Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

UHC or OIII filter?

tombulgin

Recommended Posts

tombulgin

tombulgin

Posted
Posted

I want to buy my first nebula filter for improving DSO viewing on my Skywatcher 10" dob. I am not (yet) into astrophotography and have read about HC and OIII filter types. Does anyone have any suggestions or preferences? Would appreciate a suggestion for good 'all rounder' that is going to give me some "wow", from which I can then push on and add to my collection over time.

Thanks for input!

Tb

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Northern Soul man

Northern Soul man

Posted
Posted

Hi ya Tom, I've got both, beware, they both darken the view through the ep - the OIII more than the UHC, when I say both I mean 1 1/4 and 2" - mainly used on a Revelation 12 dob. The UHC is a more general filter as opposed to the OIII. I live in the West Mids and suffer with terrible light pollution, but I find they help locate certain objects but with a much dimmer view, the Lumicon OIII is great but pricey, I have two 2" low price (Castell) filters an they work just as well, but you can also try a slightly higher mag on each object which also darkens the background sky a little enhancing the contrast a little more - searching and finding objects just ads to the fun of astronomy - a good set of charts and a correct image finder also helps a great deal - I have the Sky Atlas 2000 and an Orion 10 x 50 right angled finder which gives me the correct orientation for star hopping to locate Objects - Filters will help but nothing will help more than a really dark sky, usually the rule of thumb is if you can see the milky way the galaxies and nebulae will POP out at the ep, but, like me the night sky around the West Mids is very light polluted, but Hey - adds to the fun, Hope that helps - Sorry to Babble on, but I just LOVE the Hobby Cheers Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted

the UHC is a better all rounder as it darkens the sky less than the Oiii. it's great on M42 at the minute. that said, I tend to use my Oiii more as for those objects that it affects, it really makes a massive difference - i.e. you can see them. I'd recommend the UHC for now as many of the Oiii objects (like the Veil) are past their best now and the UHc will give you more use for now.

get an Oiii for next summer though if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
acey

acey

Posted
Posted

Only filter I own is a Lumicon UHC. Bought it about 10 years ago and have never felt the need to buy anything else. I've successfully used it with all my scopes (80mm f4, 8" f6, 12" f4.9) and have viewed Veil, Crab, Horsehead etc etc etc. Great for hunting small planetaries. But when it comes to really bright stuff (e.g. M42) I prefer to view without the filter. And if you want to see the Blinking Planetary blink then you likewise need an unfiltered view. I should add that as the vast majority of DSOs are galaxies (and are mostly what I look at) the filter spends a lot of time not getting used at all. But whenever I do need to use it, I'm very glad of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northern Soul man

Northern Soul man

Posted
Posted

Another point guys wait till the objects you want to observe are at their highest point in the sky, or even overhead(the Zenith), it tends to be the darkest portion of the sky, least amount of atmosphere to look through, like now M31 and the surrounding region is well placed, see if you can pick up the 2 galaxies with the Andromeda Galaxy - not tonight though - too much Moon !!! - but yes the UHC would be a better filter to start with as the OIII works better on emission rather than contrast Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted

I have an APM UHC filter (2", 69 euros) and it is very useful, also on typical O-III objects (like the Veil). I am now also going to get an O-III, but I do not expect to use it as much as the UHC. I also want to replace my SCT-fitting LPR filter for a 2". LPR filters (broad-band) work much better on galaxies than UHC filters (narrowband).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tombulgin

tombulgin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well everyone, thanks for the really useful suggestions. UHC seems to win the day, and I like the idea that the O-III might be better suited to DSOs in the summer months.

At the moment, moon allowing, I am enjoying Orion and all it's delights, M1 (although almost impossible to see last night), the various clusters in Auriga and Andromeda Galaxy a few nights ago (but moon not helping here either now).

I have found the Clown Face nebula hard to see (other than pale grey smudge). I really hoped to be able to see the Rosette Nebula too but totally invisible.

I think I may go for the UHC (will this enhance the nebula of Orion?) - perhaps the baader?

Cheers all,

tb

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tombulgin

tombulgin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Awesome report! Not only gives details of which filters work best but also tells me where the DSOs are that I should be searching for! (I've just taken delivery of my first telescope in 30years so getting back into it!).

UHC seems to win the day, and even if there are objects listed here for which the OIII is preferable, the UHC is at least second and if not tied with it.

I noticed what appeared to be two different types of Baader nebula filter:

Baader UHC-S / L-Booster-Filter 1'/4 optically polished [baa-42-2458275] - 49.00 : 365Astronomy: Discovery for every day!

Baader UHC-S Nebula Filter (1.25") 31.7mm

Are these actually the same filter, just listed with different names?

Thanks

Tb

Link to comment
Share on other sites
acey

acey

Posted
Posted
Lumicon is very good, by all accounts, it is also quite expensive. I would like to see a side-by-side comparison between my 69 euro APM and the 199 euro Lumicon counterpart before changing.

My 1.25" Lumicon UHC was about £70 when I bought it, now £82 at SCS Astro.

There's a comparison of spectral transmission (not a review) for various types here:

Astronomical filter curves

The various Lumicon types (UHC, OIII etc) are compared here:

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1520

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted
My 1.25" Lumicon UHC was about £70 when I bought it, now £82 at SCS Astro.

There's a comparison of spectral transmission (not a review) for various types here:

Astronomical filter curves

The various Lumicon types (UHC, OIII etc) are compared here:

Filter Performance Comparisons - Article

Mine are 2", hence the difference, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

I have an Astronomik O-III in the 2" size. Having owned a few O-III and UHC filters (including Baader and Orion (USA) ones) I find the Astronomik the best and most versatile performer in my 4" - 10" scopes. It's band pass width is a little more generous than some O-III's and it's optical quality is excellent too with stars showing more as pinpoints than in other filters I've used. I find its the only filter I need :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.