2" UHC Filter

[Mark in Macc]

Can anyone recommend a decent, reasonably priced 2" UHC filter. I have a Lumicon 1.25" UHC at the moment, but have started the move towards 2" eyepieces and will be selling my 1.25" filters. I would love to buy all Lumicon filters, but the 2" ones are not cheap and I might end up in the divorce court. The Baader UHC filters look to be a reasonable price, but I don't know much about these.

Thanks,

Mark.

[Andrew*]

The Skywatcher UHC is actually very good, and belies it's £61 tag. Can't really go wrong: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/uhc-oiii-visual-filters/skywatcher-uhc-filter.html

The Baader UHC-S is not a true UHC as it passes a much wider band than a UHC, reducing contrast.

Andrew

[alan potts]

The Lumicons are very good and the Astronomik too. The trouble with starting with the best is you always are going to compair with it. I would take my chances with the wife.

Seriously look out for a secondhand one I am, I managed to get an Olll now I like you would like a 2 inch UHC.

Alan

[Stargazer_00]

I'm not sure quite how they would differ but I took a punt on a 2" SkyWatcher UHC just to see what a nebula filter does and this works jut fine for me. I'll probably get an O-III filter as well at some point just to see what that does on specific targets. I have never really gone nebula hunting in anger since buying the UHC, just looked at the Orion Nebula, Owl and Eskimo. I'll have a think about how I would do this next decent clear night I get.

I hear nebulas are visible well with a UHC/O-III even when the moon is up, so maybe I should've been doing this already this week on the nights I just looked at the moon for an hour or two and packed up on an othewise clear sky, bored.

[alanjgreen]

Cats Eye Nebula is worth a look.

Very strange sight - really does seem to glow like a cats eye

Saw it last night for the first time, the glow seemed to come and go - may be my imagination

My Skywatcher UHC did seem to help me "see" it better tho!

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have an APM UHC filter (and an O-III) which is a very generic one (same as SkyWatcher, I think). I do like it, but I am edging towards a more expensive one, like the Astronomik or Lumicon

[Stargazer_00]

Any specific reason why the more expensive ones are better? Are they tighter on the frequencies that are passed?

I always assumed filters to be rather simple affairs where cost didnt really factor in. essentially they are coated to prevent certain frequencies of light from passing. this is relatively low tech as far as i know so should be close to universal performance across brands. Is that not the case?

[John]

I've used a number of brands of filters from Skywatcher to my current Astronomik O-III. The main difference I see with the more expensive brands is that stars are better defined as pinpoints than with the lower cost ones. It's not a show stopper though, unless you plan to image with them I guess.

[Moonshane]

I have Castell UHC and Oiii and they are really excellent value for money. The stars are slightly bloated but I am not looking at them of course. I may eventually buy an Astronomik but for now am very happy with the Castell.

I'd have no worries about buying other brands like Skywatcher as although the banding might vary somewhat, they will all perform reasonably I should expect.

my recommendation for a single narrowband filter is a Oiii. the reason is that this shows things which without it are simply 'invisible' to me even with 16" aperture. things like the Veil and Pacman Nebula as well as the Rosette and NA/Pelican at darker sites. the UHC makes things look more 'contrasty but generally they are things you can already see to a large extent, Ring, Dumbbell, M42 etc.

[Paul81]

Another vote for the Astronomik UHC and OIII, pricey but work very well (I have the 1.25" versions). Stars are tight and I can't see any visual artifacts due to the filter (apart from its intended effect of course).

[LukeSkywatcher]

The Skywatcher UHC is actually very good, and belies it's £61 tag. Can't really go wrong: http://www.firstligh...uhc-filter.html

The Baader UHC-S is not a true UHC as it passes a much wider band than a UHC, reducing contrast.

Andrew

I agree.I bought one (along with the SW OIII), and for the price, you really cant go wrong.