Beginner Woes

[dunwitch]

(Appended - this is long) Hi folks. I've had my 90mm aperture long-tube (910mm) refractor for a month now, and have been using it every clear night from my backyard in Fridley. I'm thinking of spending a couple hundred bucks to improve my viewing experience.

So far I have learned to navigate around the constellations Lyra, Cygnus, Aquila, Ursa Major, Ursa Minor, Hercules, Pegasus, and Cassiopia. I have spent a lot of time looking at Jupiter and the Moon; my scope is great for these sorts of objects and I can resolve nice banding on Jupiter. I have found fuzzy smudges corresponding to the globular cluster in Hercules and the Andromeda galaxy, but can see no detail. I cannot deal with open clusters at all; I have swept the regions where they should be and see nothing. Globulars appear quite well ... meaning I can see a sizeable smudge where they should be. My scope came with 10mm and 25mm Plossls, and I have a short Barlow. The 10mm Plossl is difficult to use; the eye relief is very short (I wear glasses) and the field of view is small. Nebulae I have been unable to find, although I believe I caught fleeting glimpses of a planetary nebulae once (ring), and an emmision nebula once(crescent). I have been having a great time learning the constellations and seeing what I can, but, to quote my favourite song, "I want more."

So I'm going to crack open my wallet and improve my astronomy experience. I think the problem could be solved by either changing my location or my equipment. Here are my options:

1) Change my location. I have not yet used my scope in a dark-sky location. The scope is ungainly and difficult to move, but I know my views will improve in dark-sky viewing locations. Will I be able to see detail in bright clusters and galaxies from dark-sky areas? Is light pollution my #1 problem? If so, I'll pick up a travelling case and spend my money on gas to look at the skies from dark spots.

2) Change my eyepieces. The stock cheapo Plossls could be replaced with better optics; I could buy some wide-field, more expensive eyepieces and improve my views. I've been researching eyepieces, and maybe a couple of Stratus, Nagler, Televue, Knight Owl, etc. higher-end eyepieces with 6+ elements, 60+ degree apparent field of view, good eye relief, and multicoated lenses might improve my experience.

3) Add Filters. I would be happy just seeing a few nebulae. An OIII or extreme narrowband filter might allow me to see nebulae. But is this even possible from a light-polluted area with a 90mm refractor or would I be wasting my money? Do people with scopes under 100mm use filters? I have read reviews that say they are useless on anything less than 6 inch aperture.

4) Add gadgets. I would like a correct-image finder scope or telrad, a tracking drive, a CCD, camera mounts, moon filter, etc. But I am able to find things OK; I just don't see enough when I do find them. But I get into gadgets, so maybe they would add to my experience.

5) Get a new telescope. I really like the scope I have; it's awesome for viewing planets and the moon. Granted I haven't had anything but Jupiter to look at, but I can only look foward to seeing Saturn, Mars, and Venus with it, while there are millions of DSO's. I would be happy being able to resolve some detail on a few dozen of the brightest DSO's. If I buy a new scope it will be a major defeat, but at some point upgrading my beginner scope will be counterproductive. Have I reached that point already?

6) Add viewing time. Am I completely off-base and just need to have more patience? I have read about M31 and M13 being bright and spectacular and easy to "see" even with binoculars, but I "see" them fine, they are tiny gray fuzzy blobs. M31 and M13 look no different to me - which could be just an artifact from me not staring at them long enough, or my optics, or my location.

7) Quit trying. I'm not willing to drop several thousand dollars into this hobby at the moment, so should I just give up and go fishing? Am I not cut out for this hobby? I kinda feel like I'm drowning. I have way too many hobbies already (microscopy, flyfishing, scuba, reef aquariums, fish breeding, building computers, hacking, birding, foreign languages, cartography, gardening, cooking, music, hunting, canoing, herpetology, boating) and I want to also have fun with amateur backyard astronomy. But if it means spending multiple thousands of dollars then I will probably lay off it for a year or two and get back to it later in life. But I'm always able to get out into my backyard under decent skies several times a week, almost every day, and if I could "see" more from my location it would become my #1 hobby, simply because it involves nothing more than moving my body and using my eyes.

Some combination of the above. Maybe if I could buy one new eyepiece, a telrad, have more patience, pick up a nebula filter, and travel more to dark-sky locations, I would be better off, and be able to progress and learn and improve myself and be happy. I want there to be a better visual reward for finding the DSO's than just another identical fuzzy blob. I want to see the unique characteristics of them. No, I don't want colorful hubble-type images, I just want to see more than fuzzy stars.

Sorry for the huge ranting diatribe, but I know most of you have already gone through my stage in the hobby and have probably picked up on things that I have stupidly missed. I feel as though if I make the wrong move at this point I will lose the "excitement and wonder" factor which is currently driving me. I am very proud of the things I have seen so far and think I am doing well, but I need to know if it is my equipment, my temperment, or my location that is preventing me from enjoying astronomy more.

Thanks for any kind replies,

Corey

[mlfj4901]

Greetings,

#1 The darker the skies the better the views....sometimes. My understanding is objects such as double stars, globular clusters, planets, and planetary nebulae don't suffer from light pollution as much as other objects. However I may be wrong.

#2 If you're going to get a new eyepiece decide how much you want to spend first, and then look for your new eyepiece. I would highly recommend plugging your telescope and prospective eyepiece data into the eyepiece spreadsheet found here in the Beginner's discussion area.

If you just want a good quality eyepiece without spending a fortune, the Orion Sirius plossls are a good choice. If you want to spend a lot more go for a Televue eyepiece. While you get what you pay for (at least as far as these two brands are concerned) you may find out a $300 dollar eyepiece is overkill for what you want. At the next starparty track down someone who would be willing to let you look through both brands in the same scope...perferably your scope. Don't be alarmed if a Televue Nagler owner is keeping a close eye on his/her eyepiece though...lol

#3 I have an 8" Orion Dob, and one of my favorite objects is the Lagoon Nebula. I also have a Skyblock and an Ultrablock filter, neither seem to do much for my viewing experience....however many people swear by them. I have never used an OIII, way out of my budget.

#4 I love my Telrad. Probably the best gadget investment I've made on my scope. Not only can I find things easier, but I can stand on the other side of the scope when my kids are looking at something, and carefully nudge the scope to keep the object in the field of view...as long as it is my low power eyepiece.

#5 Don't know if a new scope is right for you or not. I guess that's up to you. How much are you willing to spend, what kind of scope did you have in mind? You can get a lot of apeture with a dobsonian reflector, but is that what you want? A GOTO scope will get you less apeture for the money, but perhaps not being frustrated with finding things will make up for the loss of apeture.

#6 If you want to see more DSO's you need apeture but more importantly you need time. Time to find what it is you're looking for. I spent 30 minutes the other night trying to find the ring nebula for the first time. I realized I had had it in my eyepiece multiple times, but not realizing how small it was kept passing it. "Turn Left at Orion" is a wonderful book for small apeture scopes. Every object in the book was found with a small apeture scope in light polluted skies.

#7 Don't quit trying. There is a lot to see in a small scope. A 90mm quality refractor can see quite a lot of objects. Make sure you bring your scope out to a starparty, and don't be afraid to ask for help finding things.

Hope something in there helped. I think you hit the nail on the head with doing a bit from each. Buy a couple eyepieces, a decent low power eyepiece and a decent 9-17 power eyepiece, add a telrad, and head to a starparty....not necessarily in that order.

-matt

[ashutoshl]

I absolutely agree with Matt regarding dark skies. Maybe you should bring your scope out to Onan or CGO and try seeing the same objects that you are viewing from your backyard.

Before rushing out and buying new eyepieces try to find someone who will allow you to take a peek thru their eyepiece from your scope. Even though the Naglers, EPs, Radians, etc. are wonderful eyepieces, be absolutely sure that spending that much money will improve your viewing experience noticably. Remember, everyone's scope and viewing habbits are different. I have been using some 5+ element GSO's on my scopes an they are decent eyepieces with about 67-70 degrees AFOV.

Sky pollution is a major impedient to observing. Remember, Messier compiled his catalog using nothing but a 3" refractor. Not only does your instrument gather more light, it also has better optics (Messier's scope was over a hunderd years old).

A 90mm f/10 refractor is a good intrument (I frequently use a 105mm f/13 refractor) for the planets, the moon, binary stars and some globs. If you want to see deep sky objects, try going with lower powers initially. Very rarely will you get to use high powers because of the "seeing conditions". For a 90mm scope, you can go as low as 13x (based on exit pupil of 7mm) and as high as about 180x (only under the best possible conditions).

Thinking of a bigger scope --- try out someone's 8" or so Dob. See the same sky objects with the Dob and your scope under similar sky conditions.

Hope this helps.

[SEmert]

Hi Corey, both Matt and Ashutoshl have good advice.

From your discussion, it sounds like you're having a pretty good experience actually getting in the right spot to view the objects - if you weren't, Matt's suggestion of getting a Telrad (or, more appropriately for a 90mm scope), a Rigel QuickFinder would be number one on the list. My first scope was (is - still have it and use it) a 130 mm reflector on an EQ mount. It came with the typical 6x30 finderscope. I was having a horrible time locating anything - especially from my light polluted back yard. The Rigel quickly fixed that. Look through it with both eyes open, fix the bullseye on the spot you're looking for, and Voila! It's there - or at least close enough you can find it by starhopping (good) or panning around the area (bad, but that's what I do most).

Light pollution is public enemy number 1 for astronomy. I've almost given up on my backyard for anything but the Moon, Jupiter and Saturn and the brightest objects like M13 and M42 and open clusters. But if you work at it, you can find many objects from your backyard. Of course, they look a lot cooler under dark skies.

You'd mentioned virtually giving up on open clusters. I had the same problem in my back yard. How do I differentiate between clusters and just a little denser patch of background stars? Again, light pollution makes it worse, masking the dimmer stars in the cluster.

Also, I found out I like to use lower power. With my 130mm (5") reflector, I found myself using the 25mm eyepiece at 26x or 17mm at 38x the most. Even with my 12.5", I use a 25mm (60x) more often than higher powers. Using lower power does two things - gives you a wider field of view so you can differentiate the object from the background more easily, and gives you a brighter image. I guess I prefer a small, bright, sharper image than a larger, dimmer, somewhat fuzzier one. You might try using low power more often to see how it works for you.

I wouldn't rush out for different eyepieces right away. The Sirius Plossl's are good, and of course the expensive ones are better, but the differences are more easily discernable after more experience. I still sometimes use the cheapo "silver top" plossls that came with my 5" scope.

Try coming to a couple of star parties. See how much more you can see of the globular clusters and M31 and (pretty soon) M42 under darker skies. You'll be surprised what your 90mm can do. Also, you can look through larger scopes and see if you do want to spend more money on one with a larger aperture.

Not only does larger aperture bring more light gathering capability, but it also increases the theoretical resolution limit. For example, I see M13 as a fuzzy spot with a few stars resolved in my 5", but in the 12.5" it resolves to the globular cluster that it is. That's mainly from the additional light, but a little of it is also from the higher resolution limit.

You don't have to go out and spend thousands on the hobby. Depending upon what you want, there are nice scopes for well under $1000. Of course, good refractors and good SCT's do cost quite a bit. But for many a nice 8" to 10" Dob does a great job and can suffice as an only scope (but don't get rid of your 90mm - you'll find times you want to use it as well).

Hope that helps some, too.

[SEmert]

My understanding is objects such as double stars, globular clusters, planets, and planetary nebulae don't suffer from light pollution as much as other objects. However I may be wrong.

Well, I'd partially agree with Matt on that. Planets, double stars, no problem. Planets are bright (at least Venus, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars at opposition are). Double stars are bright points of light that have good contrast against the background skyglow. Open clusters can be good, since many open clusters are relatively near to us and are relatively bright.

To me, globular clusters are usually fairly unimpressive from light polluted areas, but you can see a few of them. Many dimmer ones are just impossible to me in my back yard. Nebula, other than M42, are to me pretty hard to pick out in light pollution - and even moderately bright ones are impossible to see against high background glow. Galaxies can be hard. You can see the central core of the brighter ones but the edges are lost in the background glow, making them appear much smaller than they are.

[dunwitch]

Thanks for all the great advice folks. The consensus seems to stress my location more than anything ... but a few things could help me along. A larger reflector scope for my backyard might be worth looking into, since it doesn't have to move much. I was thinking a 6 inch Orion Dob would give me the most bang for my buck, maybe an 8-inch if it's a significant improvement. I don't need the go-to features; part of the fun for me is learning how to navigate and find things. But that can wait; I should probably just keep learning and adding to the limited number of objects I can find from my backyard (darn willow trees), while making short trips to dark-sky sites whenever possible so I can find the same objects from there and compare.

Basically, I have this feeling that if I go out and buy a new finder, a few eyepieces, go on a few trips, buy a couple of books, a carrying case, and a filter or two, I will have spent more than $349 which would've bought me a spanking new 8 inch orion dob. I have a feeling I could get one used for less but don't know where to look besides ebay. Is that too much scope for me though?

Too bad I missed the last star-party. I didn't find out about it until too late. Anyone know a dark-sky site north of the cities but fairly close? I could run out there tonight; it's supposed to be clear but humid. I'm a little confused about packing up and moving my scope; don't know if I should take it out of the rings and collapse the tripod, detatch the EQ mount, or should I just retract the legs and try to cram it into the cab of my pickup truck? I don't have a case for it but I think if I rolled it up in an old sleeping bag it would be nicely cushioned.

I do find the low powers more pleasing in general. Part of that is the 10mm's tendency to jump around both from mount jiggling and the necessity to put my eye in exactly the right place to get a clear image. With my glasses on, I have to press right up to the eyepiece and that often moves objects out of the field of view even with the mount locked. I like the 25mm with the doubling barlow in place; things seem clearer and sharper, yet big enough to be more than a speck. I can look through that one easily with my glasses on.

Thanks again for your help, I really appreciate it. You guys will make an astronomer out of me yet.

[Jon Hickman]

Corey:

I concur for the most part with all 3 of the others. One point that needs to be made to keep everything in perspective: the largest lens (it was found unmounted, not in a scope) that history can attribute to Gallileo is 73mm. The largest lens that history can attribute in a scope to him was 70mm. Both significantly smaller than your 90mm "beginner" scope. You have a tool at your disposal beyond the largest ever known to be used by one of history's greatest astronomers.

Is there more light pollution today than in his time, yes, there is, however, Jupiter and his moons have not dimmed since then, nor Venus, nor Mars, nor Saturn, nor Mercury, nor the moon, nor......

From downtown LA I've seen details in Jupiter's bands with 80mm binoculars that most people will never experience. One night in Seattle between the bright glow of lights, and a mostly overcast (and drizzly) sky, I had an incredible time observing the moon. In a parking lot of a hotel along 394 (and drirectly under the flood lights of said parking lot) I introduced over a dozen people to their first ever view of Saturn's rings.

Yes, the darker the night sky, the better; and yes, the bigger the aperture of the scope, the better. At the end of the night, however, what matters is only what was observed and the wonder and knowledge those observations bring to the observer. The magic is never in the tools, but rather in the skill of the craftsman who wields them.

[Starforce2]

Open clusters are dificult, and I consider mself somewhat experienced, and good with my equipment as far as knowing what it can do. what you need, regarldless of scope, but the larger the scope the more important it is, is a wide field lense. I use a 32mm. Even on a 10" that's actualy too narrow of some objects. In some cases, open clusters can be best apprecated through, believe it or not, a set of decent sized binnoculars. Ofcourse, some have alot of faint stars, for instance the M24 starcloud, and that one, like the disk of our galaxy, cannot be seen worth a damn from the city. At Cherry grove or Onan, it will be sweet. In north dakota or such loactions it will blow u away.

Also, to add to the above, I would keep that 90mm for planets. I alway prefer the way planets look through refractors compared with reflectors.

[dunwitch]

That makes me feel a little better. I think a dark sky might make a big difference with the small scope, but I can spend so much time viewing from my home that I think a scope with more aperture would be worth it to me. If, that is, a bigger scope will offset some of the light pollution effects. I'm not entirely sure if that's the case. That's the problem; I want to be able to see decent views of bright DSO's from my backyard, but it could be an unrealistic goal with any scope. In which case I'd rather stick with what I have.[/code]

[dunwitch]

Sorry to double-post, but I've been doing more research on this, and am starting to understand how things work. Several sources are saying that you can compensate (to some degree, with some objects) for skyglow with aperture. Which is not what I believed when I researched what scope to buy; I was under the impression that anything over 4 inches would amplify the light pollution and be useless. That is what most "buying your first telescope" guides were telling me. Here's the links to the various aperture discussions I've found:

http://www.astromart.com/articles/artic ... cle_id=149
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze55p46/id1.html
http://www.sjaa.net/eph/prisons.html

The last one was the first time I saw light pollution expressed as "effective aperture" which makes perfect sense to me. Basically, they're saying light pollution makes your view equal to what you would get from a lower-aperture scope, based on how severe it is. An urban sky might give you 50% effective aperture, so an 8-inch scope will resolve objects as a 4-inch would under dark skies, and my 90mm scope would resolve as if it were 45mm, and have a much lower limiting magnitude.

I also found a very nice complete list of Messier objects, rated by this observer by how much they were affected by light pollution and aperture. This shows me which objects I should not even attempt with my 90mm from my yard, and which are still quite spectacular, even with low apertures and moderate light pollution, and which objects improve dramatically under dark skies. I think it is valuable for a beginner like me to know what is worthwhile to go after, in both difficulty and aesthetics. Here's the link if anyone is interested:

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze55p46/id23.html

So anyway, I'm thinking about a new scope, probably an 8-inch dob from Orion. But I'm a little gunshy since I've already got a scope and only had it for a couple of months. I've had a great time with it (it's a really nice scope and excels at planetary viewing) and no doubt it will become my travelling scope, but all I can really use it for is planets, the moon, and double stars, unless I travel to the country every night, which is out of the question. Is my reasoning sound?

[Mike Fischer]

I'd give it some more time. You and your new scope have "just met." Think of using your telescope as learning a musical instrument. It takes time to learn and finesse the craft. Sure, a Stradivarius is a wonderful dream for any violinist, but a master musician can make a beautiful sound with even the beginner model at a music store.

Here is what I'd suggest. Give your scope one year. Then...

1. Try astronomy tricks like averted vision and tapping to finesse detail out of faint objects.
2. Find out what others here in the city can see well from their back yards. Create a list of targets to find. Share that list with all of us.
3. Get out to Onan or another star party and try some scopes. There would very likely be the opportunity to look through an Orion 8" dob.
4. (To satisfy that "deep space" nebula urge) Try something like Slooh (www.slooh.com) or even Starry Night. Sure it's not seeing it through "you're own" scope, but it can be great fun.
5. Keep networking with others and connecting, finding out what to look for.

A year from now, you may still want to replace or upgrade, but you will have a much better idea of what you want and the best place to buy being so much more experience.

[Buzzygirl]

dunwitch: The 8" Orion dobs are an exceptionally good deal for what you get. Really, you pretty much get everything you need to start out when you purchase one, you get the eyepieces and even a copy of The Sky student edition. About the only thing you might want to buy that's not included is a carrying case for the tube.

A few MAS members have these scopes and I see them out at Onan fairly often. For the price, I think you get a lot with these scopes.

[Starforce2]

IMHO you might as well spend the extra hundred or so for the 10", if possible. I've been finding alot of extremly dim ngc's from dark sites like onan, and I doubt the 8 would do it. And you want a scope that keeps you busy. I suppose one could say this about never running out of objects on a 16" dob...but those are hard to even point. Anything bigger than 10" unless u go truss is going to be dificult to carry and transport.

[Buzzygirl]

The 10" Dob is still pretty portable. The tube's about 32 lbs and the base about 20 lbs. Very easy to transport and assemble. If you are comfortable with that weight, the 10" will allow one to see more and fainter objects. And the price certainly can't be beat; if you're willing to go for one without the 'push-to' function that Orion offers on some of its dobs, the under $500 price tag is really reasonable for what you get.

[Jon Hickman]

and even a copy of The Sky student edition

Nope, now they ship Starry Night. On every other point I agree completely with Buzzy.

Savage makes a good point as well, much better than I did in my previous post, but essentially the same idea. Take the time to enjoy what you have. I'm reminded of Robin Williams' role in Dead Poet's Society. Those old enough remember the "Carpe Diem" fad understand...sieze the day...

With that in mind, aperture is always king. More aperture, see more things, plain and simple....

[dunwitch]

Thanks folks. I'll try to make it to the next observing session and join up. If I wait for awhile, I could probably swing the bigger 10" scope.

In the meantime I can keep myself busy with Jupiter and driving to darker spots. I'll pick up another eyepiece and finder too. Pretty soon we'll have Mars in the evening and Saturn in the morning to add to the fun, and the Orion stuff too.

[Starforce2]

crab is already up if u want to be awake that early. I tried it from work and either had the wrong star or too much light, not sure which. Ought to be obvious in a 10" cuz I can see it in a 3". With it being ata funny angle low in the sky I may have grabbed the wrong star too.

[mlfj4901]

Greetings,

Starforce:
Well with all the haze it might've been impossible to see also...

dunwitch:
If you make it to Cherry Grove this weekend you might have a hard time looking through your scope, after looking through the BAD. I know I suddenly felt like my 8" Dob was woefully inadequate, but my wife for some reason said no to a new 24".

-matt

[dunwitch]

Looks like I'm 80% likely to be way up in the northwoods this weekend, with my scope in tow, with no outdoor light sources for 1.5 miles. I'll be able to get a good assessment of my scope, and whether my poor views are from my lack of aperture or my lack of darkness. Any good objects to use as references? I'm going to hit the well-known Messiers I can see from home first, and log the results.

[Jon Hickman]

Any good objects to use as references? I'm going to hit the well-known Messiers I can see from home first, and log the results.

Nothing better to use as a guage than what you already know! Comparing the views you know with the views you see up north is the perfect test.

[rbubany]

You might want to see if you can pick out M101 or M109 in Ursa Major and also perhaps the Triangulum Galaxy, M33.

Use the 25mm eyepiece, which should give a magnification of 36x.

Here's a quote about M33...

"...For the observer, this galaxy can be glanced with the naked eye under exceptionally good conditions; for most people, it is the most distant object visible to the naked eye (there are rare reports that some eagle-eyed stargazers managed to see M81 under exceptional conditions, but this is exceptional with all respects). It is outstanding in good binoculars, but as its considerable total brightness is distributed quite evenly over an area of nearly four times that covered by the full Moon, its surface brightness is extremely low. Therefore, it is difficult to impossible to view this galaxy in telescopes which do not allow low magnification - lowest is best for this object ! The best view of M33 the present author had was with a 6-inch refractor at magnification 25."

I'll be curious to hear how you do!

[mlfj4901]

Greetings,

I agree with Ron and Jon, go with what you know, and go for things that your scope should do well on.

Don't forget about Mars, it comes up around midnight I believe, fairly high in the sky around 0200.

My suggestion would also be to go with things you can find easily, there are going to be a lot more background stars and stuff you normally won't see in the city. Make sure you bring along some form of star atlas or beginner's book. Turn Left at Orion, Minnesota Starwatch, etc.

Have fun

-matt

[dunwitch]

I have "Nightwatch", "Beginner's Guide to backyard Astronomy", a small Planisphere, and a dozen or so paper charts I have printed out from "Hallo Northern Sky". I've found my best finding comes after printing out a chart of a single constellation-area and then writing the directions and descriptions for my hops on it. I might have trouble with the "extra" stars, though. We'll see. Thanks for the object tips; I'll try them.

[dunwitch]

Well I tested my scope under dark skies. The Andromeda Galaxy was much more distinct. Still could not see fine detail, but the galaxy had a long, narrow, elliptical shape extendeding across the 25mm eyepiece. Very nice. From home all I can see is the central bulge.

Beyond that, the constellations visible were staggering! Spent quite a bit of time just naked-eye and binocular viewing. Showed my two nieces Jupiter, Venus, and a hazy crescent moon at sunset. Lots of bright meteors!

I had a clear view to the north and west, south and east were quite obscured. Had some trouble getting my scope pointed directly at the zenith.

[Jon Hickman]

Had some trouble getting my scope pointed directly at the zenith.

My problem with my Orion SVP120 was less getting it pointed at zenith, and more getting my carcass back up off the ground after looking through it when pointed at zenith!