NGC4565 is always a crowd pleaser at the eyepiece and as an image! Is so big and bright it always gets a wow at the eyepiece under decently dark skies.

Big and bright also makes it a good target when seeing and/or transparency are poor.  The first night had poor seeing, with 4.5 arc second , while the second and third nights improved to 3 arc seconds stars to 3.5 arc second stars. There was some creeping humidity that turned into fog putting a halt to things one night and some moderate moon issues. Despite the poor conditions, the result here wasn't too bad, despite the sky conditions and the limiting magnitude is over 20.

The image here is sampled it down a bit from the original image that was 0.5 arc seconds per pixel, as the limited seeing didn't show a lot of detail at that image scale. 

GALAXY STRUCTURE:
One of the galaxy's brightest globular clusters that is visible just to the right of the moderately bright star just to the lower right of the galaxy core. The cluster, KAZF 4565-7, is right on the fuzzy edge of the central bulge of the  galaxy and is a bit over magnitude 21, according to data in SIMBAD. If you look very carefully just above there is another globular cluster, KAZF 4565-12, faintly visible in the bulge forming an equilateral triangle with the star and KAZF-4565-7. Following the links in orange will take you to the SIMBAD data on these object.

The distance to the galaxy seems to be little under dispute based on data available in SIMBAD. Redshift data puts its distance anywhere from 39 to 57 million light years away. Apparently its redshift is difficult to measure. Tully-Fischer distance estimates (based on a relationship between rotation speed vs brightness of spiral galaxies) put it at around 45 million light years. Being edge-on and very dusty might be making all these measurements more difficult. Either way, the galaxy is definitely significantly larger than our galaxy, being at least 175,000 light years across!

IMAGING:
This image was produced using the lucking imaging technique. Each of the 23 seven minute images stacked to produce this image were a live-stack (in SharpCap) of 105 four second exposures. Because I sampled the image down, I entered the FWHM in arc seconds rather than pixels. Astrobin doesn't specify whether the units should be pixels or arc seconds, but I assume the former is the norm for the site.