Skywatcher H-beta filter

[Moonshane]

Hi all

John started a discussion on this (partly anyway) here http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/167802-h-beta-filters/page__hl__%20h

I wonder if anyone has this filter http://www.365astronomy.com/skywatcher-hbeta-filter-2-inch-p-2945.html

If you do then I'd be very appreciative of some feedback as to its use for visual observing. It seems a very reasonable price and I'm itching to have a go with the 'magic bullet' filter.

Cheers

Shane

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I think it is identical to this one, which is even cheaper:

http://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/product.html?info=3709

Don't know what they charge for shipment to the UK

[rwilkey]

Hi Shane, I don't think it would be suitable for visual use to be honest, just a guess. I bought the Orion visual H-Beta filter off AB&S for under £50, perhaps a look there may help.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I do not think that is quite correct. The main difference between visual and CCD filters is that the latter also block IR. The bandpass might be narrower. The Astronomik H-Beta filter listed for visual here

http://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/Optical-Accessories/Filters/2-Filters/H-Beta-filter-2-649.html

is also suitable for CCD it is claimed.

According to this site:

http://www.astroshop.eu/h-beta-filters/skywatcher-2--h-beta-filter/p,25148#tab_bar_1_select

The skywatcher is also suitable for visual use.

[John]

I'd be trying to find something with the highest % transmission of the H-beta line for visual use. Some of the ones aimed at CCD use seem to be lower, presumably because you can make up for it by capturing more data ?.

[mert]

Are you having a go at The Horsehead Shane?

Sent mobile

[Moonshane]

Ideally yes but LP is a bit rubbish where I live. It would be nice to have this sort of filter in my case though for when I get to dark sites. my thinking though is if I can get away with £40 for this filter rather than £150 for such a small range of objects then all the better.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I also think the cheaper one is worth a shot. I cannot now justify a three or four times higher price.

[John]

Having thought a bit about this I tend to agree that the lower cost filter makes sense. I don't use my O-III that much so an H-Beta would get out even less. Perhaps renting would be a good idea

[mert]

I got a 2" H-Beta from Astronomica, I also have a Astronomik 1.25" version that Telescope House sells, it came from fleabay. I managed the HH with both filters on the same night using a 12" SCT, was hard to see but the Flame Nebula was also visible, having a 16" would have helped :-)

Sent mobile

[Damo636]

I've managed the flame many times but not the HH (unfiltered) As much as I would like to see the nags head, I haven't been able to bring myself to splash for a filter that will see such limited use. The APM one is good value though, might be worth a punt!

[Moonshane]

well, despite logic telling me I should save and buy a Lumicon or Astronomik, I have bitten the bullet with the Skywatcher H-beta. one reason is that if I understand it correctly, the wavelengths covered seem almost the same as those for the Astronomik Visual H-beta. one difference is the transmission being about 95% in the Astronomik and about 87% in the SW.

hopefully the attached document will read OK but it seems to suggest almost identical curves/wavelengths.

At £40 for the 2" it's not a big gamble and hopefully I can report back and confirm jaw dropping views of something on the absolute edge of detection even with 16" of aperture.

Astronomik filter.doc

[Damo636]

Thanks for stepping up for guinea pig duty Shane & good luck chasing the nag :-)

[alan potts]

Olll, H alpha H beta, S2, it's all Greek to me. Is there a short guide anywhere so an idiot like me can help get is old head around them. I understand photographic filters as well as anyone but this is all so, well, different.

Alan.

[Moonshane]

quite a good guide at the bottom of here Alan. I suspect you'd benefit a fair bit actually.

http://www.lumicon.com/store/c/18-Filters.aspx

[RikM]

That's a great link Shane

Goes some way to explain why I get different results on different nights with either a UHC or Oiii filter. Differing transparency giving different amounts of reflected light pollution.

[Moonshane]

this http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/3725708/Main/3724695 is interesting albeit coming from the will visual filters work for imaging angle.

[Moonshane]

this thread http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php/92315-Are-my-filters-for-visual-or-astrophotography-use esp. post #4 suggests that it may be OK too.

[Moonshane]

adding bits as I find them as there's a dearth of info about h-beta online it seems

"The H-beta-CCD is also great for visual observation. If you plan to get filters for visual observation and for astrophotography get the CCD filter: You may use this filter visual as well as in front of you camera. The built-in IR-blocker doesn’t disturb visual observation but you need an additional IR-blocker if you want to use the visual filer with your camera."

from http://www.astronomik.com/en/photographic-filters/h-beta-ccd-filter.html

[Moonshane]

I suspect that this sort of test has not been done many times so will be interesting to see if it works. When I get the filter (or technically when it's my birthday in mid-Feb) I'll do a test with my 6", 12" and 16" scopes and report the results.

here's a comment from Telescope House where I bought mine in reponse to the question, is the difference just the addition of an IR filter for CCD imaging?

"HI Shane,

I think you're right - CCD-inclined H-Beta filters have a slightly different band pass - but it also depends on who makes the filters.

Broadly speaking, you may use the Skywatcher H-Beta for both visual and photographic use, but it may be outperformed by some more expensive filters photographically.

Give it a go with the 16" and let us know - we've only just started bring the Skywatcher H-Betas in and I haven't had a chance to test them yet!"

[John]

Thats an honest and helpful attitude from Telescope House

[swamp thing]

I await your results with interest Shane. The H-Beta filter is next on my wish list.

[alan potts]

Moonshane,

Thanks for that I have bookmarked it. You can buy some very good eyepieces for the cost of some of these Lumicon filters. I guess it is a bit stupid having Televues or the like and then getting something cheaper, but of course most of these will need to be 2 inch sizes, still I can't take it with me. I think the most useful one to kick off with is the Olll, anyone disagree?

Alan.

[RikM]

With nice dark skies Alan, a UHC may be more useful, but the Oiii is certainly well worth having in the box.

[alan potts]

Thats an honest and helpful attitude from Telescope House

John,

I bought some gear from them around September time and they were very helpful to me and gave me some good discounts, 24kg of kit sent to me by courier for 31 quid, not bad if I may say so.

Alan.