Venus visible in daylight

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
news
"MichaelJP" wrote in message
. ..

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
...
It is hardly news to those who read uk.sci.astronomy, but this morning
the sky is unusually clear and blue, so I went out just before sunrise
and marked a position where Venus was lined up with a chimney, then
looked again 40 minutes later. Venus is easy to see in a clear blue sky
as long as you know approximately where to look. Clearly visible and
bright, at 0740, well after sunrise this morning 5 October. Just looked
again at 0750, still there despite having the Sun shining directly on
me.

Earlier, I went out and saw an impressive line-up of planets and waning
crescent Moon, with bright and very orange Mars high up near Castor and
Pollux, brilliant Venus, and fainter Saturn. Predictions suggest we are
in for a few clear days and nights, so grab 'em.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

I was looking for Andromeda (the galaxy) last night through 10x50
binoculars.

I could definitely see it but it was very faint, would I need to use a
telescope to discern the disk structure or just dark skies?



You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a larger
format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a focal
reducer, or both.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

OK, thanks for the tips.

Looks like it was pretty futile trying to see the disk with the binoculars
then!

On or about 2007-10-05,
Pete Lawrence illuminated us with:
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 20:35:49 +0100, "Mike Dworetsky"
wrote:

You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a larger
format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a focal
reducer, or both.

You can get it nicely with smaller refractors Mike. A ZS66 or ED80
(80mm) fitted with a focal reducer will record the core plus the
brighter spiral arms with a DSLR or CCD camera in a couple of minutes.

A 3 minute exposure with a 76mm f/4 scope
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/200..._IMG_9925b.jpg

A stacked result using an 80mm ED80 refractor and focal reducer
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/M31-2006.html

A hybrid result using data from both scopes...
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/200...ybrid_1024.jpg

Wow! I think the evidence Pete is that _you_ can get it with that
equipment, but I'd not be so sure that _anyone_ can! Amazing

By the way, how come the first one says "unguided" on it? Surely a 3
minute exposure has to be using a telescope with some sort of drive,
so what does "unguided" mean in this context?

--
Mark
Real email address | Love is real if you and the other person stick together
is mark at | like peanut butter and jelly.
ayliffe dot org | (child's response to "what is love?)

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:39:35 GMT, Mark Ayliffe wrote:

A 3 minute exposure with a 76mm f/4 scope
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/200..._IMG_9925b.jpg

A stacked result using an 80mm ED80 refractor and focal reducer
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/M31-2006.html

A hybrid result using data from both scopes...
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/200...ybrid_1024.jpg

Wow! I think the evidence Pete is that _you_ can get it with that
equipment, but I'd not be so sure that _anyone_ can! Amazing

Strangely I'd be sure that if I can get it then anyone can!

By the way, how come the first one says "unguided" on it? Surely a 3
minute exposure has to be using a telescope with some sort of drive,
so what does "unguided" mean in this context?

Unguided means that the shots were not auto-guided. It's a bit of a
confusing term but that's what it means. However, they were
equatorially driven at the sidereal rate of couse otherwise the stars
would have trail.

"MichaelJP" wrote in message
m...

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
news
"MichaelJP" wrote in message
. ..

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
...
It is hardly news to those who read uk.sci.astronomy, but this morning
the sky is unusually clear and blue, so I went out just before sunrise
and marked a position where Venus was lined up with a chimney, then
looked again 40 minutes later. Venus is easy to see in a clear blue
sky as long as you know approximately where to look. Clearly visible
and bright, at 0740, well after sunrise this morning 5 October. Just
looked again at 0750, still there despite having the Sun shining
directly on me.

Earlier, I went out and saw an impressive line-up of planets and waning
crescent Moon, with bright and very orange Mars high up near Castor and
Pollux, brilliant Venus, and fainter Saturn. Predictions suggest we
are in for a few clear days and nights, so grab 'em.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

I was looking for Andromeda (the galaxy) last night through 10x50
binoculars.

I could definitely see it but it was very faint, would I need to use a
telescope to discern the disk structure or just dark skies?



You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a larger
format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a focal
reducer, or both.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

OK, thanks for the tips.

Looks like it was pretty futile trying to see the disk with the binoculars
then!


You would be able to see the inner region around the nucleus as a fuzzy
elongated blob, brighter at the centre and fading out. Features further out
would be too faint to see this way. With binoculars I doubt that you could
see the dust lanes or spiral arms, which is what I took you to mean by
"seeing the disk". (Maybe you could just manage to do this with very large
binoculars in a very dark site.)

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
...


"MichaelJP" wrote in message
m...

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
news
"MichaelJP" wrote in message
. ..

"Mike Dworetsky" wrote in message
...
It is hardly news to those who read uk.sci.astronomy, but this morning
the sky is unusually clear and blue, so I went out just before sunrise
and marked a position where Venus was lined up with a chimney, then
looked again 40 minutes later. Venus is easy to see in a clear blue
sky as long as you know approximately where to look. Clearly visible
and bright, at 0740, well after sunrise this morning 5 October. Just
looked again at 0750, still there despite having the Sun shining
directly on me.

Earlier, I went out and saw an impressive line-up of planets and
waning crescent Moon, with bright and very orange Mars high up near
Castor and Pollux, brilliant Venus, and fainter Saturn. Predictions
suggest we are in for a few clear days and nights, so grab 'em.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

I was looking for Andromeda (the galaxy) last night through 10x50
binoculars.

I could definitely see it but it was very faint, would I need to use a
telescope to discern the disk structure or just dark skies?



You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a
larger format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a
focal reducer, or both.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

OK, thanks for the tips.

Looks like it was pretty futile trying to see the disk with the
binoculars then!


You would be able to see the inner region around the nucleus as a fuzzy
elongated blob, brighter at the centre and fading out. Features further
out would be too faint to see this way. With binoculars I doubt that you
could see the dust lanes or spiral arms, which is what I took you to mean
by "seeing the disk". (Maybe you could just manage to do this with very
large binoculars in a very dark site.)

--
Mike Dworetsky

It was resolvable as a fuzzy blob, but not really elongated in any
direction. It was at my semi-urban location though so next clear night I'm
going to drive out to the peaks where its much darker and see if I can see
any more.

Must admit I'm far more interested in objects I can see directly through the
binoculars or my 6" reflector than any CCD stuff. That is no doubt
fascinating but a whole hobby in itself!

I was looking for Andromeda (the galaxy) last night through 10x50
binoculars.

I could definitely see it but it was very faint, would I need to use a
telescope to discern the disk structure or just dark skies?


You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a larger
format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a focal
reducer, or both. Mike Dworetsky

Hi - ok Mike I'm 10 miles from central London but my 70mm f/5 OG [Meade ETX-70] + CCD does a fair job in M31 at http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthrea...big07105mg.jpg and more tiny scope stuff including Venus in daylight at http://www.astroman.fsnet.co.uk/etx70mg.htm

Nytecam

"nytecam[_1_]" wrote in message
...



I was looking for Andromeda (the galaxy) last night through 10x50
binoculars.

I could definitely see it but it was very faint, would I need to use a

telescope to discern the disk structure or just dark skies?


You would need to take a long exposure (3-4 mins) with a CCD using a
telescope of at least 6-inches aperture. You would need to have a
larger
format CCD to take in enough galaxy to see the spiral arms, or a focal

reducer, or both. Mike Dworetsky

Hi - ok Mike I'm 10 miles from central London but my 70mm f/5 OG [Meade
ETX-70] + CCD does a fair job in M31 at http://tinyurl.com/yunhtd and
more tiny scope stuff including Venus in daylight at
http://www.astroman.fsnet.co.uk/etx70mg.htm

Nytecam




--
nytecam[_1_]

Yes, OK, well that's a 32-min exposure. That's 10 times the exposure I
suggested for the 6 inch, yours is a c. 3-inch, so I guess my original
recommendation was comparable to what you might get with 15 mins (to detect
spiral arms). I was taking into account that the OP was a "newbie".

I'm old enough to remember getting similar results with a 1-hour
photographic exposure in a very dark site. Darkness is less a requirement
with CCDs, not from the S/N POV, but because to get a result you can
digitally subtract background fogging. On film/plate photographs this is
more difficult.

Is that a photomontage artefact in the middle?

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

Yes, OK, well that's a 32-min exposure. That's 10 times the exposure I suggested for the 6 inch, yours is a 3-inch

No - that's 8min per quadrant [M31 is BIG] via 70mm OG eg 3"!

Is that a photomontage artefact in the middle?

Yes - where the quadrants meet in this prelim mosaic.

Nytecam