Orion Nebula

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I finally had a chance to go out early this morning and check out the Orion Nebula. It's the first time my telescope has been used in at least 2 months and the firsy nebula I have seen. I actually went past it four times because I just assumed it was a bit of fuzzy glare. Was I mistaken in expecting it to be brighter than what it was? I live in town (a population of roughly 4000ish) so maybe I would have been going somewhere with darker skies. What are other people's experiences with these things?

I would like to find Eta Carina tonight, but now I don't know what to look for.

[xelasnave]

As your experience builds things will seem brighter.
Make sure your eyes are dark adapted and no light is nearby, use a hood if anything is interfering.
As to EC follow the milky way south it's in there somewhere.
You may not find it but you will see many objects .
But take your time and many interesting objects will appear.
Use low power eye piece and change up when you find something.

[BeanerSA]

I spent a week going straight past the Carina Nebula, the problem being that it is nearly 3 degrees across. Use your lowest power eyepiece, and maybe look at some sketches before you go hunting.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I have a 42mm ep that will probably do the trick. There's so much going on in the milky way so if I can't find carina then I should stumble on something else to keep me busy.

[Allan_L]

Definitely darker moonless skies help a lot.

To Find Eta Carina:
Look at the Southern Cross (naked eye)
Draw a line from Beta Crux through Epsilon Crux, then almost three and a half times that span again.
you will see a brighter patch of nebulosity within the milky way.
That is it.
Good Luck.

[RobF]

Perhaps check out post #16 in this excellent thread by Alexander?
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=86831&highlight=sketch

[Gvarouha]

Try using you peripheral vision to look at your target. Takes a bit of getting used to but when you master it everything looks a lot brighter

[Camelopardalis]

Also try using your finder scope... both the Orion nebula and Eta Carina are quite bright enough in direct vision to be identified in a small aperture.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I don't actually own a finder scope. I bought a pair of second-hand binoculars, but there's something wrong with them. I collimated (?) both sides and still get this weird rainbow starburst when I look through them.



I'm slowly learning to use my peripheral vision. It seems to be an art all of its own.



Alexander is a master of sketching. His drawings make me wish I had at least a drop of artistic talent. They've helped me out a bit, as opposed to using the Hubble inages for comparison.

It looks like we're in for cloudy nights for a while longer now, so when the skies clear up I'll head back out and give it another go.

[raymo]

I don't know if you've mentioned it somewhere on these threads, but what scope do you have, and how come it doesn't have a finder scope?
Finding objects is very difficult without one, as the eyepiece field of
view is so narrow.
raymo

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I have a Skywatcher heritage 130p. I didn't know that having a fider scope was such a big deal to be honest. Nobody has ever mentiond it's importance before now :shrug:

[glend]

Eta Carinea is gettng pretty low now, why nof look direcly overhead at about 8pm where you can find the vast stream of the Sagitarius star cloud and Milky Way. The Lagoon Nebula can easily be seen by naked eye and then you can hop the scope along to thr Trifud, Swan and Eagle nebulae.

God luck.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I found out last night that it's sitting just behind our shed, so I'll have to wait until it comes back around to look. There were some things up high that I noticed from the corner of my eye, possibly nebulae of some sort. I didn't have a chance to check them out though.

[julianh72]

That's got a Red Dot Finder - right? They're fine for pointing at naked eye targets (such as planets, or pointing at the alignment stars on a GoTo mount), but you'll need to use star-hopping from bright stars to find fainter targets.

A right-angle finder scope (8x50 say) might be a useful accessory - it'll let you find much fainter targets than you can with the naked eye. (Right-angle finders cost a bot more than a straight-through finder, but with a small telescope where the viewing position is never very high off the ground, your back and neck will thank you for it!)

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I have got a red dot finder, I just have no idea where it went. One of my girls knocked it off my scope and it's grown legs. I'm sure it'll pop up sooner or later.

[raymo]

Just to confuse you, some people [including me], find a right angle finder
more of a pain in the neck than the pain caused by a straight through
finder, because it displays the sky in a different orientation
from that shown in the main scope's eyepiece.
raymo

[Solanum]

I used to live in Mildura, still spend a lot of time there (in fact I'm typing this from Mildura right now) and I've driven through the Riverland hundreds of times and you have very good skies! Even in the 'city' of Mildura nebulas like Orion and Eta Carina were fabulous, much much better than they are from the light polluted skies here in the Adelaide Hills.

As others have mentioned, part of it is probably expectations (nebulas never look like the colour photos you see). Where you are, Eta Carina and the Orion nebula are naked eye objects, I could locate the lagoon nebula by eye from Mildura as well. However, use the red dot finder, it is difficult to align even naked eye objects without the red dot or other finder.

The other thing that improves detail is a nebula or UHC filter, you can probably find a second hand one for not too much money (they go on the eyepice, not the scope...).

Finally, even in the Riverland, dark adaption for your eyes is essential, so I concur with what others have said, 30+ mins in the dark and avoid getting street or other lights in your eye (and avoid the moon being up of course).

Good luck!

[julianh72]

:lol: Yes, I understand the confusion between the different image orientations that you get with straight-through versus right-angle finders. However, isn't that pretty much unavoidable whatever configuration you use? Unless you are using a refractor without a diagonal and a straight-through finderscope (or a refractor with a diagonal and a right-angle finderscope), you will get a different image orientation between the main eyepiece and the finderscope.

Just to clarify my suggestion of a right-angle finder - the OP has a SkyWatcher Heritage 130, which is a smallish table-top Dob, so most of the time, you are hunched somewhat over the normal eyepiece, and when observing near the zenith, you'd almost have to lie flat on your back on the table to be able to use a straight-through finder!

I find life a lot easier if the finderscope can be arranged so that the eyepiece is close by the main eyepiece, and in the same physical orientation, so that you can swap easily between the two - image inversion effects notwithstanding! (This can be less of an issue with larger scopes such as SCTs where the main eyepiece stays at a reasonable viewing height in most orientations, so you can swap between the eyepiece and the finderscope without needing to be a gymnast, but even then, targeting objects near the zenith can be a challenge with a straight-though finderscope.)

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I already have to cope with everything being upside-down, so would a right-angle finder scope really be that bad? :lol:
I should be able to manage with my red dot finder (if I can work out where it is) but later on down the track I'll definitely invest in a finder scope.

[raymo]

I can willingly concede your point regarding the 130 Heritage Julian,
there are always exceptions.
raymo

[Larryp]

If you use an RACI (right angle correct image) finder, everything is right way up and correct left/right orientation-these are very easy to use!

[BilliGoatsGruff]

But what one should I get. It's a bit overwhelming :confused2:

[xelasnave]

For preserving night vision make an eye patch.
You can put it on 30 mins plus before you go outside and you are ready.
Also at least get some binnos to look around for targets.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

I'm sure I would make a great looking pirate :lol: it's a good idea though.

[xelasnave]

Works a treat. Also you can come back inside make a cuppa etc and not destroy your dark eye adaption.
It is one of those ideas that sound odd but really works.

[N1]

Relax Billi. I suggest you get your RDF working again, know how to use it without giving it much thought (especially in combination with a chart and a bit of starhopping), then decide whether you really must have a finderscope on the Heritage. If you know where your target is, what you do is find the general field using the RDF even if you don't see your actual target, then pick up the object in your lowest power eyepiece. Most anything worth looking at in the Heritage (a nifty scope I hear) should be findable that way. Not sure what your current low power EP is, but a 32 Plössl for example (about 20x in the Heritage) should work very well. Attach one of the filters mentioned earlier in this thread to the same eyepiece for spectacular low power views of Eta Car.

My 10" dob has an RDF only and so far has not left me wanting more. The small refractors are their own finders so nothing gets attached to them (the bigger one has 570mm focal length). I use a RACI on my 8" dob, but only because it came with it.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

Thanks for the heads up :) I have a whole range of Meade eps, but find myself reaching for the 32mm rather than the 40mm. It was what I used when I stumbled across the orion nebula. I would like to get a filter sometime, but I'm only new to it all so there's so much for me to look at without needing a nebula filter.

[N1]

Yep the 32 PL should be just about ideal as the Heritage only takes 1.25" barrel size if I remember correctly. Widest true field of view in 1.25" and a large exit pupil. The 40mm is probably a specialty EP with no gain in TFOV but with an even brighter image than the 32 IF your pupils dilate to 8mm (most people's won't). If they don't, then the 40mm will be of no advantage in the Heritage (unless you want super low power for some reason) - especially under (sub)urban skies. This will be different in a telescope whose f-number is higher and maximum useable image brightness is needed without going to 2", so the 40mm may be worth keeping for that reason.

Edit: Speaking of light pollution - while the 32 is great for finding stuff even under less than ideal skies and unbelievably good under dark skies, you may find galaxies and nebulae look a bit better from home using higher power. Try an exit pupil between 2 and 3mm for those. Exit pupil = Eyepiece length / f number of telescope. This will darken the background sky a little bit, which is said to improve contrast.

[BilliGoatsGruff]

So if I've worked it out correctly then a 10mm would be ok once I find the object that I'm looking for?

[N1]

Yep 10-15mm.

YMMV!

[BilliGoatsGruff]

:thumbsup: