T 

Greg

Thanks for the great information!  

Greg

Hey Greg, sorry I missed this at first.   I used a 6" discmount alt-az manual mount.   Not really the best for anything that requires high mag.    It's a great manual mount with encoders and a nexus DSC, but when you have narrow FOV with high power eyepieces and changing eyepieces while trying to keep something in view, it's a challenge.   I'm sure for someone better, it's easier, but it was difficult for me.   I did it a few times and moved to a 3.5mm eyepiece, but wow, things are moving fast.   I have a turret, but using the turret with a tripod and long refractor makes the issue near the zenith even worse due to how broad the turret is with eyepieces.    I actually tried it while in michigan and it's a very cool thing to be able to spin the turret to your next or highest power and back to lowest power in less than a second but you loose too much of the sky.   I think the ultimate for me would be the 180 with turret on a driven pier, and either the mach 2 or 1100.  Either would be fine for visual.    But I'd want a big pier, like my ATS pier as it's 54" long so I'd have the best chance to clear the pier with the turret at the zenith and not have my cheek on the ground.   next year this is what I'm going to do!! 

Terri

Of the Minkowskis I've found, I'm guessing 2/3 of them I wouldn't have been able to find without an OIII. Even if you can find it without an OIII, the OIII still helps.

My notes for M 1-64 include: "Responds well with OIII. Looks sharper with OIII."

And for the fainter ones, I assume aperture is the main limiting factor.

Hi Mark, I was a bit flustered when I performed poorly at the beginning of the night, and almost threw in the towel.    It took me until the clouds rolled in around midnight or so to just get 15, and one of those with the help of a neighbor who had a large scope (a lot like our own 18" obsession).   I was looking and couldn't find an object and then I overheard him telling his wife/girlfriend, "I've got (the same object) in the viewfinder, do you want to look?" so I went over and asked.. it was big and beautiful in his scope.

I ended up getting my pin, but I really wanted to get all 15 in my own scope and I failed in the end.    The one I kept trying, and did not find was the blinking planetary nebula, ngc6826 and I know I've looked at this one before.  It's fairly bright..   so that's my first target on a clear night.   In fact I talked to the guy who created the list and told him how much more difficult it is than the last few years, and he told me he'd been easy on us because he didn't think there were any real observers, just a bunch of telescope makers.   And he said this year proved him wrong with how many got the pin the first night.  I think there were 30 of us.   I never did get to the bino list.   Saturday after 10:30 turned out nice as well and even better than Friday, but I didn't sleep well the night before so I was exhausted and did some viewing with my neighbor in his 20" drive ball scope (very cool home made scope).

One of the other things I didn't mention, which culled my list quite a bit, is the fact that I was using a long refractor on a tripod.    When trying to view items near the zenith (in vega or cygnus), My scope just wouldn't go there because I was hitting the tripod legs.   It was a bit frustrating as this took away a number of objects from my list.   

It is fun, and you would be a master at it.    I suspect you could be teaching classes in finding things.    You should come to Stellafane next year!    

Best,

Terri

Of the Minkowskis I've found, I'm guessing 2/3 of them I wouldn't have been able to find without an OIII. Even if you can find it without an OIII, the OIII still helps.

My notes for M 1-64 include: "Responds well with OIII. Looks sharper with OIII."

And for the fainter ones, I assume aperture is the main limiting factor.

Mark

Hi Mark, we had one Minkowski on the list that I did not find.   I did take out a nebula filter at one point, but maybe I should have taken out an OIII and just left it on there.    As I continue to hunt them down in my yard, I'll try this.     When I tried the nebula filter, the view became very dark, but given how little I get to do visual I didn't know the benefit.   Maybe this would have been the way to go.   The one I didn't find is Minknowski 1-64.    We had Hubble4, at 6" and mag 13.1!!!!    We had a few other 13.X and a 14.5!     Luckily, I only needed 15 of 25 as the 13.Xs I did not get except the little gem at 13.2, which I think brighter than 13.2.

Terri

Thanks for the great information!  

Greg

Mark