Ring Nebula and Baader UHC-s (brief) first light

[AndyWB]

I'd a very brief first light with my new Baader UHC-s filter in my 130p. I must confess a degree of trepidation - filters cut light, and 130mm gathers a lot less than many other scopes; this was part of my reason for selecting the UHC-s - that it isn't as expensive as many, and it bills itself as being for small scopes.

I wanted a familiar target, so I looked for the Ring nebula, and for the first time couldn't really see it in the 30mm lens. I knew I was pointing at it, but there it wasn't. Normally, I can see it fairly well, even though I'm in town. I added the UHC filter and it was just visible as a fuzzy patch in the 30mm

Move to the 8mm, with the UHC - and could just about make out the ring. Star colours were weird - like magenta or turquoise, it was like my eyes couldn't decide which. Removed the filter - and I could see a less distinct round blob, not a ring, and the sky glow was much worse.

Conclusions? It does make a difference, and contrast on the nebula was improved. Stars were dimmed, and changed to funny colours. And also that this was the worst conditions I've tried observing in for a while.

I found Andromeda too. Last weekend, from somewhere dark, it filled the eyepiece, and I could see M32 and M110. Today, from town, I could barely see Andromeda, as a faint fuzzy tiny patch.

So other conclusion? Being somewhere dark makes a MUCH bigger difference.

And with that, clouds arrived. Hopefully I'll get a chance to have a look somewhere dark and with the UHC filter before long.

[cotterless45]

Try M27 with the UHC , it really works a treat. Same here for high cloud, resorted to chasing the gaps,

Nick.

[AndyWB]

That was going to be my next target - but it was behind a cloud already!

[swamp thing]

Nice one Andy, its good that you realise the merits of being somewhere dark. For visual deep sky observing its nearly always about contrast. The darker our site, the more contrast we get.

Clear skes

[AndyWB]

Yeah, it was actually quite an interesting comparison to judge the difference - massive. Of course, to go where I was last weekend was over an hour and half driving, the park out back is a 5 minute walk...

But it did bring home that no matter how much filtering, shrouds, and so on, dark sky will still win.

[AlexB67]

Thanks for the report Andy. I think you'll get more out of it when you bring the filter to a dark site no doubt. I am not saying from experience, just speculating, but that would make sense to me.

Still, your report gives me a sort of feeling, even though I never used one first hand but reading about them, I probably will not get one soon as a high priority item, until my eyepieces are build up a bit more that is, and perhaps even a bigger light bucket before that too.

No doubt the UHC and OIII will be added at some point to my collection, just a question of when in the priority list

[AndyWB]

Mmm. Yeah. That was my (still early) feeling - it was effective, but not as effective as proper darkness or good conditions. Still a bit early to tell for sure just how effective, but it isn't magic. I'd like to try all three though - somewhere dark, on a good night, with the filter. Like you say, I think that'd get more out of it.

It seemed a definite edge, but not a game changer, I guess.

[acey]

Interested in your comments about star colour - I don't get any change of star colour with my Lumicon UHC, they just look fainter. I agree that having a dark sky to begin with makes the biggest difference. Though I've been finding in the last few weeks that PNs with a UHC make good targets in light summer skies - as long as you can shield your eye from surrounding glare. At my dark site that glare is the sky itself. Last night with the 12" I viewed the faint planetary NGC 6742 (Abell 50, V-mag 13.4), at midnight when I still couldn't see the Milky Way and my Sky Quality Meter gave a reading of only 19.37. And there was haze in the sky too. But I saw the PN clearly, thanks to the UHC and its ability to darken the sky background.

[AndyWB]

Actually, Acey, that is sort of what I got it for; I'd read Astronomy Now this month and it had an article on good summer planetary nebulae, which is what started me thinking about it - and then exploring around Sagittarius and it's various nebulae made me think some more. I'll report back with more when I've been somewhere dark with it.

The colour thing with the filter - well, I definitely saw it! I'd have thought a Lumicon would've been worse for that too - I'm pretty sure they're a narrower pass filter, from some of the reviews I've read. Maybe I only saw it on brighter stars? I guess when they're dim you lose colour perception?

It wasn't a problem, but it was strange, like my eye was trying to make up its mind what colour they were.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Ive seen the Ring with a Heritage 130P. Tiny but perfectly formed. I have the same UHC filter but not seen the Ring with it. I can only imagine that the UHC is cutting out way too much light at that aperture, hence your observations.

[AndyWB]

I can only imagine that the UHC is cutting out way too much light at that aperture, hence your observations.

Why? I was able to see the ring with the filter, and without it it became blob like. Normally I'd expect to see the ring without a filter, but that night conditions were poor. Even so, the UHC seemed to do its job.

Oh, the looking at Andromeda bit was unfiltered too.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Sorry Andy my grammar is terrible. What i meant was that i have seen the ring neb with the heritage,but although i have a UHC filter,i have never tried to observe the ring using the filter on the scope.

[stevend]

It is interesting to read threads like this as I have been thinking about a UHC filter; both to bring out the best when conditions are really good and to help see them when the moon takes over.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have found loads of tiny PNs with the UHC filter. Very useful tool. Normally the Ring does not need it, unless there is a lot of LP or moonlight. By contrast, M27 is almost always better with UHC, unless you are in a very, very dark location.

[AndyWB]

Normally the Ring does not need it, unless there is a lot of LP or moonlight.

Indeed - when I tried it out it was under poor LP and moonlight. Like you said, normally the Ring seems to cut right through that.

[spudlet]

I have always found the ring is better without UHC, but the dumbell is better with. Stars take on a green colour in the UHC I have which I find quite off-putting, but I have to tell myself I didn't buy it to enhance the stars, did I

[cotterless45]

M27 is. Glorious glow with a UHC filter. One end glows brighter and it appears almost cotton wool like. With the filter it'll take x150 plus,

Nick.

[emadmoussa]

I sold my UHC-S filter, didn't seem to make a satisfactory difference...I'm happy with no-filter observing

[John]

I have always found the ring is better without UHC, but the dumbell is better with. Stars take on a green colour in the UHC I have which I find quite off-putting, but I have to tell myself I didn't buy it to enhance the stars, did I

Thats how I found things too. Having moved to a better quality filter (Astronomik) I've found the stars much more, er, star-like which is nice from the aesthetic point of view.

My Astronomik is the O-III which I tend to reserve for objects that really benefit from filtration of this type such as the Veil and Owl nebulae. M27 is also pleasantly enhanced despite being a pretty good object unfiltered as well. I don't generally use the filter on M42 or M57 as I feel the unfiltered views of those are preferable, to my eyes anyway.

With the above mentioned Veil and Owl nebulae the difference between using the filter and not using it are like night and day even with 12" of aperture. In my 4" scope it can make the difference between seeing nothing and seeing the object.

[AndyWB]

Well, for what its worth, there was a second light :

And I used it in the dark too:

The short of it - the UHC really makes a difference on most of the nebulae I've had a look at. The Ring doesn't really need it, but is slightly better, I think. The Dumbell is much improved. Mostly, it seems to pull out more detail, but I'm not sure I'd have seen the Western Veil without it. Really chuffed to have seen the dark lane in the lagoon nebula with it.