Essential filters

[sbj]

I only have one filter at the moment - a cheap moon filter, and obviously have seen the benefits of that.  live in the middle of nowhere so have no light pollution to speak of.

Are there other filters that people would consider "essential"? 

[Charic]

Depends on your telescope? Most filters increase contrast by the subtraction of light, so the more light (bigger aperture) you have, the better the end result. We dont suffer much light pollution  this far North so pollution filters are not necessary. Red Blue or other coloured filters can make certain features stand out on the planets, red for Mars, blue for Jupiter, those filters will help to enhance the cloud bands . Then there are the Nebulaes that produce the greenish light where a doubly ionized oxygen filter or an` OIII` can be used, but again, dependent on the telescopes abilities. At present I remove the small cap on the lens hood to diffuse the whole amount of light entering the scope. Its not perfect, but makes do for now.

[Stu]

As said, would help to know which scope you have.

The Baader Neodymium is a good general LP and enhancing filter which works well on Jupiter and Mars.

If you have a small scope, then something like a UHC-S can help on nebulae such as the Ring, Dumbell and Orion for example. In a larger scope, a UHC works well on similar targets, and for the Veil and North American, an OIII filter is almost essential to show it well. They are basically in order of reducing band pass, so the OIII let's through light only in a very narrow band if frequencies. In small scopes it tends to reduce the brightness of objects too much, so a UHC or UHC-S is better.

Stu

[sbj]

I see, thanks.

Scope is a 127 mak, and also will soon have a little 130p reflector also.

[ronin]

Justr to throw what could be a spanner in the works, I don't have any filters and have managed to get along well enough for 12 years of having scopes.

[NGC 1502]

For me, I wouldn't be without my UHC filter.  I could live without my OIII filter, but keep it mainly for the 'Veil' nebula, where it excels.

But these filters are only good for specific objects, so I do think it's best to get a good set of eyepieces first, because they are used on every object.

Regards, Ed.

[Moonshane]

I have five filters and have used four of them in scopes of 90mm to 400mm. the narrower the band the fewer objects it can be used on generally speaking. So a Baader neodymium as Stu says is good for moon and Jupiter/Mars and general skyglow from the moon or certain LP. 

the UHC is great for enhancing contrast on a very wide number of objects although I use it less than my Oiii

I have used the Oiii on a 90mm refractor to see the whole Veil from light polluted gardens and in a 6" scope to see the NA Nebula, Pelican, Crescent and Veil from a darker place.

I have a H-b filter but this is good for very few objects and I have not seen one of them yet!

If I could only have one it would be my Oiii

[Reeny]

I am bewildered by the amount of filters available.

The £40 price tags aren't cheap either.#

I saw the ring nebula through someone elses 10" dob on Saturday, without a filter (although it was in black & white)

My plan-A is to find the objects first, then try to work out which filter might work best.

This astronomy malarky can be an expensive business.

[John]

Justr to throw what could be a spanner in the works, I don't have any filters and have managed to get along well enough for 12 years of having scopes.

More or less the same here. I do have an O-III filter for enhancing the contrast of nebulae which I'd not be without but otherwise I don't use filters, even the lunar ones that so many feel are essential 

The vast majority of deep sky objects are shades of grey, even when filters are used.

[swamp thing]

I'd second Shane on, if I could only have one filter I'd have the O-III. Although the UHC will work on more objects, I find the more dramatic effect of line filters give better results on the objects they do work on.

Be aware though that nebula filters will still give far better results from dark skies.

Nothing will transform your observing more than a good dark site, when hunting for nebulae.

[Grotemobile]

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/moon-neutral-density-filters/variable-polarizing-moon-filter.html

This is what i use for Lunar

& Planetry.No good for deep sky.

Steve.