There is still surface detail to be seen despite the storm warnings. I used my 6" f/8 Newtonian, at powers of 280x-320x. Best view was at about 290x. Seeing was poor to fair, of the "slow" variety, with a bit of atmospheric dispersion thrown-in. Result was a clear view only every fifteen or twenty seconds for a moment. Best contrast of surface details was with a #56 light-green filter. "Melt line" clearly seen around the polar cap, which is huge. The area of Ausonia & Eridania appeared about as bright as the polar cap, indicating the possible presence of atmospheric dust. Gibbous phase obvious. As morning twilight advanced, the view went sour and the planet turned into an orange featureless ball by 5:15 am. A well-spent hour despite the indifferent seeing. Here's an old trick: Any eyepiece-barlow combination can be used to make your own "zoom" eyepiece. Pulling the eyepiece back in the barlow barrel increases magnification slightly. You'll have to touch-up the focus as you vary the seperation, but it's a neat tool when working near the diffraction limit of your telescope. You can tweek the magnification to just exactly the right power. Push it until you reach the point of diminishing returns, then back-off just a tad. You can tweek it as conditions change. I use this technique a lot when observing planets. I'm going back to bed. C. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Chuck, Thanks for that great report! I noticed Mars (only naked eye object visible) in the twilight at 5:30 this morning as I was putting on my shoes to go haul a load of hay for my horses (wishing I was at the eyepiece instead of getting ready to break my backside). :o) Is there a simple calculation or rule of thumb to determine what the diffraction limit is for a given telescope? Rich --- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is still surface detail to be seen despite the storm warnings. I used my 6" f/8 Newtonian, at powers of 280x-320x. Best view was at about 290x. Seeing was poor to fair, of the "slow" variety, with a bit of atmospheric dispersion thrown-in. Result was a clear view only every fifteen or twenty seconds for a moment. Best contrast of surface details was with a #56 light-green filter. "Melt line" clearly seen around the polar cap, which is huge. The area of Ausonia & Eridania appeared about as bright as the polar cap, indicating the possible presence of atmospheric dust. Gibbous phase obvious. As morning twilight advanced, the view went sour and the planet turned into an orange featureless ball by 5:15 am. A well-spent hour despite the indifferent seeing.
Here's an old trick: Any eyepiece-barlow combination can be used to make your own "zoom" eyepiece. Pulling the eyepiece back in the barlow barrel increases magnification slightly. You'll have to touch-up the focus as you vary the seperation, but it's a neat tool when working near the diffraction limit of your telescope. You can tweek the magnification to just exactly the right power. Push it until you reach the point of diminishing returns, then back-off just a tad. You can tweek it as conditions change. I use this technique a lot when observing planets.
I'm going back to bed.
C.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Rich, If I might interject . . . Dawes' Limit is 4.56 divided by the aperture in inches. This is very close to the 500 nm theoretical limit. The theoretical limit at a wavelength of 500 nanometers (greenish light)is 4.957 divided by the aperture in inches. Dawes' Limit is an empirically derived number for just being able to discern a notch in two equal magnitude sixth magnitude stars. The theoretical limit is from your friendly neighborhood physics book. Brent --- Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
Chuck,
Thanks for that great report! I noticed Mars (only naked eye object visible) in the twilight at 5:30 this morning as I was putting on my shoes to go haul a load of hay for my horses (wishing I was at the eyepiece instead of getting ready to break my backside). :o)
Is there a simple calculation or rule of thumb to determine what the diffraction limit is for a given telescope?
Rich
--- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is still surface detail to be seen despite the storm warnings. I used my 6" f/8 Newtonian, at powers of 280x-320x. Best view was at about 290x. Seeing was poor to fair, of the "slow" variety, with a bit of atmospheric dispersion thrown-in. Result was a clear view only every fifteen or twenty seconds for a moment. Best contrast of surface details was with a #56 light-green filter. "Melt line" clearly seen around the polar cap, which is huge. The area of Ausonia & Eridania appeared about as bright as the polar cap, indicating the possible presence of atmospheric dust. Gibbous phase obvious. As morning twilight advanced, the view went sour and the planet turned into an orange featureless ball by 5:15 am.
A well-spent hour despite the indifferent seeing.
Here's an old trick: Any eyepiece-barlow combination can be used to make your own "zoom" eyepiece. Pulling the eyepiece back in the barlow barrel increases magnification slightly. You'll have to touch-up the focus as you vary the seperation, but it's a neat tool when working near the diffraction limit of your telescope. You can tweek the magnification to just exactly the right power. Push it until you reach the point of diminishing returns, then back-off just a tad. You can tweek it as conditions change. I use this technique a lot when observing planets.
I'm going back to bed.
C.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
BTW, some people claim to do better than these limits. This may be possible on an extended object like Mars. The brain can do some mighty spiffy image processing. Brent --- Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Rich,
If I might interject . . .
Dawes' Limit is 4.56 divided by the aperture in inches. This is very close to the 500 nm theoretical limit. The theoretical limit at a wavelength of 500 nanometers (greenish light)is 4.957 divided by the aperture in inches.
Dawes' Limit is an empirically derived number for just being able to discern a notch in two equal magnitude sixth magnitude stars. The theoretical limit is from your friendly neighborhood physics book.
Brent
--- Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
Chuck,
Thanks for that great report! I noticed Mars (only naked eye object visible) in the twilight at 5:30 this morning as I was putting on my shoes to go haul a load of hay for my horses (wishing I was at the eyepiece instead of getting ready to break my backside). :o)
Is there a simple calculation or rule of thumb to determine what the diffraction limit is for a given telescope?
Rich
--- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is still surface detail to be seen despite the storm warnings. I used my 6" f/8 Newtonian, at powers of 280x-320x. Best view was at about 290x. Seeing was poor to fair, of the "slow" variety, with a bit of atmospheric dispersion thrown-in. Result was a clear view only every fifteen or twenty seconds for a moment. Best contrast of surface details was with a #56 light-green filter. "Melt line" clearly seen around the polar cap, which is huge. The area of Ausonia & Eridania appeared about as bright as the polar cap, indicating the possible presence of atmospheric dust. Gibbous phase obvious. As morning twilight advanced, the view went sour and the planet turned into an orange featureless ball by 5:15 am.
A well-spent hour despite the indifferent seeing.
Here's an old trick: Any eyepiece-barlow combination can be used to make your own "zoom" eyepiece. Pulling the eyepiece back in the barlow barrel increases magnification slightly. You'll have to touch-up the focus as you vary the seperation, but it's a neat tool when working near the diffraction limit of your telescope. You can tweek the magnification to just exactly the right power. Push it until you reach the point of diminishing returns, then back-off just a tad. You can tweek it as conditions change. I use this technique a lot when observing planets.
I'm going back to bed.
C.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Brent is absolutely correct on the theoretical limits for a given aperture. I'd like to add that many other things can affect the limit in practice. Super-smooth optics improve resolution. Contrast & baffling, even how smooth the edges of your mirrors are. Microscopic surface abrasion on eyepiece lens surfaces. Anything that sucks energy out of the central spot can affect resolution, especially low-contrast planetary details. Every little bit adds up. Mars is getting bigger now, but even just a few more arc-seconds will pay dividends when seriously trying to pick out surface & atmospheric details. When you can't detect the slight gibbous phase at medium powers, it's about right from my experience. This morning I was craving more power, but the seeing wouldn't have supported it. As it was it was barely possible to see only the largest albedo features and sharpest contrast details. This 6" mirror has supported powers over 400x on rare occassions (always in autumn & winter) and it would have been nice if the air were steady enough this morning to have gotten away with it. I'm sure that there is no more detail visible at 400x than at about 300x at this aperture, but the larger image makes some details more visible, and since there is no image degredation, sometimes the higher power pays off. For these eyes, anyway. Had I not been such a stumblebutt at 4:30 am, I might have taken out the 10"; but it's just as well since the seeing wouldn't have supported it from here. Chuck --- Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Rich,
If I might interject . . .
Dawes' Limit is 4.56 divided by the aperture in inches. This is very close to the 500 nm theoretical limit. The theoretical limit at a wavelength of 500 nanometers (greenish light)is 4.957 divided by the aperture in inches.
Dawes' Limit is an empirically derived number for just being able to discern a notch in two equal magnitude sixth magnitude stars. The theoretical limit is from your friendly neighborhood physics book.
Brent
--- Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
Chuck,
Thanks for that great report! I noticed Mars (only naked eye object visible) in the twilight at 5:30 this morning as I was putting on my shoes to go haul a load of hay for my horses (wishing I was at the eyepiece instead of getting ready to break my backside). :o)
Is there a simple calculation or rule of thumb to determine what the diffraction limit is for a given telescope?
Rich
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
participants (3)
-
Brent Watson -
Chuck Hards -
Richard Tenney