|
A little
about myself. I got started
in astronomy when I was a young child.
A friend showed Saturn to me through his 60mm
refractor, and I have been hooked ever since. I went to the library, checked
out many astronomy books, and enjoyed every page. A year later, my parents purchased
my first telescope, the venerable Dynascope RV-6. Over the last 50 years, I’ve
made many observations with telescopes as small as 2.4”
and as large as 48”. The
rest is history.
Currently, I
observe with telescopes ranging from 22” to 48”. My main observing targets are
mainly obscure deep sky objects, such as the VV catalogue
of interacting galaxies, galaxy
trios, Shakhbazian galaxy groups, and super thin
galaxies to name a few "lists".
I'm a star
hopper at heart and over the decades got pretty good at
it. My buddies sometimes wonder how I can find
stuff so fast by just using a zero-power finder and 24mm
Panoptic (my general low-power eyepiece). I just chalk
it up as experience. I tried digital setting
circles (DSCs) and found that it took more time to find
stuff than just star-hopping using proper star charts
and techniques. Figure that most of the objects I look
for are not in the "built-in" catalog of the DSCs, so I
would need to enter the coordinates. Those of you who
own these things understand the pain of entering RA and
Dec manually one digit at a time.
My primary
methodology is to center the object with the zero power
finder (Telrad or Rigel QuikFinder) using appropriate
star charts, then further centering the field using a
low-power eyepiece. Once centered, I generally bump up
the magnification to at least 230x, generally higher.
Medium to high power observing yields detail that
one would miss if it is observed at low powers.
Sometimes tight galaxy pairs, trios, or groups
need high magnifications to "bust" them apart. I
observe between 230x and 500x more than 90% of the time.
I not only
observe at high powers, but I also prefer to use very
high contrast eyepieces. My current favorites are
Orthoscopic eyepieces as I use those 90% of the
time. If I need to go wide field, I’ve found that
the 72-degree TeleVue Delos is the best in class in
terms of observing threshold objects. A wide field
eyepiece goes in my focuser when I observe very
star-poor regions, where very little if any field stars
are visible at high powers. There were several
times when I was looking at something in Cetus or a
star-poor region at 500+ power, I was getting lost due
to the lack of field stars, so I had to pull back and
throw in the Delos. A bit
more detail is in the Eyepieces section, which
discusses which eyepieces I use and why.
Once I’ve
located the object, I generally observe at varying
magnifications and note details visible. Sometimes
some detail is visible at higher powers and other detail
at lower powers. My observing notes are generally a
composite of what I see with varying
magnifications. Hence when I write my notes, I
generally include not only the telescope and atmospheric
conditions but the magnifications as well. When I
sketch objects, I generally observe at several
magnifications, then sketch in the details as a
composite of the different magnifications. Since I
observe at the edge a lot, I use different
magnifications and mostly Orthoscopic eyepieces.
Our observing
sites are generally in the Sierras of Northern
California at 5,000 feet and higher with fellow TAC and
TAC-Sac observers. Our most used site at 7,600 feet
elevation under NELM 7.0+ skies. Since I have
relocated to Texas Hill Country, my observing sites are
at least 3 hours west to get equivalent skies as in the
high Sierras. Or I can go 5.5 hours west and I'll be at
the site of the world famous Texas Star Party (TSP).
For major
star parties, I regularly attend the Texas Star Party,
the Oregon Star Party, and the Golden State Star Party.
I’m not just
a visual observer, but like to build telescopes. I
haven’t built one since 2011. My most used
telescope is the 22” I built in 1999. I’ve built
several smaller and larger telescopes, ranging from 16”
to 28” reflectors. Some detail can be seen in Telescope Components.
I
spoke at some major star parties when asked to do
so. I was invited to speak at others, which I had to
decline due to work commitments. Some star parties
or events spoke at are:
- 2010 and 2012
Texas Star Party –
afternoon speaker
- 2011 Oregon Star Party –
evening speaker
- 2009 Golden
State Star Party – evening speaker
- 2010 SVAS
Star-B-Que – evening speaker
- 2012 NCA
speaker
There is one
award that I was blown away when I received it. The TSP Lone Star Award in
2009. I was very shocked! Thank you to the organizers of
TSP.
Telescopes
- 22"
f/4 home-built reflector I
use this telescope the most as it is fairly light and
very transportable. I feel that 22 inches of high-end
glass is a good balance of aperture and portability. I
can pack this telescope with all of my accessories and
camping gear into the Volkswagen New Beetle (old
vehicle) and now the BMW 330i. The primary was figured
by the late John Hall of Pegasus Optics and resulted
in a very fine figure. I've used up to 1200x with full
aperture with no image breakdown, so it meets the 50x
per inch quality guarantee. I am using the Crossbow Platform and it
works GREAT!
- 30" f/4.3
Starmaster with Sky Tracker I use this
telescope only at major star parties as it is too big
for one person to set up. It also requires a trailer
to transport unless you have an Excursion or something
similar. It barely fits in there, due to the
long truss poles and a 12-foot ladder. The
primary was figured by late Steve Swayze and is a very
good sample. I was able to use 1200x at Mars
during the 2003 Oregon Star Party. There was
astounding detail and many folks yelled that "You
gotta see Mars in the 30." Lastly, the Starmaster has the
best customer support and best optics of any
commercially made truss telescope in the market.
The late Rick Singmaster personally tests each
telescope as a system over several nights before it
leaves his shop.
- 4"
f/11 AstroTelescopes refractor This
telescope is used mainly as a quick grab-and-go for
quick views out of my backyard. This telescope
features an ultra-smooth focuser, feels very close to
the famed Feathertouch, and has excellent hand-figured
optics. During the 2010 Golden State Star Party,
I viewed Jupiter at 450x and was astounded by the
level of detail with no image breakdown. Yes,
there is very little color in very bright
objects. But the amount of color is less
than expected in an f/11 system. Some folks
commented that the views through this telescope rival
those through the famous 4" f/15 Unitron.
Eyepieces
Narrow
field and very high contrast
- Zeiss
ZAO-II (10, 6, and 4mm) and ZAO-I (25mm) - My
current set. The Zeiss ZAO-II is my favorite Deep Sky
eyepiece as it gives me the best chance to observe
that last photon or minute detail that I'm attempting
to fish out. The Zeiss gives the highest light
transmission, lack of scatter, and highest contrast of
any eyepiece I've used. And I've used many
different eyepieces. The only eyepiece that
would outperform the ZAO-II is the TMB
Supermonocentric, which I used to own. I
regrettably sold them as I initially determined that
the TMBs and the ZAO-II's were redundant. Best
of all it is only 4 elements in two groups with
incredible polish and coatings. I use the
ZAO-II's most of the time, the only time I don't use
them is when I'm observing galaxy clusters or galaxy
rich field in star-poor regions, where I tend to get
lost at high powers...so I employ one of my Delos in
that case.
- Baader
Genuine Orthoscopics (18, 12.5, 9, 7, and 5mm) - My
current set. I use these to fill in the gaps
between the Zeiss eyepieces. A great alternative to
the Zeiss ZAO-II’s as an entire set of BGOs costs as
much as one ZAO-II eyepiece – used. They are excellent
eyepieces and outperform the Delos, Ethos or any
wide-field eyepiece when it comes to the ability to
see threshold objects. A couple of beginners at
the 2009 Golden State Star Party saw more detail and
background stars with the BGO than the Ethos. We
compared a 6mm sample of both eyepieces along with the
Zeiss ZAO-II. The University Optics HD (I think it is
the same as Baader) is closer to the Zeiss than the
Ethos. See the results here (scroll to the
bottom).
- Baader
Classic Orthoscopics (10 and 6mm) – I got
these just to compare to the ZAO-II and Delos as the
focal lengths are the same, hence making comparisons
fair. In a nutshell, I’ve
found that the performance of the BCOs sits in between
the Delos and the ZAO-II, a little more than halfway
between the Delos and the ZAO-II (closer to the
Delos). At $74 a whack, it is a
pretty good deal since the ZAO-II and BGO aren’t quite
available anymore.
Wide
field
- Televue
Ethos (17, 13, 8, 6, and 3.7) I do not own these as I replaced them with
the Delos. The
Televue Ethos is by far the best ultra-wide field
eyepiece on the planet right now. I compared several
focal lengths with every major brand and the Ethos
goes deeper and shows more contrast than any other.
The Pentax XW comes very close
and is a great alternative if you don't want to spend
that much (See note regarding the Delos below). The
Explore Scientific 100-degree series is a good
alternative too but doesn't perform as well. Those who
want the best should stick with the
Ethos.
- Televue
Delos (17.3, 12, 8, and 6mm) The
Televue Delos is currently the deepest wide field I've
ever tried so far. I think it has 6 (or 7)
elements versus the 9 elements in the Ethos. As I was
told, the Delos and Ethos have very well-polished
surfaces with glass-matched coatings, giving the
highest contrast (or lack of scatter) and transmission
for a wide-field eyepiece. So I've got to see it for
myself as the true performance of an eyepiece is what
the observer sees through the eyepiece, not
theory and numbers. So...
At OSP
2011, I borrowed the 6mm Delos from Televue rep, John
Rhodes. The skies were very dark, NELM = 7.5. I've
observed two objects namely Hickson 99 (components D
and E) and IC 1296. For more detailed notes, click here. To sum
it up, I found that the Delos noticeably outperforms
the Ethos, but not the Zeiss, while observing extended
objects. The objects used in threshold
observations are Hickson 99, component E (mag 17.7),
and IC 1296 (a good low surface brightness galaxy by
M-57).
The Delos
is basically a narrow field Ethos with extra eye
relief with even more contrast and transmission. Very
impressive. The end result is that after my experience
at OSP 2011, I sold all of my Ethos and acquired the
above Delos.
The Delos is my wide field of choice when it
comes to observing deep.
- Televue
Panoptic (24mm) This
is my primary finder eyepiece as I leave the 2"/1.25"
adapter in my focuser 100% of the time. This is
the widest practical 1.25" eyepiece. I would like to
see a 22-24mm Delos in 1.25" format in the future, but
given the basic understanding of how the Delos is
made, I don't think it is physically possible.
Several thoughts of eyepiece comparisons when
observing faint deep sky objects.
I generally
compare several eyepieces at the SAME focal length
against each other. Even 1mm of
focal length difference especially at high powers
makes a huge magnification difference.
Test objects are generally threshold objects,
such as a mag 17.7 example I used at OSP or a very low
surface brightness object. Also
the larger the scope, the wider the difference between
two given eyepieces. For
example, the difference between the Ethos and the BGO
is pretty obvious through the 22” reflector, while I
could not discern the difference in my 6” refractor. The diagram below shows that the
difference between eyepieces increases as the aperture
increases. The graph is a bit
exaggerated, otherwise, there wouldn’t be space to
insert text or brackets.
Some may
report that they can't see the difference. At
GSSP 2009 and OSP 2011, even a beginner noticed a
difference between the eyepieces.
Other Visual Accessories
Barlows
- TMB
Barlow 1.8x ED Wow,
this Barlow is
excellent. The coatings are so well made that the
glass is very hard to see under normal light. The
glass is made at the famous Zeiss Jena facility and is
regarded by many to be in the same league as the famed
Zeiss Barlow, a few think it is actually even better.
It has only two elements in one group as far as I
know! Someone on CloudyNights.com has recently
performed the transmission test with a laser and
sensor...has determined that the TMB Barlow has a
greater than 99% transmission!
Deep Sky
filters. Note all
links below are to actual scans as produced by Cary at
Lumicon.
I've also
noted the age of the filters as I understand that the
quality of filters changes over time as companies
constantly change and/or improve the filters.
- Lumicon
UHC filter – Workhorse
narrow-band nebula filter. The
current version is far better than the original 1990s
version as it rejects the red wavelengths. This
filter has replaced the Orion Ultrablock filter as my
primary narrow-band filter. The filter was
picked up at about 2014.
- Orion
Ultrablock filter – The original, made in
Japan, back in the early '90s. Not the current
version, which is currently made in Korea. Solid
everyday nebula filter.
- Omega
Optical NPB Filter –
Outstanding filter
and a good alternative to the Ultrablock or Lumicon
UHC filter. The stars appear natural versus
greenish as this filter also passes some red.
Some observers sometimes prefer this over the O-III
for planetary nebulae.
Picked this up in about 2010. You can
pick it up here or here
- Lumicon
O-III filter – Workhorse
planetary nebula filter. I think this is the
best O-III filter. I picked it up to replace my older
Lumicon blue box O-III filter in about 2007.
- Lumicon
H-beta filter – The well-known "Horsehead
Nebula" filter. Best used
on the "redder" nebulae, such as the California,
IC405, IC 5146 (Cocoon Nebula), etc. This
replaced my old blue box Lumicon at about 2007.
- Astronomik
CLS filter – Good filter for protoplanetary
nebulae and reflection nebula where the Ultrablock/UHC
doesn't work. Outstanding filter for the younger
(bluer) galaxies, such as NGC 253, M-33, etc.
Don't let the "budget" marketing label fool you.
This filter actually passes quite a bit more than your
standard broadband filter, while rejecting a majority
of the light created by artificial light sources, such
as street lamps. Jimi and I have used this
filter to enhance the view of Hanny's
Voorwerp with his 48" reflector.
- Lumicon
Deep Sky filter - rock solid broad-band filter.
Picked it up in about 2014.
- Lumicon
Comet Filter
Picked it
up in about 2014.
- Baader
Moon and Skyglow filter –
Interesting filter that really works in enhancing the
lunar and planetary contrast. Acquired in 2010
- The Celestron
LPR Nebular Filter was my first filter of
any kind to reduce light pollution. I picked up way
back in about 1983. It still works well,
considering that it was probably among the first
generation with the early Lumicon filters. I
actually saw the Veil for the first time ever with
this filter with a 6" reflector in west San
Francisco. Yes, in the city of San Francisco in
1984.
Other accessories
- Mickel's
self-centering collet 2"/1.25" adapter with both
2" and 1.25" filter threads. This adapter lives
in my focuser. This
adapter is no longer available in the market.
- I'm still
considering the AstroDon Sloan G filter for
visual use as my buddy, Jimi, and I have found it
effective for protoplanetaries or objects like Hanny's
Voorwerp (offical site of discoverer or an image).
Collimation Tools
- Catseye
sight tube, Cheshire, and Autocollimator
- Lasermax
holographic collimator – Got this in 1995 and was the
best one out there back then. There
are many current offerings from Glatter, HoTech, etc
are also very good. I
haven’t tried many of them as I got one that work and
works well for me. It is
also very hard to find anywhere now.
- Glatter’s The Blug
barlowed collimation plug – Great tool for those times
I arrive a bit too late to use the autocollimator,
which requires a bit of ambient light to work. It works great.
Contact me by email at alvin dot huey @ faintfuzzies period com
|