Is it worth getting a OIII filter

[spacebloke]

Hello,

I currently own UHC and a IR cut moonglow filters and use them at the moment for visual and hopefully imaging soon.

Is it worth me getting a OIII filter too?

Cheers

[Pingster]

Not to be gloom bringer. But if you have. Scope smaller than 10in i dont feel its worth it. In a 8in for example it will let you see the veil

Neb, where as before it you will most likely see nothing.

But you will only just about see it, and it will be too dim to really get much joy for observing as it will be fuzzy and not bery detailed.

Thats just my experience xD.

[umadog]

People buy these filter to block out LP and so naturally use them in places where there a lot of LP. A lot of such locations have bright direct lights that prevent dark adaptation. You will NEED to be well dark adapted to use an OIII filter, particularly with scopes below 10" or 12".

The OIII is certainly a good filter but I'd seriously suggest you buy an eye-patch and observing hood if you want to use it at 8" in an urban setting.

[russ]

Not to be gloom bringer. But if you have. Scope smaller than 10in i dont feel its worth it. In a 8in for example it will let you see the veil

Neb, where as before it you will most likely see nothing.

But you will only just about see it, and it will be too dim to really get much joy for observing as it will be fuzzy and not bery detailed.

Thats just my experience xD.

Filters devide opinion. Some like them and see their benefits, other prefer to not bother.

Personally i think more to the OIII than just the Veil. It's a real boon from a light polluted garden to spot things like M97, M76, Eskimo just for starters, which are barely visible without it. All respond well with the OIII and an 8" scope. M27 loves the OIII. There are loads more emission neb and planetary nebs that work well with the OIII.

But whether its worth buying if you have a UHC is another matter. I sold my UHC-S to buy the OIII, i think it was a worthwhile exercise. And i've seen the Veil from the garden (LP hell) with a 4" f5 Startravel frac and the Skywatcher OIII. So it will work with smaller apertures no probs. And the same combo added something extra to M27.

[John]

I regularly see the Veil Nebula with a 4" scope and an O-III filter it's one of the best sights in the sky in my opinion. I've also picked out the brighter portions with an 80mm and a UHC filter.

A narrowband filter of some type, whether UHC or O-III, is a useful item to have in your "toolbox" I feel although you need to accept that only certain classes of objects will benefit so it won't necessarily get used that much.

There are some objects (eg: the Veil and Owl nebulae) which are virtually invisible in smaller scopes unless a filter of this type is used.

[spacebloke]

Thanks for the feedback guys, it looks like I've divided opinion slightly.

Whenever I look at the deepsky images on this forum, I see that people talk about taking subs in Ha, OIII among others. Are these to show different colours which are then stacked together?

Seeing as I will mainly be using this filter for imaging would the OIII filter be good for me?

I've had my Dslr modded and wanted to know if this would make a difference when using filters?

Cheers

[faulksy]

going on your signature and 6" i would say no bought one from rvo for my celestron 62 and couldnt see jack as aperature to small was the same on my 6"mak as well

[ollypenrice]

Be aware that the filters used by CCD imagers are different from those used visually because they have a much narrower bandpass. In visual use CCD filters would be pretty well opaque. If you already have a UHC visual filter then adding an O111 would maybe not bring much to your toolbox, I think.

I live at a dark site and use a visual O111 to see the whole Veil loop in a 70mm Pronto. In the big 20 inch the filter is astounding, but so is a UHC.

Imagers add Ha to the red channel and, less often, O111 to green and blue in order to enhance contrast. Here's an extreme example of why; on the left an unenhanced colour image. On the right, an Ha layer has been blended into the red. It is the same piece of sky, exactly. In imaging Ha is by far the most productive narrowband filter. I use a 7 nanometer Baader.

Olly

[todd8137]

a big vote fo the 0III filter its top draw ,for visual and dslr work viel ect no probs with this filter

[spacebloke]

The filter is going to be predominantly for imaging.

[Moonshane]

I cannot comment on imaging unfortunately but for visual use I have a UHC and a Oiii. I use the latter most and find it makes suitable objects much more obvious even in my 6" newt and from a light polluted site. yes, it darkens the sky very obviously (that's what it's designed to do - remove the bulk of the light spectrum from the view) and puts a colour cast on stars but there's always a compromise with any filter or eyepiece or scope or mount.........

I can see the Veil easily from my light polluted back garden with the 6" and using the Oiii. With more aperture it makes even better viewing of course.

[lukebl]

My understanding is that for visual, you need one of these:

But for imaging, you need one of these:

They have different properties, even though they are both OIII filters. The one for imaging is far too dark for visual use. Make sure you get the correct one.

[spacebloke]

It's the narrowband one I need then.

I have put a wanted ad up if anyone has one for sale.

Cheers