Nebula filter - Help me choose please

[cygnusx1]

Looking at the price of 2" filters, i have to be careful about choosing the right item.

I bought a Baarder Neodym hoping to get at least some detail and colour but the imaging results thru my unmodded 350D were disappointing.

I've located 2 filters at reasonable prices, my question is which would be more suitable for imaging nebulas ??

Hb + OIII UHC

"this filter has had significant development to achieve excellent transmission of the Oxygen lines at 496.9 nm, 500.4 nm, as well as the 486 and 656 nm Hydrogen lines, while attenuating most of the background light from other sources. The filter has an exceptionally rectangular passband. This is a relatively narrow pass band nebula filter. Competitors refer to this type of filter as a UHC (Ulta-High-Contrast) filter. "

or

Hb & OIII Nebula II

"selectively transmits the Hydrogen and Oxygen emission of Galaxies while elliminating the background polluting light. This filter has had significant development to produce excellent transmission of the Oxygen lines at 496.9 nm, 500.4 nm, as well as the 486 Hydrogen, while attenuating most of the background light from other sources. The filter has an exceptionally rectangular passband, and very good attenuation of the remainder of the visible spectrum. This is a relatively broad pass band nebula filter.

The broad-band "Light Pollution Reduction" (LPR) filters are designed to improve the visibility of a variety of Deep-Sky objects by blocking out the common Mercury vapor, Sodium, and some other emission lines from man-made or natural sources which contribute to light pollution, while letting through a broad range of other more useful wavelengths. Since the eye is mainly a "contrast detector", this selective screening out of some of the background skyglow increases the contrast and helps Deep-sky objects stand out more noticably. While these filters do not eliminate the effects of light pollution or make the objects brighter, in many cases, these filters can improve the visibility of some deep-sky objects to at least some degree."

[cygnusx1]

No-one used any of these filters :?

[cygnusx1]

Has no-one used a Hb+OIII or Hb+OIII UHC filter???

[themos]

One way of doing this is to find an imager that posts nebula images that you like (CELESCOPE, say) and ask them directly.

[bern]

Well yeah, I've used filters of the type you've mentioned, but without a brand name or reliable technical info I wouldn't want to give advice.

What I would say is that with filters you usually get what you pay for and your imaging/viewing rig is only as good as it's weakest part.

bern

[daz]

And they are usually used with CCD's, not DSLR's.

I'm sure Nik S. would've pointed that out when you spoke to him on the 7th October....

[cygnusx1]

And they are usually used with CCD's, not DSLR's.

I'm sure Nik S. would've pointed that out when you spoke to him on the 7th October....

??? care to explain you lost me there, Nik who?

[Jeff RV]

THink he may be talking bout this geezer.

http://mstecker.com/pages/appszymanek.htm

Jeff.

[daz]

Yep Nik Syzmaneck.

Weren't you talking to him about using filters with your camera at Bedford's 20th Anniversary event on Sunday 7th October?

[Astroman]

I don't usually respond to imaging threads, but this one caught my eye for some reason.

I use the former filter, OIII + Hb UHC a lot for visual work. A narrow-band filter works great for nebulae, but I've never tried it photographically or photometrically. The former because I don't take many "pretty pictures", the latter because it's relatively imprecise, as Bern suggests. I doubt you'd notice much difference photographically between the two because you're piling photons on with long exposures. I think it may help with light pollution over time, especially the narrow-band one. Cost I'd think would be higher for this filter, too, so it's kind of a toss-up. The main band-pass will be in the green range and results will depend on your camera's red sensitivity.

To me, it seems an expensive experiment. mho. hth.