Damn clouds here, as usual. This is an ill omen for the 2024 total eclipse, which will pass through this area.
Double nonsense! I can attest that you could absolutely see Saturn’s rings with good binoculars*. I’ve seen them many times in my youth with a decent pair of ‘whatever they were’. My interest in watching the skies led my dad to get me a telescope for Christmas one year. Still have it.
*I did grow up at 6500’ above sea level with almost zero light pollution. That might help.
Although I was a bit pessimistic because it has been cloudy for the last few days here in Atlanta, it was clear tonight, so I hastily set up my 5-inch Celestron and got a pretty good view for about 30 minutes. We could easily make out Saturn’s rings and four Galilean moons. Very nice show, and I invited our neighbors to take a look, which they enjoyed.
I didn’t try to attach my DLSR because I didn’t have auto tracking set up. Later I saw a picture a FB friend had gotten just by putting his phone’s camera up to the eyepiece of his scope. D’oh! 
Maybe I’ll try that tomorrow night.
A beautiful photo, squeegee. Amazing the detail you can see with a good telescope.
Does anyone else count five moons for Jupiter in that picture? Is one an artifact of the exposure time?
I was watching for it last night, and wouldn’t you know, the only place in the sky where there were any clouds were to the southwest. I was using my Google Sky Map app to make sure I was looking in the right direction, but couldn’t see anything.
You’ve got a few more days, though the planets will be further apart. What might give you grief though is, at least where I am ~29 North Latitude, the conjunction isn’t very high above the horizon by the time you get even good twilight for viewing. So get ready right at sunset.
Plus, there’s often something in the way, clouds, trees, buildings, etc… Last night was hazy enough, it was difficult to impossible to see the moons
Galileo could see the rings of Saturn, and there are surely binoculars out there nowadays better than what Galileo was able to make.
Read OP. Pretty sure that’s Saturn’s moon Titan, which made it even more cool. IOW it will be a very long time before you see all 5 moons lined up like that again. Titan tho may be the brightest spot closer to Saturn (along with a few others like Mimas or Enceladus), so I’ll defer to the experts on that…
Was glad we looked the days before, b/c yesterday was cloudy. My wife had no difficulty seeing Jupiter’s moon’s and Saturn’s rings thru her motion-cancelling binos.
My fave joke - which I’ve pulled off repeatedly in such situations - is to point out Mars in the S, and say, “Wow - able to see 4 planets at the same time!” 
That far out of plane from Saturn’s other moons, and yet in plane with the other four Galilean moons in that photo? I have trouble believing that.
A really funny thing is, if the astronomy programs I was using were correct, there were five planets or more visible at that time. Pluto was awfully close to this conjunction, and I want to say Uranus was in the visible sky at the time too. Of course, you’re not seeing Pluto with binoculars (Yeah, yeah, yeah: Pluto’s not a “planet” anymore.), and I’d need a lot of help to see Uranus with them. Though, if I could see Titan (apparent mag 7.5-8.2), I should be able to see Uranus (5.4-6.0).
Yeah - we ran into a neighbor who was holding his phone up and he mentioned Pluto and another planet to the S. But I wasn’t really listening b/c he wasn’t going to be able to see them.
As in the past, I’ve been amused when I see people using their phones in such a manner. Yeah - it is kinda cool to know that Pluto is out there somewhere in that direction, but I’m far more concerned with objects I have a chance of seeing either w/ my eyes or an assist from my wife’s array of gear. I’ve repeatedly encountered people who act surprised that they can’t see something, when their phone says it should be “Right there!”
Then there is the repeated action where someone goes out to see something that is clearly visible with the naked eye of binos, and instead of just using a chart to get a location and then enjoying the actual phenomena, they stare at their phone.
The thing about binoculars is that, unless they have a tripod mounting hole and you’ve got a good tripod (or unless they’re motion-cancelling binocs, like @Dinsdale mentioned), it’s really hard to see fine details clearly when you’re using them handheld. Even if you brace them against something solid. I tried using mine last night, and although you could see something, it was hard to make out details.
Also, ISTR that when he first saw Saturn, Galileo thought it was a “planet with ears.” IOW, he could tell that it was not spherical, but may not have been able to resolve the rings as a structure separate from the planet. Of course, in looking at the rings, much depends on the relative orientation of them to us here on the Earth, their angle relative to the sun, and so forth. But in later viewing, he was probably able to make them out properly.
I’ve looked through an optically accurate reproduction of Galileo’s first telescope, and it’s appallingly bad, compared to even cheap optics today. It’s amazing he could make out anything at all.
Yeah - I shoulda been clear - my wife did not resolve the distinct rings. More like a sphere w/ a line thru it. Or ears.
Here’s a shot that a friend of mine who’s a pro photographer and cinematographer got last night. He used a Canon EOS 5DSR with a Canon EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM and +1.4x III tele-extender.
Ooooh, shiny! Yeah, I didn’t see that through binoculars. Planet with ears, or a line through it, is more like it. No gap between planet and ring system. Can’t see the Great Red Spot either. Of course, my objective lens is 50mm, not 800… (Or does that refer to the length of the lens, not the width?)
Lacking a tripod, or image-stabilizing binoculars, I sat in a deck chair with my feet up and my elbows braced on my knees, and that worked well. Some jitter, but tolerable.
800 mm diameter isn’t a telephoto-- It’s a full-blown telescope, and a damn fine one (the biggest scope I’ve ever looked through was about 500 mm diameter). So a telephoto marked “800 mm” must be a focal length.
You’re right. https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/details/lenses/ef/super-telephoto/ef-800mm-f-5-6l-is-usm
I just didn’t think it through. 30 inches wide? LOL. Not a photographer, obviously, but if I’m reading the wiki right, f/5.6, means the entrance pupil diameter is 142 mm or so. Which sounds like a wee bit more light than my 5 mm entrance pupil binoculars are gathering. I wonder how long the exposure had to be?
Our doofus tv weatherman talked it up last night, but we had overcast skies. He said you could wait until 11 PM when the clouds would clear and look then. Of course they would set by then.
I just worry that some people took his advice and ended up seeing nothing.
I should start a pit thread about him and his stupid antics.