Deep-Sky Objects Through a Telescope. Expectation and Reality

If you use Electronically Assisted Astronomy/astrophotography (EAA in Sharpcap pro for me) I can use a cheap camera and telescope and see the "expected" in minutes with most common objects.
It should be titled "Stacked vs Visual". For people who expected the better as the visual did not study up before buying. I get your point though.

Nice.

the Pleiades looks so good where I am. I just need a bigger Telescope.

This does a good job of showing how much of a difference light pollution makes!

Whats best channel 4 live looks through telescopes

Nam mô cao đài tiên ông đại bồ tát ma ha tát thường hằng
Nam mô cao đài tiên ông đại bồ tát ma ha tát thường hằng
Nam mô cao đài tiên ông đại bồ tát ma ha tát thường hằng Nam mô

There is no such thing as cery big telescope shows you are a noob

I have no idea what toy telescope you are using. In my 102 refractor the Orion Nebula completely fills up my 18 mm eyepiece and is huge. Agreed it’s basically a greenish colour and without all the colours that photography shows. The same for M31.

Would I be correct to assume that the Gercules Globular is located in the constellation Gercules?

That's when you wish you spent the money on an astrophotography scope set up to take pictures with.

Ok but you just compare the astrophotography to live wiew ....

Thank you for sharing the reality to the folks. As an amateur skywatcher, I have 150mm telescope. Those images are taken with a good telescope + motor+a good camera with long exposure in an area without light pollution. Everyone shd know before buying a telescope. It costs a little and requires experience.

Nahh you need a filter

Modern armchair astronomy is made possible thanks to professional telescopes on the ground and in space. You'll see far more objects, detail and color with a methodical study of existing online deep sky images than by fumbling yourself with an amateur telescope and related astrophotography gear.

Gerculues

Was just in a bortle 1 around the 11th and seeing whirlpool galaxy arms looked so crazy

Which telescope

M45 you can see better with the naked eye during the winter from my balcony, than this picture you have provided.. 🤣

One time, my city was all dark. It was late in the night, almost midnight.
Then I saw the Andromeda Galaxy for the first time ever! My mom and I was shocked to see the magnificent spiral galaxy in front of our eyes.
Look at these universe masterpieces with the naked eye is amazing, I can’t explain my excitement when seeing another world… I front of my own eyes.

It seems to me like you are using poor quality images up against Hubble space telescope, images, and that’s a pretty unfair comparison

The hercules cluster is still really cool to look at in both images

You can get a really good picture of the Orion Nebula through a StarSense Explorer DX

Amazing 😻

This is actually one of the first videos that i saw before buying telescope in 2020. I bought DOB 10 Skywatcher. First two things that i saw was Venus and double stars such as Mizar. Great experience. Only thing is later i bought tele vue nagler 17 used and experience become much better. It is a costly hobby. But what isn't.

judicial chaos right here ! going on the 105 train near about 2.0860 yeah only grey spots without any details!

Для дипская нужен минимум 130мм.

But bro u have to process the images to see better the objects, for example u can photograph the M31 with good details through your telescope but processing the image and doing a superposition.

Its just stacking image thats why its more clear and you can also study from it

Yes, that's clear. Well, most of the pictures are still being edited anyway. Staking and then enlarged without pixels.

your example of the pleiades is really not accurate I can see atleast 40 stars with binoculars and I am in a bortle 9 zone and had a full moon

The funny part is the saturn at the end 😂😂😂😂😂😂

Nowadays you could digitally crop your photos and videos of night sky objects, even do image stacking of nebulae and galaxies. But I bet they wouldn't be as good as NASA's photos in books and encyclopedias.

Maybe you should buy a telescope for the job ..crazy thought I know!

Godamn light pollution even dark sites are not even a 1 for the bortle scale

Through which telescope did you observe these?.

It does not matter on how big the telescope is. It dose for dimmer objects like whirlpool galaxy. But the thing that truly matters is the exposure, cameras and the mount.

The pictures in expectations are taken by regular astronomical telescopes and enhanced by false colour and noise reduction techniques.

Lol congrats on a mil

U can see more with a bigger telecope

To get images like the expectation you have to do very long exposures

Your records are breathtaking!

Dumb question but what if the eye piece I used was a microscope

Still amazing! Thanks!

what telescope you using

I'm curious to know what aperture, sensor and exposure you used, not to mention telescope, as one can get far greater detail from a decent rig (that isn't even that costly) provided they understand the technology and technique.

Long time expositon is the reason yuo get thats brillant galaxy pictures, yuor retina cant do that