Urban Astronomy II

[nevers]

Wow...what a set back, but at least it's back. I'm still shocked all our stuff is gone. Anyway...I got a new 'scope (the tripod for my AstroView has gone to pasture) and I was out in my backyard (Las Vegas) and took this picture of M15. It's with my Canon G5 digital camera set at f/2 for 15 second exposure. The 'scope is a Meade 5" Refractor on the LXD55 mount with Autostar at 50x<br /><br />Like the old forum, I hope to hear from more people out there who are doing any kind of astronomical observing from Urban Areas: using any kind of telescope, binoculars or just your good old eyes, it doesn't matter.

 

[nevers]

Hmmm...still having second thoughts about Autostar but that's another thread. I'm having problems with alignment. User error is most definately a probable factor but I really don't think that's it. I think it's more with the LXD55 mount or the Autostar program itself.<br /><br />Anyway, I'd like to start a "Telescope & Equimpment" thread to discuss this and similiar topics. I think I'll do it right now!

 

[rvastro]

I just picked up a 1965 Cave Astrola. Scope needs the mirrors recoated but that is not a big deal. I think I lose like 5% of the light due to .5mm holes in the secondary coating. The mirrors I believe are still using the original coatings. The data on the mirror states coating took place on 10/7/1965. I am taking it out again in a bit so it can get some more starlight.

 

[tiza]

Hello, Brad:<br /><br />My husband and I bought a telescope right after we were married in 1976. We were married in 1975. This shows you how old we are. It still works, but I'm embarrassed to say where we purchased. Back then, you just couldn't find much.<br /><br />If you don't mind me asking, what did you give for your new scope? I would love to have a good one. You can give me an estimate, if you wish. I sure miss looking up at the sky. I still do, but we don't drag the heavy scope out anymore. <br />Thanks,<br />Tiza

 

[nevers]

Hi Tiza,<br /><br />Not a problem: the new Meade 5" was in the neighborhood of $800. I'll post a picture of it below in hopes that someday you'll be able to see it.<br /><br />So, what's this "heavy scope" you speak of?

 

[tiza]

Hello, Brad:<br /><br />I just got a chance to check out your Web site. It's pretty cool! Are you going to post things that you find on it? You have some really beautiful pictures too. I am trying to keep up on some things that are happening right now in the great cosmic arena when I find the time.<br />My time is extremely limited. <br /><br />About our old telescope, and you're going to laugh. Years ago, I think it was '76, my husband and I went to look for a telescope. We searched everywhere. Of course, back then, we really didn't know about astronomy magazines at all. So we ended up in Dallas after searching high and low. We finally were about to give up and went to Sears. Finally, after a month of searching, we ended up ordering a telescope from Sears that had to be shipped from I forget where, but it took it several weeks. At the time I remember spending close to $400 on it. Back then, 400 bucks was a lot of money. See, I know you're laughing. But we had fun with it. We went to some bookstore and found a starguide book thingie which worked so good and we were able to locate many places. <br /><br />Anyway, we live out in the country. In the earlier years when we lived here it was darker. Now there's more lights around here and there. It's a shame!<br /><br />For several years my husband and I have gone to a place outside of Glen Rose, TX to some private cabins for a mini-vacation. Some people own a bunch of land in a hilly area and have private cabins spaced apart on their land. Anyway, it's really nice, peaceful and secluded. We were simply amazed at seeing the stars there because it's so dark. It's almost like you've never seen them before.<br /><br />Tiza

 

[nevers]

Hi Tiza,<br /><br />I'm not laughing: I remember 1976 very well and $400 is still a lot of money! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> I've only been into Astronomy for a short 2 years (although when I was a kid I did have a telescope that I only remember looking at the moon with) and I would advise anyone: don't get a 'scope from Sears. (No offense Sears!) But I'm sure back then, that's about the only place you could get one. The hobby has really taken a quantum leap forward and the technology has been amazing. So, I imagine getting a 'scope from Sears was a good thing! Heck, back in the Stone Age, things were built to last! So, do you still have it? Or did I miss that part.<br /><br />Believe me, I know what it's like going to dark skies and looking at the stars. I've gone places with new equipment or even telescopes and couldn't wait to use them but when I got to dark skies, I spent a good deal of time just observing with my eyes. The "Big Picture" is truly the most wonderous.<br /><br />Well...we're still looking for applicants here in "Urban Astronomy". I think you qualify. We'd love to hear about what you can or can't see from your backyard, telescopically or visually. This was one of the most posted/read threads in "Ask the Astronomer" before the crash...we need help to keep it that way again! Hope to hear from you in the future...

 

[ktkrus]

Hi Nevers (and everyone else!) <br /><br />I haven't posted in awhile. Conditions have been absolutely terrible. Either too cloudy or too humid. I know it wasn't this bad last summer. I think I saw three stars last night! With weather and lights like this, it seems pointless to take the scope out. <br /><br />Maybe I just need a BIGGER SCOPE?! Yeah, that will solve my problem! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Thanks for resurrecting the thread! I look forward to reading about everyone else's observing!

 

[nevers]

Hi TaaP -<br /><br />It's good to be back, I was about to think it would never happen. Every day I kept checking: at first it was the "logo" and some strange html codes that didn't work, then it was the "Sorry, SDC forums are temporarily out of order". Now it's back...Woohoo! Glad to see your also up and running!<br /><br />On your scale of sky darkness, I live in 9.5. I think somewhere like the L.A. metro area (maybe not on the fringes but their fringes stretch for miles and miles) are worse then mine. If you live in a 3/4, I'd say an 8" Reflector would do the job fine.<br /><br />With an 8" Reflector you could certainly see everything on the "Urban Astronomy" list of 110 objects. Of course, they won't look like they do from dark skies but you will be able to find and see them. Some of them will certainly be more challenging to find then others. People might try and tell you that from Urban locations that the bigger aperture 'scopes only grab more light-pollution making it harder to see some of the more faint objects. That's not true. Get the biggest aperture you can afford, store, lift and transport.<br /><br />I've always said 'scopes are like people: each one of them best at doing something different. But I like Dobsonians the best. They tend to be very stable in less then perfect conditions and have the fewest "working" parts that can get broken. If you were able to do Astrophotography someday, a Dob would work on the moon and the planets. Of course there's the problem of getting your 'scope there but...<br /><br />I'm not good with the "pounds to dollars" ratio but if it's in the realm of $400 for an 8" Dobsonian, I'd say it was a fair deal. I'm a huge fan of Orion Telescopes but I have seen some good ones and probably cheaper from Hardin. Discovery is also a good 'scope. Meade (that I'm aware of) doesn't make a Dob smaller then 10". If the 'scope that you get comes with an 6 x 30 finderscope, I would consider an upgrade to at least 8 x 50. Also a 2x Shorty Barlow and p

 

[nevers]

You know what they say: "Get a new telescope, get clouds!" What on Earth do you think a bigger 'scope will get you! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />It's been a bad observing year all in all for everyone, everywhere I think. Especially during the new moon. I've been lucky to get what I've gotten.<br /><br />Glad to see you found your way back here! Hey, without you guys, this thread would just be me going bla, bla, bla. (The crowd says: Isn't that what it is anyway!?!?!?!) We are the true Warriors of Astronomy: Hunters in adverse conditions daring to peirce the layers of floral carbons and wandering photons! You saw three stars last night...not many people even take the time to go outside to look up at the sky. Hope you get some better conditions so we can read about your observing sessions again.

 

[nevers]

I went to Lovell Canyon outside Vegas to do some "Semi-dark" sky observing. In the morning on the way back into town this is what I saw. Even though the picture is during the day it shows the "air" (if you can call it that) that I'm looking through. This is only one section of the south strip and I'm about 10 miles from it when the picture was taken. I held my breath and kept driving towards home...

 

[qzzq]

Hi NEVERS! <br /><br />Thank you for restarting this thread. Ask The Astronomer would not be the same without it. I'm looking forward to the pictures and the enthusiasm for astronomy in the posts this topic will no doubt produce!<br /><br />Quantum Zero Zombie Quark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>

 

[nevers]

Hey qzzq - <br /><br />I'm just glad it came back so we could have it again! I was starting to worry for a while. Quantum Zero Zombie Quark...those were good days. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[nevers]

Ok, it's a new moon and I got cruddy weather. Big storms moving through during the day but it finally cleared up tonight. I was going to go to dark skies but I think I'll wait until tomorrow night.<br /><br />So, I took the Meade LXD55-AR5 into the backyard and set it up. I wanted to take some "Urban Astropix". I've never tried the Cat's Eye Nebula before. I tried with a 9mm EP and a Narrow Band filter but I didn't like the results. So, I tried again without the filter...I like it a lot!

 

[nevers]

I guess I should mention the above picture was taken through-the-eyepiece with Orion's SteadyPix camera attachment and an Orion 9mm Expanse EP. The Canon G5 is a digital camera and was set at f/2. Each frame was exposed for 15 seconds each. I took 18 frames and stacked them together using RegiStax 2.

 

[thalion]

Just got back from a fun night with my 60 mm refractor. I finally split one of the components of the double-double Epsilon Lyrae at 114x, which had been on my "wish list" for some time, but only *just*--the split between the Airy discs came and went with the seeing. The other component might have been elongated, but it was not distinct enough to be sure. Once more, I fretted that I didn't have a barlow to push that bad girl to ~130x to make it definite. That's the beauty of double stars: they let you stretch the old rule of the maximum magnification being 50x per inch of aperture.<br /><br />I also finally saw 61 Cygni, which was as lovely as I had heard: a striking pair of orange stars in a rich stellar field. The secondary showed the faintest hint of a bluish tinge, which I knew was a contrast effect; if I relaxed my eyes, they both looked orange again. As a minor note of history trivia, 61 Cygni was the first star to have its distance measured by parallax, by Bessel in 1838; his value was within roughly 10% of the modern estimate.<br /><br />Can you tell that I'm a double star guy? <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> It's about as much because of personal taste as it is because double stars, like the planets, are relatively unaffected by light pollution. <br /><br />I checked out M13, though my scope can hardly do a gem like this justice; it was just a fuzzy ball. High magnification, contrary to my expectations, degraded rather than improved the image (I had hoped that the darker field would help it stand out more). Honestly, for the (very) small telescope owner, I think M15 is a better globular, because of its noticeably denser and brighter core, which to me looks almost stellar with averted vision. <br /><br />By the way, I was observing under hazy skys with moderate light pollution; I'd guesstimate the naked-eye limiting magnitude at no better than 4.

 

[nevers]

My hero...! That's what I'm talkin' 'bout: all the odds against you and your still observing in a big way. You rock! Let's hear some more... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I went out to dark (?) skies with my 5" Refractor and 16" Dobsonian...I should have stayed home under the light-polluted dome. This is it from 30 miles away...as you can see I had yucky clowns too...<img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> Yes, they're "clowns", they only think they're funny!

 

[nevers]

Thank Alex...! I took a couple more last night. Hope ya don't mind...

 

[nevers]

...and here's the other one.

 

[nevers]

Yes, all the pix I post here are under HEAVILY light-polluted skies and no, I did not use a LPR filter.<br /><br />Here is a photo that amazed me. It's a pic of NGC 7331 in Pegasus: a galaxy that has an apparent magnitude of 9.5. There is no way it can be seen in LP skies with a 5" 'scope. Maybe with a much larger 'scope but I haven't tried. While the picture is nothing fancy at all I think it speaks volumes for the accuracy of Autostar, digital cameras and the stacking program by RegiStax.<br /><br />I punched "NGC 7331" into AutoStar and the 'scope slewed to where it should be. For grins I looked through the EP and could only see a couple of faint stars. Then I added my digital camera and snapped 11 frames. I brought the camera inside, downloaded the photos and opened them up: only a slight blur could be seen in each individual shot. I uploaded them into the RegiStax program and let it do its thing. When it was done I adjusted the contrast and brightness and "Ta Da": here's what I got!

 

[thalion]

Thanks, Planck. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[thalion]

I have never seen M 35, with either my binoculars or my small telescope. I have no idea why--it should be an easy target. My hunch is that I have actually seen it, but simply never recognized it as such, being in a relatively star-rich field in general.<br /><br />M 44, however, is a real beauty. I was blown away the first time I saw it through my telescope, even more so than I was by the Pleiades, believe it or not. I think this was a combination of its novelty and the fact that, IMO, M 44 shows more diverse star colors, and just seems richer in general with faint stars. It seems to me that the Pleiades are best meant for binoculars, and M 44 for a telescope.<br /><br />I too had the good fortune to see Comet NEAT near M 44 earlier this year, in an otherwise very cloudy spring. It was cool to know that I was seeing this comet after some millions of years of falling toward the Solar System, and knowing that it probably won't be back for millions of more years. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[mirak]

Hi everyone, its good to be back, I finally had to re-register to get in. We recently returned from a week long vacation and hauled our Orion 10 inch dob around with us too. Between my wife and I, two teens and two labradors, that scope and a 20 foot trailer you can imagine how much space we didn't have. It was all worth it though, my kids and I stayed up late into the night 3 out of 7 nights due to clouds. They were all high elevation dark sky locations in northern and northeastern Utah. You really get your moneys worth out a 10 inch scope in dark skies. I've heard a lot of people comment on go-to scopes: some like them and some don't. Our dob has a human powered go-to system and we love it. We are learning the sky and seeing far more than we ever would with out the go-to. Did anyone see the new Orion 12 inch intelliscope dob. Wow!<br />Happy Viewing

 

[nevers]

Hey Mirak!<br /><br />Glad to see ya back at SDC! Sounds like you had a great time with your family. I'm not gonna comment on the "GoTo's" 'cause now I got one too. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> So far, it's been fun but I think I'm still my best "GoTo"! Hey, since your family enjoys astronomy you should upgrade to that big 12" and let your kids have the 10"!?!?!?!?!

 

[nevers]

Hey All - <br /><br />Ok, here's another picture taken from my backyard. The details about the picture are in the picture. I did learn a couple of things about astrophotography doing the way I'm doing it. First, make sure your camera's battery is fully charged. It went dead about halfway through!<br /><br />Second: I've been using the best "image" quality at the highest settings. This pic of M15, as you can see has too much "noise" in it. Maybe I can make it go away later by tinkering with it in RegiStax.<br /><br />Third: I've discovered that especially in Urban Skies, it's better to take more individual frames at less exposure time then to take longer exposures with as many or fewer frames. The longer exposures gather too much of the light pollution. I'll have some more examples later. For now...here's an attempt at M15: a Globular Cluster in Pegasus.