33 replies to this topic

[chemisted]

Many times I find myself thinking:  WOW this view is just the best FOV, brightness, whatever only to do the same thing with the very next setup I try.  So I asked myself to pick the best of the best.  I would like you to do the same.  Sure its an impossible task but I know you are up to it.  I will get the ball rolling.  Since I am a globular cluster geek it is going to be one of those little gems.  I know M13 gets all the love in Hercules and if one tends to wander some have discovered M92 is fantastic as well.  For me, the challenge was NGC 6229.  For almost two decades I would visit this guy and see some stars but only a handful.  My biggest scope is 10" and this cluster is 99,000 light years away.  So I optimized everything in the NV train (new intensifier, silver diagonal, Takahashi Q1.6 amplifier) and I now get dozens of pinpoint stars that thrill me to no end.  How about you?  What has floated your boat like nothing else?  What I want you to do is answer the Lovin' Spoonful's song Did You Ever Have To Make Up Your Mind?  Specifically:  " Say yes to one and leave the others behind."

Edited by chemisted, 10 February 2021 - 08:53 PM.

[Jeff Morgan]

So many great ones, but the best was "discovering" Sharpless 2-119. A huge and bright nebula over 2 degrees in extent that none of my traditional paper or electronic atlases depicted.

 

And that was from Yellow Zone (SQM 20.5 skies) with a 5.5" aperture. At that moment I realized what a powerful visual tool NV was.

[hoof]

Best? Well, looking at M42 with NV and a h-alpha filter was one. Incredible detail, took magnification very well, just an amazing experience, up there in my “best of” list.

Other than that, stumbling upon the Monkey Head nebula and seeing it actually look like a monkey head was pretty awesome. Seeing the bubble nebula as a bubble, pretty cool. Gazing in H-alpha at 1x and stumbling upon nebula was pretty cool. Oh and finally actually seeing the Horsehead nebula is neat, but, IMO the nearby flame nebula is prettier

[Joko]

My favourite is without telescope, just handheld.

And it is the full Barnard Loop with close M42, Flame, IC 434...

 

And with telescope my favourite target is the area of Ink Spot Nebula (Barnard 86) & NGC 6520.

Horsehead is also breathtaking, so easy to see even with a small telescope.

 

Globulars, Open clusters, Galaxies, Nebulas are also unforgettable using NVD.

And much more...

Edited by Joko, 11 February 2021 - 10:02 AM.

[bobhen]

After 40 years of observing in light pollution, there are many NV best views. Here are just a few…

 

The core of M-42 at 2,000mm FL – very detailed and 3-D like. 
Not only observing the Horsehead and Flame Nebulas but details within!
Discovering MANY other previously unseen nebulas
Observing the large, dark nebula running through Sagittarius
Observing 47 galaxies in one night
Barnard’s loop with a 50mm lens – if only the brighter sections.

 

Bob

[slavicek]

The Most impressive viewing experience is to be able to see the Barnard loop and Horse head from the suburbs.

Then second most impressive will be all the Ha nebulas.

Globulars just look different, in my opinion. So they are interesting to look at (with NV) but not impressive.

[PEterW]

I find being able to turn a low star count urban sky into a sky packed with stars, reminds you what’s really there and encourages one to seek to darker skies and puts a smile on your face.

PEter

Edited by PEterW, 12 February 2021 - 04:48 AM.

[chemisted]

The Most impressive viewing experience is to be able to see the Barnard loop and Horse head from the suburbs.

Then second most impressive will be all the Ha nebulas.

Globulars just look different, in my opinion. So they are interesting to look at (with NV) but not impressive.

I am intrigued by your comments on globulars.  With your 22" of aperture you are getting excellent resolution of the brighter globulars without the aid of NV because you are seeing horizontal branch stars that are strong emitters in the blue end of the spectrum where the human eye has good response.  NV devices, on the other hand, mainly detect red giant branch stars that emit most strongly in the near IR where the human eye is completely insensitive.  So your comment that "Globulars just look different" makes perfectly good sense.  There are fainter globulars that do not have blue horizontal branch stars and with those you will see an incredible improvement with the NV device.  One that comes to mind right away is NGC 6760 but there are many others.

Edited by chemisted, 12 February 2021 - 08:11 AM.

[Mazerski]

So far, my vote goes to M17. No tracking - photo is just a snap with iPhone 7 thru NewMoon 12.5" + Mod 3 in light polluted sky of MD.

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Jeff Morgan]

I am intrigued by your comments on globulars.  With your 22" of aperture you are getting excellent resolution of the brighter globulars without the aid of NV because you are seeing horizontal branch stars that are strong emitters in the blue end of the spectrum where the human eye has good response.  NV devices, on the other hand, mainly detect red giant branch stars that emit most strongly in the near IR where the human eye is completely insensitive.  So your comment that "Globulars just look different" makes perfectly good sense.  There are fainter globulars that do not have blue horizontal branch stars and with those you will see an incredible improvement with the NV device.  One that comes to mind right away is NGC 6760 but there are many others.

 

Of course, one has to have the aperture to reach the horizontal branch!

 

What would you guess that magnitude value is for M13? Go ahead, write it down on a piece of paper before looking down ...

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

Did you write it down?

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

The Uranometria Deep Sky Field Guide lists the horizontal magnitude of M13 at ...

 

 

 

15.0!

 

Yep, 15th magnitude. The brightest individual members are listed at 11.9.

 

I have posted in the past about my preference of standard eyepieces only with the very brightest globulars. Using my 130mm refractor, that is a pretty small number. With my 16" Dob there are more that qualify - but still only about half a dozen or so.

 

A 22" aperture would of course increase that population. I suspect not greatly though.

[chemisted]

I have tabulated all the observable clusters for northern hemisphere amateurs and divided them into five groupings.  The first of these is my 'Brightest' group and there are 24 clusters in it.  All of them have horizontal branch stars mag 16.5 or brighter with one exception - M53 is 16.8.  A 22" telescope under good sky conditions will reach ~mag 17 or better.  Thus a couple dozen clusters should resolve well with this size telescope but, as your point is well taken, this is a small percentage of the more than 100 that are out there waiting to be seen by the inquiring amateur astronomer.

[ButterFly]

I look at NGC 253 whenever I can.  The dust lanes in the 15" are just beautiful.  NV does poorly on galaxies, so having one that works well makes it that much more special.

 

The Propeller Nebula (DWB 111 and friends).  It's a difficult object to see well with just an H-beta filter.  Not so much anymore!

 

 

NV devices, on the other hand, mainly detect red giant branch stars that emit most strongly in the near IR where the human eye is completely insensitive.

They still pick up blue stars just fine.  Blue stars have lots of blue and red in their spectra.  However, a dimmer red star could end up appearing brighter than a blue star because of the NV device's spectral sensitivity.  That can make star hopping a little difficult at times.

 

The only glob I have found decidedly worse with NV is 5053.  With an eyepiece, it's a large haze with diamond dust sprinkles as I move my eye around the field.  With NV, the haze does not register well against the background because it's big, and the stars don't pop into view with motion - they are just there.  Most globs and tight clusters like 2158 benefit greatly.

Edited by ButterFly, 12 February 2021 - 04:26 PM.

[GeezerGazer]

For me, it's being able to see and photograph the myriad H-a subjects with modest equipment, 6" or 8" Newts and camera lenses with NV and phone.  That so many H-a have a common name resembling their shape is a plus.  And as I travel to dark sites, I have taken to finding increasingly obscure, faint and unnamed H-a subjects.  Favorite H-a?  Far from faint, probably the Rosette with it's layers and dark lines; and the central cluster with a near-absence of H-a.  What's not to like?  

 https://www.cloudyni...c-2246-rosette/

 

This is not to say that globs or galaxies or dark nebulae are unattractive; but the power of NV is well suited to H-a, and since I must "finally decide, and leave the others behind," my selection remains H-a.  

 

Good question Ed!

[chemisted]

Ray, I am always impressed and amazed by the detail you achieve in your images.  This one is stunning!  Ed

[slavicek]

I am intrigued by your comments on globulars.  With your 22" of aperture you are getting excellent resolution of the brighter globulars without the aid of NV because you are seeing horizontal branch stars that are strong emitters in the blue end of the spectrum where the human eye has good response.  NV devices, on the other hand, mainly detect red giant branch stars that emit most strongly in the near IR where the human eye is completely insensitive.  So your comment that "Globulars just look different" makes perfectly good sense.  There are fainter globulars that do not have blue horizontal branch stars and with those you will see an incredible improvement with the NV device.  One that comes to mind right away is NGC 6760 but there are many others.

I think the 22" aperture is the reason why I am not impressed with looking at the globs using NV. Looking at M13 etc. thru regular glass in the 22" is always "Holly macaroni" event, there is no need to "intensify" anything. Mind you I only use the NV on globs when using my 100mm refractor. Anyway, I am a nebula guy and that's where I use NV most of the time. And I am sure so does everybody else here.

[Jeff Morgan]

The only glob I have found decidedly worse with NV is 5053.  With an eyepiece, it's a large haze with diamond dust sprinkles as I move my eye around the field.  With NV, the haze does not register well against the background because it's big, and the stars don't pop into view with motion - they are just there.  Most globs and tight clusters like 2158 benefit greatly.

 

I'll have to go back for that one. I never tried it with a conventional eyepiece. Or if I did it was long before I kept a logbook.

 

Here is my entry for NGC 5053 with my NV eyepiece, from 20.5 skies with a 16" Dob:

 

Apr 1, 2019, Z16, Home: Good size but very faint lots of sprinkled stars resolved without the core looks more like a faint but Rich open cluster. Long pass filter seems to help a small bit.

[Joko]

I think the 22" aperture is the reason why I am not impressed with looking at the globs using NV. Looking at M13 etc. thru regular glass in the 22" is always "Holly macaroni" event, there is no need to "intensify" anything. Mind you I only use the NV on globs when using my 100mm refractor. Anyway, I am a nebula guy and that's where I use NV most of the time. And I am sure so does everybody else here.

There are so many other globs than M13.

Some are barely visible with 22" but resolved by adding NV eyepiece.

 

When you can see all details on a target like M13, NV eyepiece will not show what doesn't exist. 

Edited by Joko, 13 February 2021 - 02:02 AM.

[Mike Lockwood]

I think my favorite experience so far was sharing the big targets in the summer/fall H-alpha sky with various people at Okie-Tex, including the star party organizers, in a sky tour that took about 20 minutes, through my 14.5" f/2.55.  I did this on several nights in 2019.

 

Many of the people viewing were also imagers who marveled at being able to see some of their imaging targets in real-time.  Sometimes their imaging rigs were actually imaging one of the objects while they were viewing it.

 

As for the object that people respond to most, I find that it is the Horsehead, especially through a larger instrument, such as a 32" at WSP.

 

My most memorable personal observing experience was finding another star in the Trapezium with NV at WSP, verifying it visually without NV, and then being able to get images of it through the NV with a small camera.  Scroll down about 2/3 of the way in my WSP article to see that, and I will also note that looking at and catching some images of the Eta Carina nebula as it scraped the horizon there was also a ton of fun (see images in article, too).

 

http://www.loptics.c...20/WSP2020.html

[MJB87]

Let's all stay on topic please. This is about night vision viewing experiences. Questions of a technical nature relating to equipment belong in a different topic or a new topic. Off-topic posts will be removed. Thanks.

 

Marty

[JMW]

I am amazed to see the low contrast objects that are even difficult under dark skies. I have only seen the California, Horsehead and Flame with my PVS14. I can see them in my light polluted yard using a 7nm Ha filter. Even better under dark skies.

 

Hand held under dark skies with open horizons is amazing. Most of the rest of the time I am using it on an SVR90T with the Televue 55+ 67 converter great views.

 

Last summer 3/4 of my planned dark sky astronomy camping nights didn't happen because of COVID-19. I hope to go to GSSP and OSP this year for more dark sky nights.

Edited by JMW, 25 February 2021 - 05:15 PM.

[Dale Eason]

Every one of the above for me has been an astounding experience.  

 

But what I remember most is finally learning to navigate the Virgo Cluster and seeing from my light polluted back yard in my 10 F3 what I first ever saw in my 16 at TSP.  That is all those galaxies down to mag 9 in Markarian's chain right from my back yard.  It is incredible.  Saw some that I even missed at TSP with the 16 because the 10 F3 has such a wider field of view.

 

To me it seems my 10F3 with NV is almost equivalent to what I remember I saw in a 20 inch scope.  Except that the image scale is smaller.

[chemisted]

Dale, I have observed NGC 6356 with a 20" RC on top of Kitt Peak with a normal eyepiece and thought it was a very fine cluster.  In fact, the operator, who had never seen it before, made the remark he was definitely going to add it to his regular observing list. But at home, with my 10" fully optimized NV system, I see this cluster with TWICE the diameter because of an outer shell of faint horizontal branch stars that were completely missed by the 20"!  NV rocks.  Ed

[a__l]

There is something dubious here with a 20" telescope. Or with a light background during observation (faint haze?). Or with a personal perception (initial cataract?). Globular cluster 8,2m NGC 6356 ...

Edited by a__l, 26 February 2021 - 08:23 PM.

[chemisted]

I think you are misinterpreting the post.  The cluster was easily seen with the 20" scope and the brighter stars in it did show up to about a 4' diameter.  What was missed were the horizontal branch stars that shine at magnitude 17.5.  These faint stars increased the diameter of the cluster to 8' with my personal equipment at home.

[a__l]

Those added 3m to theoretical for 10" for not dark site?
If possible, show an approximate photo (from the Internet) of the difference that you see. It will be interesting to see in the summer.