77 replies to this topic

[grif 678]

Hi

Ever since a young boy, the pictures of the Horse Head nebula has always fascinated me. I have several older books with pictures taken with The Big Eye at Palomar. I just wonder what size scope would it take to be able to see it visually, and the ones who have visually seen it, tell the size of scope they used. It seems that I read where it has been supposedly seen with a 7 inch scope. But I have also read that it would take at least a 14 inch scope under very dark skies, and then it would be a very minute view. I know that man y can take pictures with time exposures, but like to hear from the ones who have just seen it visually through the eyepiece.

Billy

[kfiscus]

Saw it with my Z12 WITHOUT filter on a perfect 1-3-13 from my green zone site. It was just a darker dark on the palest background.

Saw it 1-15-15 with a Lumicon H-beta filter. It was beginning to show shape, especially the back of the head. Z12 was cooled and colimated.

[Vondragonnoggin]

I read places that it takes a 10" under very dark skies. I don't know how it would be minute though. The whole Horsehead/Flame nebula region is fairly large and the Horsehead column is pretty large too. 

 

I'm used to seeing it from my backyard with my IIE's visually even with AT72ED scope, but 6" refractor brings it out better with wispy surrounding gas backlit around the denser regions of gas. It's not small that's for sure. Even at fairly low mag. 

 

My IIE is similar magnification to a 26mm eyepiece and it's plenty big in that. Actual HH column maybe half the size of the. Flame neb.

 

If you haven't see it, it's worth seeing, that's for sure. The whole gas bank the column rises out of is pretty spectacular with a very misty look to it.

[GlennLeDrew]

Easily with a 16" and no filter, under a very dark sky and with a 4-day old Moon up.

With difficulty using a 120mm refractor and UHC filter, under a decently dark--but not superb--sky.

[MinorPlutoid]

I've seen slight resemblance of it with my 10", OII filter in. Moon was nearly new, so it was pretty dark, the flame nebula was pretty visible, being a weird ablated shape to the left of the horse head. 

[kfiscus]

Look up the "About to Make an Assault on the Horsehead" thread in the Observing- Deep Sky forum. Great tips and sketches. Most helpful tip- "It's bigger than you expect."

[David Knisely]

The very first time I got to see the Horsehead nebula was back in the early 1980's in a friend's 10 inch f/5 Newtonian with the Lumicon UHC narrow-band nebula filter at our club's dark sky site.  However, the smallest scope I have seen the Horsehead with (barely) is my 100mm f/6 refractor at 17x and 26x using the Lumicon H-Beta filter.  It appeared as a very small darkening on the eastern edge of a faint elongated glow that was scarcely brighter than the background skyglow.  I have barely glimpsed it in an 8 inch without a filter from a superb dark sky site, but the H-Beta makes it a lot easier, even if it still isn't exactly all that bright.  A good narrow-band filter can help make it stand out a bit, but the H-Beta is probably the "filter of choice" when it comes to this object.  One evening, I even picked it up in my 9.25 inch SCT from my magnitude 5.6 driveway when I had the H-Beta filter in the scope (59x).  I can get just a hint of the "snout" in my 9.25 inch at my dark sky site when using the H-Beta, but I usually need my 14 inch Newtonian and the H-Beta to get the full Horsehead form to show up all that easily.   Clear skies to you.

[Feidb]

Plenty including tonight.

[Oberon]

Was enjoying it very clearly last night with 16" in superb conditions in rural suburbia, ie, relatively dark sky area but local lighting. I've seen it under very dark sky conditions with an 8" but would barely rate that as a detection.

[Dwight J]

From a pristinely dark high altitude site using a 16" Newtonian, using a 20 mm Nagler ( 90 X ) first with an H-beta filter to locate it.  I removed the filter and I could see it at the limit of perception.  One thing that struck me was how small it is.  My view consisted of a dark notch in the background glow of IC 434 - no distinctive horse head shape.  

[Tony Flanders]

I first saw the Horsehead using an H-Beta filter on my 12.5-inch Dob from my country home, near the yellow/green zone border. It wasn't easy; I had to star-hop carefully to the exact right spot.

[BrooksObs]

Many years ago, in the days of my comet hunting when I had a pair of exquisite refurbished Japanese 20x120 military binoculars, I caught the Horse Head early one autumn morning. Of course, at that magnification it was nothing more than a tiny dark notch in the edge of NGC 2023, but nevertheless it was distinctly seen. This particular morning was wonderfully dark and transparent (NELM 7.5+) and in addition to the Horse Head to my amazement I could even make out a vague pale reddish tinge to the illuminated segment of NGC 2023 hanging down from zeta! Back in the day those giant binoculars gave me the most impressive visual images I have ever seen with any instrument I've owned (the Milky Way in Sgr/Sco looked like so much veined marble!) and I've had a great many up to 20" aperture since that time.

 

BrooksObs

[bunyon]

It is smaller than you think.  It's also fainter.  That should be obvious, of course, but pictures really do stick in your head.  Unfortunately, it's one of the most imaged objects and the images are everywhere.  So you think you know what it will look like.  Throw that out.   As you read above, from a great site on a transparent night, it's visible in fairly small scopes, especially with an H-beta or narrowband filter.  I've seen it in an 8 inch and completely believe reports of it being visible in smaller scopes.  But it never exactly jumps out enough to be obvious.  It's small and subtle but quite clearly the Horsehead once you know where/how to look at it.

[blb]

A few years ago now, Phil Harrington told of an experiance he and another guy had at the Winter Star party in his Binocular Universe column. They observed the Horsehead in a pair of 10x50 binoculars with the aid of filters. That, I would think is perhaps the smallest instrument that can be used to see the Horsehead. The smallest scope that I have used to observe the Horsehead was my 4-inch TV102 refractor. After about three hours of observing small faint galaxies, I decided to try the Horsehead without using a filter. I tryed several eyepieces before I found it, but I did see the Horsehead as a void in the very faint nebula IC434. It's true when they say it's larger than you think.

[Achernar]

I've seen it with my 10 and 15-inch Dobs, and nearly succeeded in finding it once with my 6-inch from a very dark area in Missouri. Under the sort of skies I have access to normally, the Horsehead was difficult to make out even with my 15-inch and a H-beta filter. Only when I went to a very remote corner of Alabama in the middle of a national forest did I see it clearly through an 18-inch, and with somewhat more effort through my 10-inch during the same night. It' a challenge object worth pursuing but do not expect it to look like the photos, it's far too dim for that through all but very large telescopes.

 

Taras

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Greyhaven]

My Hardin Deep Space Hunter 12" F5 could show it from my backyard observing site.I have also talked myself into believing I detected the dark Horse Head against a faint grey background with my NexStar 5i but as they say " If you want to see something bad enough it will appear."

 

Grey

[JimMo]

I think I've told this story before but I saw it at the 2010 Winter Star Party in my 14.5" dob but it was very faint.  I was telling some club members about the observation at dinner the next day and one of my friends said he could show it to me in a 12.5" dob.  I met him later that night and the old fellow whose scope it was told me to center it where I thought it was, he put in an image intensified eyepiece with a HB filter and bam there it was plain as day. This proved I was always looking in the right spot but my skies had never cooperated.

[JimMo]

 " If you want to see something bad enough it will appear."

 

Grey

Hi Grey,

 

It's called averted imagination.  

[Jon Isaacs]

I "see" the Horsehead in my various scopes from darker skies but in the 12.5 inch and 16 inch, it's not so easy. However, in the 25 inch F/5 with a Lumicon H-beta and the 41 mm Panoptic, it is "glaringly" obvious..  That's 77x with an 8.2mm exit pupil but its the best combo I have.  Last night I was enjoying it and wondering quite why it is that combo works so well.

 

Jon

[jgraham]

Interesting conversation. I've never seen the Horsehead visually, though I have observed it with my ETX-60 fitted with a DSI-III camera. I'm encourage to try it again now that the cold clear nights of February are on their way.

 

Neat stuff.

[Mikefp]

It took my 20" scope with HB filter to see it clearly. 5/5 transparency and dark sky at the Mojave national preserve.  14" scope failed even with HB filter at green zone closer to Los Angeles.

[star drop]

I have never seen it.

[Ahab]

I have never seen it.

I haven't either but it's not for a lack of trying.

[Matt Lindsey]

Seen it several times with my 12" reflector and H-beta filter from an orange zone sky.  Not easy, very subtle.  For me, the H-beta made all the difference; even with a UHC filter it was invisible.

[Feidb]

Continued from above, I saw it last night from my usual observing site at Redstone Picnic Area on the North Shore Road of Lake Mead, Nevada. The transparency was poor and high, thin cirrus clouds kept drifting through. However, once in a while, there was a good hole.

 

I always do a test view before I bother with the Horsehead. I do a raw view, unfiltered to see if I can spot the Flame Nebula. If that's a go, then I'm pretty sure I can spot B-33 (the Horsehead). Sho' 'nuff, I put the H-Beta filter in. I didn't even bother trying a raw view. By the way, I also tried a raw view with the surrounding bright stars to see if the ones NOT associated with nebulae had nebulae. When they didn't, or had very small halos, I figured the transparency was "meh" so it was still worth a shot since I could see the flame.

 

Anyway, I put in the H-beta and my 102X EP and swept next to Zeta Orionis and looked for the wall of IC-434. I then followed it past the two stars. The "bottom" one, as I call it, sits at the edge of the wall. Just to the left of it, as I was looking at it, the wall should have a notch going down. At first, there was nothing but after sweeping the spot with averted vision, I could just make out a missing piece of the wall. It would blend in and disappear then come back. My friend Matt was nearby and wanted to check it out, so he came over and refocused and gave it a go. He got the same results. He's experienced enough to figure it out on his own, without coaching. He spotted the dark notch once in a while by sweeping with averted vision. There was not distinct shape. The notch was indistinct and almost round, but slightly misshapen.

 

Transparency and darkness are key to making it come out, no matter what aperture you're using. Last night it was 16-inch. However, I DID see it and this view wasn't unusual either.

 

The best I've seen it was Furnace Creek in Death Valley where I was able to see the neck and nose of the horse's head. That night I could even see it without a filter, though not with as much detail.