including black and white DSS images which  are close to what a typical EAA setup might show (in fact virtually identical to my EAA setup).  As for the strengths and weaknesses of EAA v Visual, I agree with you, except that it’s hard to beat the pinpoint diamond look of stars visually, especially binaries and open clusters. EAA is a clear winner for Nebulae and galaxies though. 👍

Edited September 5, 2023 by RobertI

[Epick Crom]

Welcome back to visual👍