23-Jan-2024, Macclesfield

[Richard N]

Got up at midnight and observed through until 03:30am. 93% Moon did limit things somewhat but still saw a few nice galaxies. Ended on open clusters. Is it just me or are 90% of OCs really rather boring? Also noticed that one NGC object is a star. How odd.

M63

M106

Edited January 23 by Richard N

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I find open clusters are best viewed in a really wide field. You then see them in context, whereas if they fill most of the FOV you just feel you are looking at a bright star field.

[Richard N]

2 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I find open clusters are best viewed in a really wide field. You then see them in context, whereas if they fill most of the FOV you just feel you are looking at a bright star field.

A very fair point. My EAA sensor is pretty small so most OCs fill the field.

[PeterC65]

I agree that open clusters look best when you can observe them in context, and see that they are a cluster with mostly empty space around them. I think this is true of many objects though. The two galaxy snapshots that you posted have a field of view that is three times the size of the object for example.

Was the NGC object that is a star NGC603 by any chance? I came across this myself a few night ago while observing a bunch of galaxies (NGC603 is near to M33). I wonder if it's the only NGC star, and why it should be classified this way at all?

 

[Martin Meredith]

I too have a small sensor (this image was taken with a guide camera, apparent FOV about 0.35 degrees). However, I find that apart from many NGCs, most of the Berkeley open clusters fit well with plenty of space around.

The other thing that really makes a difference is colour!

 

[Richard N]

Thanks Martin. I use the mono version of your sensor. Noted on the colours - they definitely help in your example! Also the Berkeley OC is a new one on me. I notice that Deep Sky Planner includes it. Yet another wormhome to go down!

Edited January 24 by Richard N