105 replies to this topic

[MrsM75]

For me, it's not about competition. (I'm too old for that childish stuff) But just curious if the Southern Hemisphere has more to offer than the north. 

In Australia are many of the most poisonous snakes, like the Inland Taipan. But the good news is, most of these species have a friendly character and will not bite unless you force them. Totally other story compared with the very poisonous Black Mamba (Africa) for example, who bites many times in a row, just because you were walking there. Chasing you with a speed of 20 km / 12 mile per hour.(experienced snake-keeper talking here)

 

I agreed with you, that is why I sadi who ever love the Southern hemisphere sky, please move there, I am sure your Retirement pension can be transfer here.

 

As for how much can offer is also based on what stuff you like to look at too, just like beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Like to people they like the BIG HUGE stuff like Magellanic Clouds, North America Nebula, etc.. 

 

But then I never like those stuff, even Hubber images astrophotography still does not look interesting to me. I like Neptune, Uranus, Asteroids, Blinking Nebula, Eskimo Nebula, those tiny binny things.

 

So what offer to me more is where has those tinny binny things, not some Orion Nebula or Carina Nebula.

 

btw, I see Omega here at 8 degrees altitude right at my own home, it a HUGE Grey Glow here, and I mean it HUGE. I never like it. 

 

The beauty of this hobby is there always something in the sky that someone love, even the most ugliest thing like Ceres or Neptune, but has me love.

 

So to answer the OP question. No. Both Northern and Southern hemisphere has their gem, it up to you what you like to view, then move there to satisfy your viewing.

[Whiteduckwagglinginspace]

I agreed with you, that is why I sadi who ever love the Southern hemisphere sky, please move there, I am sure your Retirement pension can be transfer here.

 

As for how much can offer is also based on what stuff you like to look at too, just like beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Like to people they like the BIG HUGE stuff like Magellanic Clouds, North America Nebula, etc.. 

 

But then I never like those stuff, even Hubber images astrophotography still does not look interesting to me. I like Neptune, Uranus, Asteroids, Blinking Nebula, Eskimo Nebula, those tiny binny things.

 

So what offer to me more is where has those tinny binny things, not some Orion Nebula or Carina Nebula.

 

btw, I see Omega here at 8 degrees altitude right at my own home, it a HUGE Grey Glow here, and I mean it HUGE. I never like it. 

 

The beauty of this hobby is there always something in the sky that someone love, even the most ugliest thing like Ceres or Neptune, but has me love.

 

So to answer the OP question. No. Both Northern and Southern hemisphere has their gem, it up to you what you like to view, then move there to satisfy your viewing.

I like your refreshing perspective. In general, we can say that the southern hemisphere has some spectacular objects that we (unfortunately) can't see in the north. (A few great global clusters / nebulae, the satellite galaxies and the southern Milky Way) But when I made that list (it's here somewhere) and compared the best objects with each other - a comparison with what we can and can't see in the north (looking at size, brightness and beauty) - I could conclude that it isn't as bad as I first thought.

Edited by Whiteduckwagglinginspace, 22 June 2025 - 04:31 AM.

[skysurfer]

There is a pattern in octans that, through a polar scope, works well enough. It takes some getting used to for sure but it’s the same basic idea. Where we center Polaris and offset in some direction by 50’ or so, in the south, you center on a point relative to several stars in octans (I’d have to look it up again). Hard in the city but not bad in a dark sky.

Of course, today, the computer can do it as well there as in the north.

Or align to the +6.9 BQ Octantis which is very close to the real pole, much closer than Polaris or Sigma Oct. That is how I align my astrophotography rig.

STARS:
    NORTH:
    1. Sirius (brighest star of the sky)                                  Mag: -1.46
    (- 16 in Canis Major)  (also a double star)    SOUTH:
    2. Mimosa / Beta Crucis & Ruby Crucis / DY Crucis      Mag: 1.25
    (-59 in Crux) Mimosa = 19th star & Ruby Crucis = reddest star of the sky    =======================================================================
    =======================================================================

 

Sirius is not in the northern hemisphere !

[Whiteduckwagglinginspace]

Sirius is not in the northern hemisphere !

The list I made is a comparison of what we can and can't see from the northern hemisphere. That is from a different perspective than just the objects of north and south. 
Next to this, I had to pull a line somewhere: There are always overlaps, depending on where you live.

Edited by Whiteduckwagglinginspace, 22 June 2025 - 06:10 AM.

[BQ Octantis]

Or align to the +6.9 BQ Octantis which is very close to the real pole, much closer than Polaris or Sigma Oct. That is how I align my astrophotography rig.

Sirius is not in the northern hemisphere !

 

I LOVE BQ Octantis!

 

And why is Sirius so low here in North America? It was a zenith grazer on the Tropic of Capricorn…

Edited by BQ Octantis, 22 June 2025 - 04:59 AM.

[Javier1978]

I think most people would agree that the Eta Carinae Nebula, the Orion Nebula, and the Tarantula are the three greatest emission nebulae in the sky, though there are certainly a few others nipping at their heels, like M8 and M17.

 

Anyway, the Big Three are each so different from the next that I don't think it's reasonable to choose a favorite. Eta Carinae is brightest overall by a fair margin, but it has no part quite as intense as the Huygenian region in M42. I think the Tarantula Nebula might be the most beautiful of the lot through big scopes under dark skies.

I agree—there’s no need to pick a favorite. I just wanted to point out that, under typical conditions (not with a 30" scope under pristine skies), M42 is generally a brighter and more rewarding target than the Tarantula Nebula.

 

In my experience, of the three, the Carina Nebula is the most impressive in terms of structural detail when viewed through moderately sized scopes (12–14").

[ausastronomer]

That is not my experiencie. M42 appears much brighter and in a greener hue through the eyepiece, and offers nice views even under polluted skies. Tarantula nebula is very elusive under light pollution. Under dark skies both are great but I will choose M42 anytime.

 

Have a look at the Tarantula Nebula in a 25" Telescope at 300x under Bortle 1 skies with an OIII or UHC filter and you might well change your mind!

 

You should also consider things in their proper perspective:-

 

Orion Nebula.  Mag 4, Distance ~1,350 ly, Spans 12 ly.

Eta Carina. Mag 1, Distance ~7,500 ly, Spans 230 ly.

Tarantula Nebula. Mag ~4.5, Distance ~175,000 ly, spans ~930 ly.

 

In comparison to the Tarantula Nebula, the Orion Nebula is barely even a baby one!

 

Cheers

[ausastronomer]

In Australia are many of the most poisonous snakes, like the Inland Taipan. But the good news is, most of these species have a friendly character and will not bite unless you force them.

 

Forget about dying of snake bite in Australia.  You're a much greater chance of being killed in a car accident on your way to the airport.

 

On average 2 people die every year from snake bite in Australia. 50,000 people die every year from snake bite in India.  It's not all about the snakes being less aggressive. Many worldwide herpetologists consider the Coastal Taipan as the most "dangerous" snake in the world. It's big "between 2 and 3 metres", it's very fast and it's very aggressive. It also has the 3rd most toxic venom of any snake on the planet.  It's all about the medical facilities and the availability of antivenom.   I dare suggest if I was to be bitten by a snake, my preference would be at Coonabarabran, with a Hospital stocked with Antivenom less than 15km away, as opposed to the banks of the Ganges, or Sub Saharan Africa.

 

Cheers,

[Javier1978]

Have a look at the Tarantula Nebula in a 25" Telescope at 300x under Bortle 1 skies with an OIII or UHC filter and you might well change your mind!

 

 

I probably won’t have that chance, unfortunately.

 

However, I’ve had some nice views of the Tarantula Nebula under fairly dark skies through a quality 12" reflector, using a good UHC filter — it’s both beautiful and impressive. That being said, I’m quite confident in saying that the Orion Nebula is a much more forgiving target for small to mid-sized scopes and less-than-pristine skies.

Edited by Javier1978, 27 June 2025 - 06:44 AM.

[bunyon]

I'd choose 15 S over 15 N. I do think the southern hemisphere clearly has more to see. If, in fact, you like small, dim objects more than big, bright ones, the south has just as many. And planets go -23 to +23. 

 

But I wouldn't want to live N or S of 45 because you really do start to lose out on stuff. 

 

 

What this planet needs is more land with dark skies on the Equator.

[OAJoe]

I went to South Africa a couple years ago, and I was lucky to get to some dark skies near Pearly Beach, SA (or ZA).

 

What struck me was how bright the region around M7 was when it was high in the sky. It seemed even brighter than the region around M8. 

 

I also liked the coal sack next to the Southern Cross, Omega Centauri was easy naked eye, and I could see the two Megallanic Cloud naked eye. The Large MC had a bar within it in a mediocre borrowed pair of binoculars. (So mediocre, I usually used just one side of it.) But, it was just a diffuse glow naked eye.

[Tony Flanders]

What this planet needs is more land with dark skies on the Equator.

Most of the land near the equator has dark skies. But it also has lots of clouds, due to the circulation patterns of our planets' atmosphere. The desert zones where almost all the major professional observatories are located are centered around latitude 25 in both hemispheres.

 

Taking everything into consideration, I'd have to say that the Very Large Telescope's location near 25S is pretty close to ideal.

[Jon Isaacs]

NGC 4945, which ausastronomer mentioned, is a noteworthy spiral galaxy in Centaurus.  It's located a few degrees to the southwest of NGC 5139.

https://deepskycorne.../ngc4945.en.php

 

https://apod.nasa.go...d/ap150528.html

 

NGC4945 transits at slightly under 8° from our place in the high desert. Omega Centauri and Centaurus A are quite visible even in binoculars but NGC4945 is just a ghost, sometimes detectable in a 16 inch or larger, sometimes not.

 

 

 

NGC 253 in Sculptor

NGC 55 in Sculptor

NGC 1365 in Fornax

NGC 4945 in Centaurus

NGC 5128 in Centaurus (Centaurus A)

NGC 2997 in Antlia

NGC 1566 in Dorado

Grus Quartet

There are also quite a few other nice ones.

Centaurus and Fornax Galaxy Clusters are also nice

 

Except for NGC 1566, these are all visible from 32.5° north but would benefit from a more southerly location. 

 

NGC253 is quite spectacular. NGC 247 is a favorite. 

 

Jon

[Dave Mitsky]

I like your refreshing perspective. In general, we can say that the southern hemisphere has some spectacular objects that we (unfortunately) can't see in the north. (A few great global clusters / nebulae, the satellite galaxies and the southern Milky Way) But when I made that list (it's here somewhere) and compared the best objects with each other - a comparison with what we can and can't see in the north (looking at size, brightness and beauty) - I could conclude that it isn't as bad as I first thought.

Having observed from the southern hemisphere, I have to say it does have the edge over the northern one.

[Tony Flanders]

...
Except for NGC 1566, these are all visible from 32.5° north but would benefit from a more southerly location. 
 
NGC253 is quite spectacular...

I think of NGC 253 as one of the most important and popular galaxies in the canon of mid-northern deep-sky observers. And unlike NGC 55, it rises plausibly high for all observers in the contiguous United States. It was, after all, discovered by Caroline Herschel at latitude 51N.

Having said that, I've had better views of NGC 253 through my 4-inch refractor when it was directly overhead in Chile than I've ever had through my 12.5-inch Dob when it was 23 degrees above the horizon in upstate New York.

[BQ Octantis]

 

I think of NGC 253 as one of the most important and popular galaxies in the canon of mid-northern deep-sky observers. And unlike NGC 55, it rises plausibly high for all observers in the contiguous United States. It was, after all, discovered by Caroline Herschel at latitude 51N.

Having said that, I've had better views of NGC 253 through my 4-inch refractor when it was directly overhead in Chile than I've ever had through my 12.5-inch Dob when it was 23 degrees above the horizon in upstate New York.

 

 

Yep. It marks the southern pole of the southern galactic hemisphere. So on the Tropic of Capricorn, it grazes zenith just after midnight on the September equinox…

 

 

I had the fortune to shoot it from the Centralian desert back in '20 near said equinox…

 

https://www.cloudyni...-was-so-bright/

 

BQ
 

Edited by BQ Octantis, 28 June 2025 - 09:53 PM.

[Dave Mitsky]

What struck me was how bright the region around M7 was when it was high in the sky. It seemed even brighter than the region around M8.

The Milky Way is very rich in the area around M7 from the southern hemisphere.  Furthermore, M7 was easily visible as a reflection off of the waters of Lake Titicaca when I was in Bolivia.

[luxo II]

How do people in the southern hemisphere align on the south celestial pole, as there is no Polaris for them?

1. Halfway between Gacrux and Achernar. Hold up an open hand at arms length and eyeball it, should get you within 5 degrees. Or Acrux to 47 Tuc (the pole is a bit closer to 47 Tuc).

 

2. If setting up an equatorial mount (Synscan) set up and do a 1-star alignment, selecting any bright star near the horizon. But instead of slewing the scope to the star, I rotate the azimuth of the mount to centre the star in the finderscope.

 

Altitude is always close as I level my tripod to 0.1 degree when setting up, unless i entered date/time/position incorrectly.

Edited by luxo II, 30 June 2025 - 06:19 AM.

[Alan D. Whitman]

Have a look at the Tarantula Nebula in a 25" Telescope at 300x under Bortle 1 skies with an OIII or UHC filter and you might well change your mind!

 

You should also consider things in their proper perspective:-

 

Orion Nebula.  Mag 4, Distance ~1,350 ly, Spans 12 ly.

Eta Carina. Mag 1, Distance ~7,500 ly, Spans 230 ly.

Tarantula Nebula. Mag ~4.5, Distance ~175,000 ly, spans ~930 ly.

 

In comparison to the Tarantula Nebula, the Orion Nebula is barely even a baby one!

 

Cheers

Having read through this entire thread today, I don't think that anybody has mentioned that the Tarantula Nebula is a naked-eye object at its tremendous distance away in another galaxy, the LMC! 

 

I have had four glorious observing runs in Australia totaling about two months at quality dark sites using 14.5-inch to 30-inch Dobs, two months in Namibia using a C-11 at a superb desert site with no light domes in any direction, and brief observing from New Zealand (C-14), and Chile.

 

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between the sky north of the celestial equator and the glorious splendours in the far southern sky. The northern sky wins with the largest naked-eye open clusters, planetary nebulae, and the large detailed spiral galaxies M31 and M33. The southern half of the sky wins every other category, especially globular clusters and emission nebulae. (The Orion Nebula, M8 and M17 are, of course, south of the celestial equator.)

 

Living at latitude 49.3 N in western Canada, I don't observe that much anymore despite having a dark backyard. My two months in Namibia in 2023, much of it naked-eye observing, made it hard to get enthusiastic about observing from Canada. I have considered retiring in Australia, but there are always many other practical considerations besides amateur astronomy.

[BQ Octantis]

Having read through this entire thread today, I don't think that anybody has mentioned that the Tarantula Nebula is a naked-eye object at its tremendous distance away in another galaxy, the LMC! 

…

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between the sky north of the celestial equator and the glorious splendours in the far southern sky. The northern sky wins with the largest naked-eye open clusters, planetary nebulae, and the large detailed spiral galaxies M31 and M33. The southern half of the sky wins every other category, especially globular clusters and emission nebulae. (The Orion Nebula, M8 and M17 are, of course, south of the celestial equator.)

 

Living at latitude 49.3 N in western Canada, I don't observe that much anymore despite having a dark backyard. My two months in Namibia in 2023, much of it naked-eye observing, made it hard to get enthusiastic about observing from Canada. I have considered retiring in Australia, but there are always many other practical considerations besides amateur astronomy.

 

I echo your sentiment 100%. Moving back to the States after living in the Outback for 5 years, it's hard to describe the level of banality of the northern sky in comparison to one who hasn't seen. And with 10 million more denizens in the US needing illumination upon my return, finding an easy vantage point to observe its banality is itself a challenge.

 

BQ

[Sarkikos]

Agreed. Calling it a cross is extremely far-fetched; it's an excellent example of cultural imperialism. Not only is there no center star, but the fifth star fits perfectly into the natural kite or diamond interpretation, and makes zero sense as a cross.

Regardless, it's arguably the most striking star formation in the entire sky. And as a bonus, it includes some of the sky's finest doubles and one of the best star clusters.

 

To the ancient Greeks, it was the hooves of the Centaur.

Calling the Southern Cross a "cross" is no worse than any other culture looking up at the night sky and naming what they see according to their own cultural beliefs and biases.

 

Personally, I wish they would stick to naming objects in the heavens according to ancient Greco-Roman mythology.   In a way that would be more neutral, since virtually no one has those beliefs anymore.   

I can do without the Nunuwawamaumau's.  

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 02 July 2025 - 09:33 AM.

[NinePlanets]

Make and name your own constellations, Sarikikos! That's what I do. When I see that a group or asterism looks like something, that's what I call it. "They" can call them what "they" like too.

[Sarkikos]

Make and name your own constellations, Sarikikos! That's what I do. When I see that a group or asterism looks like something, that's what I call it. "They" can call them what "they" like too.

In a way, I do that constantly for little asterisms I notice when I do on-the-fly star hopping.  "OK, move to the Little Squashed Triangle, then go on to the Rocket Ship, and the object I want to see is right beside the Upside-Down Bowl."  This is while using SkySafari on my iPhone to star hop.

 

But for the big view, it's easier to just use the Constellations we've been given.

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 02 July 2025 - 09:30 AM.

[luxo II]

The question: does the southern hemisphere contain the better objects?

Depends on what context, but yes imho it does - for visual and binocular types.
 

Several years ago I travelled to  some towns in southwest Yunnan in dark locations above 3000m and took a pair of binos with me to examine the northern sky …. I can say I found it disappointing. Later I spent the best part of a year in the English Midlands and likewise found the night sky relatively uninteresting visually. 

 

But - here’s the catch - it depends on the context. There are quite a few nice examples of DSO in the north which are really nice imaging targets, but for which the southern hemisphere is rather sparse in comparison.
 

And regarding cultural connotations - when you have seen the “running emu” rising in the east from a Bortle 1 location downunder , you’ll never look at the “Milky Way” in quite the same way again. And who named it after a chocolate bar, anyway ?!? 

Edited by luxo II, 02 July 2025 - 05:27 PM.

[gustave]

Last year I was fortunate to have a look at the night sky from off the coast of Chile.  To see,  all be it with the naked eye, the Southern Cross,  the Jewel Box, and the other deep sky objects embedded in the southern Milky Way Cloud (yes it appeared as a vivid translucent cloud) was breathtaking.  A dream come true!