Baader UHC-S or Skywatcher UHC filter?

[Dazzyd]

Hi all

i want to get a UHC filter to improve nebula views etc. been looking on FLO and they have 2, a Baader UHC-S and a Skywatcher UHC. I have a 150PL so I think I'd be pushing things a little if I wanted to use a O-III on there.

Question is, which one is the best to get? I'm in the West Midlands so light polluted but nowhere near as much as if I was in a city or a dense town.

Any suggestions on which to get? Another UHC? I'd like to see the Ring Nebula better, maybe try and see the Veil etc but I'm really looking forward to spending my first winter with a scope seeing the Orion Nebula and Andromeda.

Thanks for any help you guys can give me

[celkins]

In my humble opinion, the Baader is the better filter, but that's not to say that the SkyWatcher isn't good value for money...

I almost always use my Baader UHC filter, but do also use a Baader Moon & SkyGlow filter, from time to time: I do have a SkyWatcher LP filter, but haven't used it since I got the Baader ones...

YMMV

[Mr Flibble]

I think the Baader has a much wider pass than a typical UHC. I haven't used the Skywatcher UHC so I wouldn't like to comment although I would like to try one out at some point to compare it to the Nebustar UHC which I've been using in my 6 inch. I also hear very good things about the Lumicon UHC but that's getting into higher costs again.

[Spec-Chum]

My Castell uhc filter works well on my 200p. You can definitely tell the difference when using it.

Not a bad price either, £36 iirc

[Dazzyd]

My Castell uhc filter works well on my 200p. You can definitely tell the difference when using it.

Not a bad price either, £36 iirc

Just looked at a diagram of the light wavelengths the UHC filters work at, the Castell is almost as wide as the Baader UHC-S and it's £15 cheaper! For those who may have had experience of both, is there much difference when viewing through these two?

Thanks for all you answers

[John]

Just looked at a diagram of the light wavelengths the UHC filters work at, the Castell is almost as wide as the Baader UHC-S and it's £15 cheaper! For those who may have had experience of both, is there much difference when viewing through these two?

Thanks for all you answers

Actually wide in this case can mean less effective. The Baader UHC-S is designed for use in smaller aperture scopes so it's band pass width is wider. A "normal" UHC with a narrower band pass width will enhance the contrast of nebulae more but in small aperture scopes this can lead to views where background stars are very faint or invisible. With larger scopes there is more light to play with in the 1st place of course.

[part timer]

I have a 150 mm telescope and have used the Baader for several years. It does make a great difference!

I also have an OIII filter. This REALLY does make the target more easily visible but makes all but the very brightest stars vanish. I use it to get a good mental picture of the nebulosity before going back to the uhc or filter free view.

As an only filter though the UHC-s is a great buy in my opinion. You can use an OIII on small scopes (i use it even on an 80mm!) but it is not for everyone!

[Dazzyd]

Thanks guys, think I'll get the UHC-S on order

[Spec-Chum]

To be honest feller, I think the differences between all 3 would be minimal at best, so I'd just go for the cheapest. Well. I did lol

[Carbon]

I had a hard time deciding between that and the O-III. I ordered the 2" Baader O-III just this week.

[allen g]

On my LX 90 8" I use the Astronomik UHC - It is an excellent quality filter albeit not inexpensive.

[rwilkey]

You may find the UHC-S a little too broad, I recommend getting the Sky Watcher UHC, will work well in a 150mm scope, still broader than some but an improvement in contrast over the UHC-S. I have both, so I have the best of both worlds, but the Sky Watcher is the best in my opinion.

[Moonshane]

I prefer unfiltered on the Ring, UHC on M42 and Oiii on the Veil. I have 2" Castell filters and they are excellent value for money and work well on scopes for me between 90mm and 400mm (including 6"). as mentioned they do make focus tricky on fast scopes and darken everything other than brightest stars, tinging all with a blue or green colour. even with my 16" dob, I can see no trace of the veil with no filter and filamentary detail with the Oiii (I live near Manchester). it's incredible to see M42 with the UHC and good aperture, especiallt from a dark site.

[Dazzyd]

You may find the UHC-S a little too broad, I recommend getting the Sky Watcher UHC, will work well in a 150mm scope, still broader than some but an improvement in contrast over the UHC-S. I have both, so I have the best of both worlds, but the Sky Watcher is the best in my opinion.

Fantastic! Thanks for that. I hadn't ordered anything yet but I'm on my way to ordering now :-)

Tapped with my own fair fingers on my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[faulksy]

i used to have the baader "o"iii and used it with my 6"sct and a mak and found that everything was to dull. i now use the baader uhc and find it a lot better but i should use it more often

[crazyjedi]

Have never used the SW but I like my baader lots. It works well in my scope which is almost the same as yours and under the same sky too as I live in south Birmingham. It helps lots with Orion !

[Dan Watts]

From what I have learnt, the UHC-S is not as effective as the dedicated UHC in regards to bringing out the nebula...I am going to be ordering the 2" Skywatcher UHC soon, I have heard really good things about this for the price!

[rory]

so with the baader uhc-s being wider and ideal for smaller apertures, do baader make the regular uhc filter ?

[Moonshane]

nice avatar Rory! one of my fave AP bits.

I think they do in answer to your question.

[rory]

okay thanks . i was considering a baader uhc-s but i think a more full on uhc would be better for my 8".

as for the a.p that charachter is just classic,the original david brent. pure pure class comedy.

[Moonshane]

I use a full Oiii and UHC on my 6" newts so should be fine with your 8".

[rory]

great i feel now i have the right filter in mind at least . i thought the castell looked good value as many have mentioned, but they want over £4.00 to provide a plastic case ! bit sly .

i think i may take my time and go for the s/h market.

[Moonshane]

are you at PSP? I'll be bringing mine along so you could try them.

[jimmyjamjoejoe]

The orion ultrablock is worth considering too. It's much narrower than the skywatcher/baader.

I have only tried it once, and the conditions werent great, but it made the veil easily visible (no detail though) on a full moonlit night. Views of the dumbell and rings were improved too. All in all, the improvements were ~good~ but fairly subtle, had it been a moonless clear night they would probably have been amazing.

[rory]

are you at PSP? I'll be bringing mine along so you could try them.

i take it this is reference to (something star party ?) im afraid not moonshane, but thanks for the kind offer sir .

jimmyjam, thanks for that , i'll be sure to search them out too.

p.s- sorry if ive jumped in on someone elses thread, but its all the same topic i suppose ?