Daniel Mounsey
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/12/02
|
The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
#5038781 - 01/26/12 10:49 AM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Using a Collins I3 with the assist of a simple 1.25" 7nm Ha filter in my 6" F-8 refractor, the Orion region comes alive. From a heavily light polluted city, even with moisture in the air, the view of M42 blew away any telescope you would look through in ordinary visible light. The filter also darkens the background. The entire Orion nebula looks like a picture with the extensions all the way around to the outer, faintest edges and are clearly seen, not just the Fish mouth. For the first time you can actually see depth like 3D. The region which the Horse Head resides, looks like a line of luminance which highlights the head of the Horse. My friend Pascal remarked that wow! I don't have to use my camera to see this! I honestly believe that the bad reviews this incredible eyepiece has gotten is due to the misunderstanding of how to use it properly with an Ha filter. Any other filter we used was almost useless but using an Ha literally transforms the I3 like live photographs. My friend Lindy Williams was the only one who expressed it right about the I3 and how to make it work properly. For all you critics who said otherwise about it, you are dead wrong!
Edited by Daniel Mounsey (01/26/12 05:22 PM)
|
blb
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/25/05
Loc: Piedmont NC
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Daniel Mounsey]
#5038842 - 01/26/12 11:16 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Sounds like a wonderful nights viewing. I think the only thing wrong with the image intensified view through this eyepiece is the cost of it. I was wondering though, can you change the magnification of your view when using the Collins 13?
|
ensign
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/16/08
Loc: Southwestern Ontario
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Daniel Mounsey]
#5038844 - 01/26/12 11:17 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I have observed the HH numerous times with my Mallincam and a 4 inch refractor - even under light-polluted skies.
Purists will want to observe it directly through an EP without the aid of electronic technology. Maybe using the Mallincam or an IIE is "cheating"? 
|
Astrojensen
Post Laureate
Reged: 10/05/08
Loc: Bornholm, Denmark
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: ensign]
#5039092 - 01/26/12 01:36 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
Purists will want to observe it directly through an EP without the aid of electronic technology. Maybe using the Mallincam or an IIE is "cheating"?
No, it's not "cheating", it's just not visual observing anymore, but a form of astrophotography or imaging. Nothing wrong with that, as long as it's not called visual observing!
And why is it not visual? Because the photons from the object has been converted to electrons in the process and the output is enhanced compared to the input, before the electrons are converted back to photons, which you then observe on a little screen through an eyepiece or on an actual screen.
For me, visual observing is about the eye, the mind and the telescope, observing the universe together. I have used image intensifiers to look at the stars with and the results can be extremely impressive, but it's not what I consider real visual observing.
But that's just me. In the end, it's about having fun.
Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark
|
StarBucket
sage
Reged: 02/03/10
Loc: Scandinavia - 55° 36'
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Astrojensen]
#5039365 - 01/26/12 03:48 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
That's a pretty apt summing up, Thomas.
|
David Knisely
Postmaster
Reged: 04/19/04
Loc: southeastern Nebraska
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: ensign]
#5039454 - 01/26/12 04:35 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
I have observed the HH numerous times with my Mallincam and a 4 inch refractor - even under light-polluted skies.
Purists will want to observe it directly through an EP without the aid of electronic technology. Maybe using the Mallincam or an IIE is "cheating"?
The Mallincam is definitely imaging and not really visual observing (not that there is anything wrong with imaging, as it is a great way to capture faint objects). As for the I3 Image Intensifying Eyepiece, I have mixed views on it. It does work, but for its high cost, it kind of leaves me wanting a bit more. One does have to play around a bit with the f/ratio to get it to perform optimally. A friend of mine from California was using it in an 80mm APO for the Trifid, and while I could see it, it was like looking at it in a green snowstorm (lots of noise). It also didn't show anything that I didn't also see in my 9.25 inch SCT nearby (and didn't show the reflection nebulosity next door all that well). Clearly, he needed to use some sort of tele compressor to get the f/ratio to something a bit more reasonable so that the IIE would function properly. The other thing I didn't like about it was the poor eye lens used to view the green phosphor screen. It had terrible streaky distortion as I moved my eye, kind of like a cheap magnifying glass does for things away from the lens center. This made the stars away from the center look like the "starship going into warp" view. One wonders why they couldn't have done just a bit more work with the eye lens to get a flatter and more stable view. The IIE does work pretty well on planetary nebulae and globulars, but on galaxies, its lack of blue sensitivity is a bit of a handicap sometimes. This is where for the cost, the Mallincam might make a little more sense, although you do kind of get away from the "live" viewing feel when you get into imaging. Imaging chips are also a little more rugged than image tubes tend to be. I won't criticise anyone for using these tools in astronomy, but for me right now, I probably will just stay with the good old Mark-1 eyeball and have fun that way. Clear skies to you.
|
Carol L
Reged: 07/05/04
Loc: Tomahawk, WI 45N//89W
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Astrojensen]
#5040311 - 01/27/12 02:01 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
For me, visual observing is about the eye, the mind and the telescope, observing the universe together.
Absolutely. 
|
Feidb
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 10/09/09
Loc: Nevada
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Carol L]
#5040596 - 01/27/12 09:46 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
To me it's not visual observing either. However, there's nothing wrong with it as another form of observing, just not visual. I could not begin to afford the doodads necessary to do something like that, but for those that can and with that inclination, go for it.
I'm quite happy with the views I get through my eyepieces.
|
Dave Mitsky
Postmaster
Reged: 04/08/02
Loc: PA, USA, Planet Earth
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Feidb]
#5040758 - 01/27/12 11:31 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Put me in the not-visual-observing camp too but there is something to be said for the use of such devices.
I had a chance to observe with an I3 Piece and a 24" Tectron on a couple of occasions some years ago. The images of certain objects, NGC 40 and NGC 6543 in particular, were amazing. Other DSOs, such as some of the summer Messier objects, did not impress me very much. The summer Milky Way was striking when viewed through a camera lens and the I3 Piece. Like David, I didn't care much for the display screen.
http://www.ceoptics.com/misc/technical.html
I've also seen a MallinCam in action with an 18" Obsession and was far more impressed.
http://mallincam.tripod.com/
Another option is the Binocular Photon Machine. I've used a BPM with a large Dob and many of the images were spectacular.
http://nightvisionastronomy.com/
Dave Mitsky
|
blb
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/25/05
Loc: Piedmont NC
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Feidb]
#5040769 - 01/27/12 11:35 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
To me it's not visual observing either.
It's kind of like the choice between going to a play or watching it on TV. Both involve your eyes but their not the same thing.
Quote:
However, there's nothing wrong with it as another form of observing, just not visual. I could not begin to afford the doodads necessary to do something like that, but for those that can and with that inclination, go for it.
If I were not worried about paying the bills and had a couple thousand laying around, I would probably give it a try. However that isn't the case.
Quote:
I'm quite happy with the views I get through my eyepieces.
I completely agree. I absolutely love visual astronomy. There is something about seeing it with my own eyes. Besides there are plenty of books, magazines and the web where I can look at pretty pictures.
|
blb
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/25/05
Loc: Piedmont NC
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: blb]
#5040794 - 01/27/12 11:49 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
Put me in the not-visual-observing camp too but there is something to be said for the use of such devices.
 I'm not sure if you ment you preferred visual observing of some form of image intensified viewing.
|
Dave Mitsky
Postmaster
Reged: 04/08/02
Loc: PA, USA, Planet Earth
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: blb]
#5040880 - 01/27/12 12:41 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I meant that I prefer visual observing. The electronically enhanced methods have some definite drawbacks, including their high cost and the loss of dark adaptation when using them, but they can provide views that may not be possible otherwise.
Dave Mitsky
|
Feidb
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 10/09/09
Loc: Nevada
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Dave Mitsky]
#5041052 - 01/27/12 02:24 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Decades ago, I was excited about the technology. However, I came to realize what I really wanted out of amateur astronomy and THAT wasn't it. I've watched the technology improve and the prices come down within reach of SOME amateurs. It's another form of the hobby but not for me.
It's Memroex, not the real deal, at least by my way of thinking. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, it's just not the real photons hitting my eye after going through the telescope and the eyepiece lenses.
I see it one day becoming another branch of amateur astronomy if enough of those doohickeys ever get sold.
|
Vondragonnoggin
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/21/10
Loc: Southern CA, USA
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Feidb]
#5042075 - 01/28/12 07:49 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I would like to see the technology develop further with more affordable image intensifiers and well corrected views with minimal noise. Light pollution appears to be here to stay and I like the idea that I could find those objects from the backyard that I would normally have to drive several hours to the darkest site to see.
I'll keep my fingers crossed for it or maybe a screw on adapter that does it in the future. Like amplifying the light signal before it hits your eyepiece. Something like that would be cool.
|
Peter Natscher
sage
Reged: 03/28/06
Loc: Central California
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Daniel Mounsey]
#5043325 - 01/28/12 09:30 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Hi Daniel,
What you're doing with the I3 is a lot of fun but is real-time *imaging*, not observing. Observing is purely done by using your eyes alone to see a object through your telescope and not with an electronic device. I think this post should be moved to the "Imaging" or "Equipment" forum.
|
Carol L
Reged: 07/05/04
Loc: Tomahawk, WI 45N//89W
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Peter Natscher]
#5043496 - 01/29/12 12:02 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
I think this post should be moved to the "Imaging" or "Equipment" forum.
Or the Video and Electronically Assisted Astronomy Forum.
|
David Knisely
Postmaster
Reged: 04/19/04
Loc: southeastern Nebraska
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Peter Natscher]
#5043586 - 01/29/12 01:26 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
Hi Daniel,
What you're doing with the I3 is a lot of fun but is real-time *imaging*, not observing. Observing is purely done by using your eyes alone to see a object through your telescope and not with an electronic device. I think this post should be moved to the "Imaging" or "Equipment" forum.
I don't agree. If one was just posting images that would be one thing that might be better in one of the imaging forums, but with the I3, you are still viewing real-time with your eyeball, although what you are viewing is basically amplified light. One could go too far on this and insist that "real" observing would be without *any* optical aid with the eye alone, and that would bring things in our hobby to a halt pretty quickly  . I find nothing wrong with bringing up the occasional report from an image intensified view from time to time here, although a good place for more of this would be in the video and electronically assisted forum. Clear skies to you.
|
blb
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/25/05
Loc: Piedmont NC
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Carol L]
#5044039 - 01/29/12 11:49 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think this post should be moved to the "Imaging" or "Equipment" forum.
Or the Video and Electronically Assisted Astronomy Forum.
I agree, at best this is visual observing of a CRT or TV. Still it is fun to think about and talk about every now and then.
|
Peter Natscher
sage
Reged: 03/28/06
Loc: Central California
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: David Knisely]
#5045056 - 01/29/12 10:05 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Nope, I don't agree. The realtime image you see within a I3 is falling on a surface within this electronic device that is being called an eyepiece. It isn't an eyepiece. It is a electronic device to look at a processed image in. You are observing this activated surface that is positioned between the deep sky object and your eye. You are not receiving *unobstructed* photons directly to your retina for first-hand processing.
|
george golitzin
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/24/06
|
Re: The Horse Head and M42 were spectacular!
[Re: Daniel Mounsey]
#5045147 - 01/29/12 10:55 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
...the view of M42 blew away any telescope you would look through in ordinary visible light. The filter also darkens the background. The entire Orion nebula looks like a picture with the extensions all the way around to the outer, faintest edges and are clearly seen, not just the Fish mouth.
If by the "extensions all the way around to the outer faintest edges" you mean the band of luminosity that runs from Iota-Ori around to the southwest, closing the nebula in a great loop, well I was enjoying that just the other night in my 16-inch with a UHC from the mag 5 skies at home. M42 almost always looks three-dimensional to me in that scope on a decent night. The last thing I need is an electronic image intensifier.
geo.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
