Crab Nebula

[david's dob]

hello Guys and girls.

Iv'e seen the crab nebula and it wasn't wat i expected, a white smudge, .

I expected some structure to it, abit like the ring nebula, where you see the outside ring and some faint colour to it.

I know im not expecting some photographic views, however from my dob i though it would be a great find. however the Double Cluster was Awsome and im still trying to find the eskimo nebula on Gemini.

[Space Bat]

I have to use filters to detect the merest form of structure, suprisingly the best views is with the UHC filter rather than the OIII filter which I thought would provide better views.

Chris

[Doc]

Even with 16" of aperture I don't see any internal structure. I do see a clearly defined shape but the filaments you see in photo's do not appear.

[John]

The fact that it's the first object in Messier's catalogue can be misleading - it's far from the most impressive. An faint oval smudge is what I see with my 4". It's a more distinct oval smudge when I add my OIII filter and combine that filter with 10" aperture and a little more "form" is suggested, but only on the darkest nights and only the slightest hints.

Still at least you have had the privilege of seeing with your own eyes the remnants of the supernova event that chinese astronomers witnessed 956 years ago - that's what does it for me

[DarkerSky]

Still at least you have had the privilege of seeing with your own eyes the remnants of the supernova event that chinese astronomers witnessed 956 years ago - that's what does it for me

Same here !!!

The Crab is a difficult customer. Its fairly even surface brightness makes it hard to pull out from the background in light skies. Darker skies do it a bit more justice.

As for structure I have clocked up about 2 hours in total at the eyepiece with relatively high magnification attempting to tease out detail with averted vision. No filaments were seen, although slight protrusions from the fat 's' shape were seen. The OIII filter gives it a completely different appearance, but no detail.

It takes very good seeing to get a good visual obs of this one

[Space Bat]

Interesting to see that Seb and John report better obs with the OIII - I have found it somewhat disappointing with the OIII and the UHC adds far more contrast and pops the nebula into view far easier...

However the OIII on other targets such as the owl and the ring nebula...there is no contest there is so much more to grab using this filter...

Has anyone else found the OIII disappointing on M1 - in theory it should provide better views

Chris

[Doc]

This is what the Praire astronomer has to say.....

M1 CRAB NEBULA (SNR in Taurus)

(10 inch f/5.6, 52x, 71x, 141x.)

DEEP-SKY: (3) Improves the contrast and brings out the wispy arc-like cusp on the eastern end.

UHC: (4) Darkens the background and reveals little hints of tattered detail on the edges with the eastern "cusp" now more visible.

OIII: (3) Much darker than in UHC, and appears slightly smaller and somewhat rounder, but with hints of filamentary detail on the edges and across the nebula at 141x.

H-BETA: (0) barely visible.

RECOMMENDATION FOR M1: UHC/DEEP-SKY (H-beta *not* recommended).

[Space Bat]

Thanks Doc

So the UHC edges it slightly

[DarkerSky]

Interesting to see that Seb and John report better obs with the OIII - I have found it somewhat disappointing with the OIII and the UHC adds far more contrast and pops the nebula into view far easier...

However the OIII on other targets such as the owl and the ring nebula...there is no contest there is so much more to grab using this filter...

Has anyone else found the OIII disappointing on M1 - in theory it should provide better views

Chris

The OIII certainly gives it a different appearance - more rounded. I wouldn't say it improves the view. I'd agree more with you that it is disappointing with the OIII. My best views have been unfiltered. That said I dont have a UHC to compare it against

[Talitha]

M1 has always looked like a puff of smoke in the 8" SCT whether i'm using an O-III or not. TBH though, i prefer the non-filtered view.. it seems brighter and cleaner to me.

[twotter]

M1 has always looked like a puff of smoke ...

That's just what I saw a few nights ago. As though a cosmic smoker had just taken a quick drag

[John]

Different brands UHC and OIII filters vary quite widely in their bandpass width. My Astronomik OIII has quite a wide band pass width compared to the Baader OIII - the views through the two are very different (I owned a Baader OIII for a short while and could not get on with it). Likewise the Baader UHC-S has a wider band pass than, say, an Orion Ultrablock (which is generally classed as a UHC). So perhaps it's not surprising that our experiences with them on, say, M1, vary.

[RikM]

I found M1 a couple of weeks ago (just about). I tried with and without a SW LPR filter and I preferred it without. I only had the faintest hint of the DSO so perhaps not enough light for the filter to work with, it just cut out too much, but still stoked to have found the crab

Rik

[Pete Presland]

a friend asked me the other day what was the point in looking at deep sky objects through my telescope when they are nothing like the pics from Hubble etc....

john is spot on! seeing stuff that occurred Milena ago and seeing it for real is the reason! looking back in time wow thats what its all about.

[LukeSkywatcher]

a friend asked me the other day what was the point in looking at deep sky objects through my telescope when they are nothing like the pics from Hubble etc....

john is spot on! seeing stuff that occurred Milena ago and seeing it for real is the reason! looking back in time wow thats what its all about.

Even though it is tecnically/scientifically true that when we observe DSOs that we are looking back in time i dont focus on that (excuse the pun). What amazes me is that we are observing something billions of miles away..................right from our own location here on earth with nothing more then a few pieces of glass held together with a tube.

Even the moon is about a quarter of a million miles away (the light from the moon takes 1.5 seconds to reach earth?).

It would be great if our planet had no atmosphere because we would get spectacular unhindered views of the night sky................but we would all be dead due to solar radiation.

[Bigwings]

M1 has always looked like a puff of smoke in the 8" SCT whether i'm using an O-III or not. TBH though, i prefer the non-filtered view.. it seems brighter and cleaner to me.

From North Notts I get a very feint fuzzy but what a buss to find it....

Clear Skies

Mike