Thinking Caps, please

I'm having a problem with M42. Can't see it with the current scopes(Stellarvue 102f8.7apo, Nighthawk, and MiniBorg 50.) And it's not external light pollution as I had no problem with an 8" SCT, 90mm Mak, or an Orion 120f8 refractor. No problem with 12X50 binos either. Even the MiniBorg had the problem. The 2 Stllarvues have Antares 2" diagonals. The Mini has the Borg diagonal that came with it. It's like the Thetas just burn it out. An OIII and UHC filter don't help. With the 120, (no filter)I barlowed the 10mm Plossl and was even able to get streamers.
It's not the scope type, aperture or magnification. Now I'm wondering if it's the type of EP or coatings. The 120f8 always seemed to be muzzy - these 3 are far sharper and brighter. I've tried a 13mm Nagler and a 14mm Antares wide with the same results. A 32mm plossl wasn't much better. I've asked at our club's star party, they couldn't answer it, either.
Hope someone here can help figure this out.
Thanks

Lois,

It sounds like you have quite a few scopes which implies a good level of experience, so please take no offense to this, but if you can't even see M42 (generally an easy naked eye object) with three different scopes, with three different diagonals and three different eyepieces, chances are you are doing something wrong at the most fundamental level. I would check things like lens caps, finder scope alignment and also make sure that what you think is M42 is indeed M42. (e.g., are you observing this recently before midnight? If so, it probably isn't M42).

Is M42 the only object you are having difficulty with? If not, try these scopes on a terrestrial object during the day to make sure you have no basic issues with alignment, setup, etc.

Best wishes,

Randy

Are you saying you can't see it at all, or that you just arn't seeing the level of detail you wish to see. Given sufficiently dark skies, M-42 is a naked eye object, easy in binoculars. In terms of seeing "Streamers" in the nebulosity, M42 is a diffuse nebula, the classic example of a DSO. I doubt you are going to see much detail with small refractors, or 90mm Mak's. Deep space observers don't say "Aperture Rules" for nothing. The real secret to seeing detail in DSO's is aperture, and a showpiece object like M42 really exemplifies this. In my 80mm achromat, I see M42 as a nebulous haze, with my 8"dob I see streamers, with my 14.5" I see ripples and knodules that look solid enough to walk on, extending from one edge of the eyepiece to the other. This isn't a function of optical precision, it's a function of aperture! Don't waste your time looking for mag14 galaxies, the hoarshead, or nebulous detail in the Rosette or veil with your 50mm Borg, it just ain't going to happen! Another thing, forget the O-III filter with your current scope lineup, it does you more harm than good in smaller than 4" scopes. An O-III filter rejects greater than 90% of incomming light, and you don't have very much light comming into a 2"-3" refractor to begin with. IMHO, If you want to observe detail in nebula's, your 4" Stellarvue is your best bet for now, and you should consider adding an 8" or larger reflector to your scope collection.

Of course there is one other posibility I just now thought of, and that is poor transparancy. Humidity, haze, or even a thin invisible layer of high sirrus clouds will act like a neutral density filter, reducing the detail seen in any scope, especially ones with limited aperture, while bright high contrast object like a star might be a little softer, they will otherwise seem unaffected essentially decieving you into thinking your seeing is clear.

You are kinda missing the point. I can see much more nebulosity in an 80f5 and 120 f8.3 (both Orion) than in the Stellarvues or the Miniborg. Some of it HAS to be EPs. I tried the Mini again this AM with 3 different Eps. There was about a 50% improvement in a Vixen 20mm Lanthanum. A generic 17mm plossl showed nothing, and a 10mm Orion Sirius plossl had about a 35%improvement. Put the 14mm Antares back in and couldn't see much. (The 14 Antares and 13mm Nagler were almost the same in the amount of nebulosity the showed.) I'd be thinking focal length if it wasn't for the 80ST. I've also seen people that had good refractors (similar in f/l and aperture) bragging about what good views they have. I've also seen filters discussed and the Meade OIII is not too well thought of. I've also read that a good UHC will do better (mine's Lumicon) That's why I'm so puzzled.
I'm extremely happy with all 3 scopes and I just want the best performance as possible out of them.
Thanks,
Lois

Lois, another thing to look out for is that LPR filters act like mirrors. Meaning any ambient light on your eyeball side of the EP can reflect back into your eye, actually reducing contrast. Whenever using such filters make sure you shield the EP from any stray ambient light.

Good luck,
Doug

I can get up - usually it's about 3AM. Live at 39N. I think those of who suggested the diagonal might be right. Tried the Lagoon last night even though it was over the more light polluted area. Tried using some 1 1/4 diagonals. Had one I bought from Scopetronix as a web special. Ad said it was listed at 1/8 whatever, but that was all. I swiped it from the ST80. Could see unfiltered about what I see filtered(UHC)in the 2". Filtered using this diagonal and saw much more of it. Tried a 19mmPan and a 13mm Nagler (which did better). Also seemed to see more color in the stars of the double cluster. Was going to try M42 this am, but it's raining.
I played around with trying to look straight thru, but can't get the scope to focus at infinity. I don't have an adapter. Any way to do this w/o an adapter?
Thanks,
Lois

I also have a SV102V 7.9 f/l. And I can see nebulosity in M42 at 30X in my front yard looking over streetlights at morning twilight with no nebula filter. Fogged up optics? Maybe.