Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    thew's Avatar
    thew Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't



    I got off a good session yesterday with my 6" reflector, despite being
    new to this. But I really, really loathe this 5x24 finder scope. It's
    tiny and even the brightest stars look dim through it. Will replace it
    with a better one.

    In spite of that, I bagged a couple different objects. Because Jupiter
    is setting early now, I went out right at sunset. I only have a Kellner
    25mm eyepiece and a Plossl 15mm (48x and 80x, repectively) so far. With
    the 25mm, Jupiter looked like a white dot with the moons on either side
    of it. With the 15mm, it looked like a bigger white dot. I could then
    just about see a cloud band or two. I'm going to get a Barlow lens soon.
    It's getting late for Jupiter, but Mars is coming up.

    And of course the Moon. With the 15mm eyepiece, it just about fills up
    the entire field of view.

    Then looked at the Lyra Double-Double, but I apparently don't have
    enough magnification to resolve the two pairs of stars. I also couldn't
    see Zeta Aquarii or Gamma Delphini, both tight doubles.

    But I did get the Ring Nebula. At either magnification, it looks like a
    nice little gray donut. Tried to find the Dumbbell Nebula, but couldn't
    see it. I also couldn't see the North America Nebula to save my life.

    Got Albeiro in Cygnus (easy), and Gamma Andromedae (another nice orange
    and blue double).

    M13 just looked like a gray cotton ball at either magnification,
    although with the 15mm I could make out it's stars with averted vision.
    Also got M15 in Pegasus.

  2. #2
    William Hamblen's Avatar
    William Hamblen Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't

    On 19 Sep 2007 15:51:36 GMT, thew <thew@enter.net> wrote:


    The North American Nebula is a real noseeum. I've made a slide of it
    from my back yard, but I can't see it in the eyepiece.

    Bud
    --
    The night is just the shadow of the Earth.

  3. #3
    Marty's Avatar
    Marty Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't

    >The North American Nebula is a real

    Actually, it's one of those things that's kind of hard to see on account
    of it's large size. Under darkish skies, it shows up as a bright patch
    of the Milky Way to the naked eye. Once you've located it that way, it
    starts to show it's shape, (ie. the gulf of Mexico,) with binoculars.
    Marty


  4. #4
    AstroSketcher@gmail.com's Avatar
    AstroSketcher@gmail.com Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't

    On Sep 19, 9:51 am, thew <t...@enter.net> wrote:


    Good idea! It's amazing how much of a difference a *good* finder (or
    two) can make.


    Yep, a bit more magnification seems to be called for. Precise
    collimation can also make a *noticeable* difference when it comes to
    observing the planets.


    Perhaps the scope wasn't quite pointed at M27? The Dumbbell should be
    plenty bright enough for you to see.

    The North America Nebula is *huge*! One of my best views was an
    accidental encounter. I was sweeping the sky for comets several years
    ago using a 25cm Newtonian one night when suddenly the entire field of
    view (and then some) became flooded with "bright" nebulosity (complete
    with a considerable amount of visible structure). I took some time
    out from my sweeping to scan the region (including the Pelican Nebula)
    with my low-power, wide-field eyepiece before resuming the hunt. This
    was from a magnitude 6.5 or better sky.

    I suspect that many people (under less ideal skies) mistake the rich
    Milky Way in the area for the nebulosity. With a telescope it ought
    to be possible to clearly tell whether or not one is seeing the
    nebulosity.

    Under sufficiently light polluted skies the North America Nebula
    *might* be rendered invisible (at least without a 'nebula' filter of
    one kind or another). The nebula's large size (especially when
    combined with a bit of light pollution) can also turn it invisible in
    some telescopes at some magnifications.


    Those are very nice doubles!

    Bill Greer
    To sketch is to see.
    http://cejour.blogspot.com
    http://www.rangeweb.net/~sketcher


  5. #5
    thew's Avatar
    thew Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't

    > Yep, a bit more magnification seems to be called for. Precise

    True. You need 100x or greater for the planets. A 2x Barlow would take my
    15mm eyepiece up to 160x. Especially since this upcoming Mars opposition
    won't be as good as the past three ones. Too bad you can't see Saturn now
    unless you're willing to get up at 5:00 in the morning. I suppose I should
    have tried for Uranus (easy enough to find), but 80x is not enough
    magnification to make out it's disk.


    This evening I tried M27 again and failed. I centered on Gamma Sagittae and
    moved straight up, but nothing. I also tried M71, between Gamma and Delta
    Sagittae, but missed that too.


    You must have had a 2" eyepiece. My 6" reflector can't use those.


    The NA Nebula should be simplicity itself to find, being right next to
    Deneb, but all I saw was darkness. The sky this evening was not
    particularly good because of the brightness of the first quarter Moon.



    I tried Gamma Delphini again this evening and got it. Zeta Aquari is too
    tight (heard that you need 100x magnification to split it). I also tried
    Polaris. At 80x, I could see it's 9th magnitude companion. And also looked
    at Mizar in the Big Dipper (easy double). Looked for M101, but couldn't see
    it (but then the BD is awfully low in the sky this time of year).

  6. #6
    David Knisely's Avatar
    David Knisely Guest

    Default The seeing was good, the finder scope wasn't

    Try using either a good Oxygen III (OIII) filter or the DGM Optics NPB,
    and do it under a dark sky. In a rich-field scope with over two degrees
    of true field, it is pretty easy with a filter, but rather diffuse and
    hard to see without one. Clear skies to you.
    --
    David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
    Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
    Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

    **********************************************
    * Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
    * July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
    * http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
    **********************************************

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Finder Scope versus Telrad/Celestron finder
    By pedalmasher in forum Celestron NexStar Telescope Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 05-10-2013, 09:20 PM
  2. If i bought a good finder scope for my telescope to view deep space
    By Micheal banks in forum Telescope Accessories Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-23-2011, 05:22 AM
  3. Z10 Finder Scope
    By djrossco in forum Dobsonian Telescopes Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-16-2009, 03:22 AM
  4. Finder scope for a DOB?
    By swiftfalcon in forum Telescope Accessories Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-31-2009, 10:32 PM
  5. The importance of a good Finder
    By Ioannis in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-18-2003, 09:41 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18 AM.