Honestly, I'm going to assume that the lighting is to blame (causing too many hairlines/nicks to look bigger than they look in "real life") and say it could be an AU53-55. If you make me choose one, I'll say 55. I had an NGC XF45 that looked much, much worse.
It's an AU-53 straight graded...I forgot to put it in my watch list and can't find the dang coin this am! From Eternity coins in Boston
Nice. I knew it would most likely be straight graded but I though it would top out at 50. It probably looks a bit better in hand
Having photographed a few coins, I've run across that issue - you see it in hand, then you take the photo and you think, "Ugh, is that the same coin?" Kind of like looking at a toned coin in natural sunlight and then under an undiffused IKEA Jansjo light. Yikes.
It's possible the photograph makes it look worse. I bought a modern business strike coin some time ago that was graded by NGC with a "PL" designation. I had always wanted a modern PL circulation coin...and the price was low so I jumped on it. The photos of the coin in the eBay add looked horrible...as if someone had taken a piece of steel wool to it. I took a chance because I trusted NGC and the price was low enough. What did I get...a lovely PL coin that looks great in hand. But, when you photograph it (if not really careful)...you get a really ugly look. It's really hard to photograph accurately. That said, this is a key date Morgan and I have seen a bunch of...questionable coins in slabs. So, it'd be interesting to see it in hand.