oiii filter

[alro]

Yes 1.25,

there are 4 left advertised at 44.99, you know what to do for your best price, send an email and make him an offer, as a customer already im sure you will be rewarded for your loyalty.

Al

[Dom1961]

Do they have a 1.25" UHC, I've found the OIII now

[John]

Do they have a 1.25" UHC, I've found the OIII now

Just out of interest, you might be interested in this review of the Castell O-III filter by an experienced member here:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/69740-review-of-castell-2-oiii-filter/

365Astronomy have the 1.25" version at £42 currently:

http://www.365astronomy.com/Castell-OIII-Deepsky-Filter-for-1.25-Inch-Eyepieces.html

Castell filters don't cost a lot but seem to have delivered positive results for members here for a few years now.

The Skywatcher O-III filters cost a little less again and I've read positive results on those too:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/uhc-oiii-visual-filters/skywatcher-oiii-filter.html

There are quite a few decent lower cost filter options out there that have been tried and tested

[Dom1961]

Thanks! Might think about castell then!

[alro]

Cant see uhc ht . Think they are awaiting new order.

there are some in specialist section though that are a little cheaper. They come in different boxes and are not supplied with individual data sheet, the data is available on request though.

good links provided above.

al

[-Aldebaran-]

Had some luck last Friday night using the Lumicon, only managed it on the Owl Nebula though, extremely dim and tricky to view without the filter in Lp'd garden, but showed some clarity with, and much brighter. No eyes but a hint of contrast within the nebula.

I should have prepared better for viewing the Veil, I didn't expect to be out that night so didn't get the veil's whereabouts, couldn't find it after searching a good 15 minutes!

Could I get a point in the right direction please for next time?

[John]

Had some luck last Friday night using the Lumicon, only managed it on the Owl Nebula though, extremely dim and tricky to view without the filter in Lp'd garden, but showed some clarity with, and much brighter. No eyes but a hint of contrast within the nebula.

I should have prepared better for viewing the Veil, I didn't expect to be out that night so didn't get the veil's whereabouts, couldn't find it after searching a good 15 minutes!

Could I get a point in the right direction please for next time?

I use the star 52 Cygni, which is naked eye visible, as the pointer to find the Veil Nebula - the Western portion of the nebula (the "Witches Broom") runs right past it in the eyepiece. It's a very large object though so use your lowest power / widest angle eyepiece and have the filter fitted from the start as it makes a huge difference to what you see.

Even with the Lumicon O-III and my 12" dob I find I can only really see hints of one "eye" in the Owl Nebula but some mottling and contrast variations across it's disk. The nearby galaxy M108 is worth looking for next to the Owl but you need to take the filter off to see that.

[-Aldebaran-]

Thanks John, 52 cygni , I'll keep a filtered eye out for it.

Oh and on a slightly different note, how much quality is comprised when a filters glass/coatings has a few scratches on it?

The reason I ask is because I could get the Lumicon 0iii relatively cheap but unsure to its condition.

[John]

Thanks John, 52 cygni , I'll keep a filtered eye out for it.

Oh and on a slightly different note, how much quality is comprised when a filters glass/coatings has a few scratches on it?

The reason I ask is because I could get the Lumicon 0iii relatively cheap but unsure to its condition.

I'd not buy a scratched one to be honest so I don't know. It may not make a lot of difference but I can't think scratches will improve things !

[-Aldebaran-]

 Even with the Lumicon O-III and my 12" dob I find I can only really see hints of one "eye" in the Owl Nebula but some mottling and contrast variations across it's disk. The nearby galaxy M108 is worth looking for next to the Owl but you need to take the filter off to see that.

I always spot the nearby galaxy, it's usually the first one I spot of the pair. I must have really keen pupils as I was still able (albeit just, and with averted vision ) to see the galaxy with the filter in place!

[Paul73]

I'm looking forward to the Viel again. But am awaiting a 2" Lumicon OIII to arrive from the States.

I upgraded my lower mag eyepieces to 2" 82° format over the winter. This will give me a 2° FOV which won't be enough to get the whole thing but should be good for each of the three main areas.

Paul

[-Aldebaran-]

O.k, brand new, the Lumicon is a touch out of reach, I believe the astronomik Oiii is priced roughly same, but it seems the Castell is getting some talk from earlier postings, and quite cheap to.

I'll ponder the future purchase a while longer. Thanks again John.

[-Aldebaran-]

I'm looking forward to the Viel again. But am awaiting a 2" Lumicon OIII to arrive from the States.

I upgraded my lower mag eyepieces to 2" 82° format over the winter. This will give me a 2° FOV which won't be enough to get the whole thing but should be good for each of the three main areas.

Paul

I have been looking at the 2" Oiii for my 24mm 82° but my concern is that it's alot of money for what could turn out to be a 1 objective filter, ie the Veil. What other benefits could be had on the 2"? Or is the veil really worth the look.

The lowest I could go with my 1.25mm filter is with the 20mm 68° would that be a touch tight, or would I get benefits from some of the Veil's structural detail?

[Stu]

I use the star 52 Cygni, which is naked eye visible, as the pointer to find the Veil Nebula - the Western portion of the nebula (the "Witches Broom") runs right past it in the eyepiece. It's a very large object though so use your lowest power / widest angle eyepiece and have the filter fitted from the start as it makes a huge difference to what you see.

Even with the Lumicon O-III and my 12" dob I find I can only really see hints of one "eye" in the Owl Nebula but some mottling and contrast variations across it's disk. The nearby galaxy M108 is worth looking for next to the Owl but you need to take the filter off to see that.

As John says, finding 52 Cygni means you can miss it, if it's visible!

52 forms a right angled triangle with Zeta and Epsilon. Unlike John's skies, it's not always, or even regularly naked eye for me

Here are a couple of charts, one showing 52 relative to the Veil of Zeta/Epsilon. The second with Telrad circles so you can get an idea of the scale.

Depending upon aperture and above all skies, you will get varying amounts of detail. Generally with a small wide field scope you get the overall shape and some small amounts of structure like the separation in the broom and the two hooks in the eastern veil.

In a big aperture at a dark site you see beautiful structure and filaments, but only a small section at a time.

Stu

[John]

I have been looking at the 2" Oiii for my 24mm 82° but my concern is that it's alot of money for what could turn out to be a 1 objective filter, ie the Veil. What other benefits could be had on the 2"? Or is the veil really worth the look.

The lowest I could go with my 1.25mm filter is with the 20mm 68° would that be a touch tight, or would I get benefits from some of the Veil's structural detail?

I know it sounds crazy but I do think the views of the Veil nebula are worth the purchase price of a good O-III filter. It's an intricate and spectacular object which the filter transforms from a "I think I can see it but I'm not sure ????" to a "Wow, wow wow !!!!" object.

Having a wide field low power eyepiece and darkish skies are the other parts of the equation of course. My 4" F/6.5 refractor will show the whole complex in the single field of view of my 31mm Nagler eyepiece and it's THE showpiece object of the summer months for me

Your UHC filter should do a good job on the Veil as well though so give that a go first I'd suggest.

[Mark at Beaufort]

Although I have an Astronomik O-lll filter now I previous had a TS O-lll which was very good - http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p2702_TS-Optics-1-25--Premium-O-III-filter.html

What I like about the Astronomik and the TS filters is I am still able to see background stars.

I saw the Astronomik filter on ABS and thought I would buy it to compare the two filters. To be honest there was not a great deal between the filters.

Some time ago I bought one of these adapters from 365 Astronomy so that I could use my 1.25" filters in my 2" EPs - it works pretty well - http://www.365astronomy.com/365Astronomy-2-to-1.25-Filter-Adapter.html

[Paul73]

Your 20mm 68° will be a bit tight but still very rewarding. Give it a go. And then make the decision re the 2" version......

Paul

[Pete Presland]

I use one of these for my "white light" solar imaging.

[estwing]

I was shocked how good my astronomik UHC 2" filter was on the veil last year at SWSP I'm hoping to use different filters on this target this summer

[alan potts]

Although I have an Astronomic O-lll filter now I previous had a TS O-lll which was very good - http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p2702_TS-Optics-1-25--Premium-O-III-filter.html

What I like about the Astronomic and the TS filters is I am still able to see background stars.

I saw the Astronomic filter on ABS and thought I would buy it to compare the two filters. To be honest there was not a great deal between the filters.

Some time ago I bought one of these adapters from 365 Astronomy so that I could use my 1.25" filters in my 2" EPs - it works pretty well - http://www.365astronomy.com/365Astronomy-2-to-1.25-Filter-Adapter.html

Mark,

I guess there is always a chance that Astronomik's being a German Company and TS being the same they are made by them with maybe slightly less coatings to keep the price down or something else?  I to have the Astronomik's in Olll and UHC but my they are dear new now.

Alan.

[-Aldebaran-]

I had a look at the 1.25-2" filter adapter and it looks like something I might go for. But I have one concern over it, because it would be covering a good deal of the eyepiece entry lens would it not reduce the field of view or at least reduce light transmission??

[John]

I had a look at the 1.25-2" filter adapter and it looks like something I might go for. But I have one concern over it, because it would be covering a good deal of the eyepiece entry lens would it not reduce the field of view or at least reduce light transmission??

It would reduce the field of view if used with a 2" eyepiece which has a field stop larger than the aperture of the 1.25" filter.

[-Aldebaran-]

It would reduce the field of view if used with a 2" eyepiece which has a field stop larger than the aperture of the 1.25" filter.

I had a feeling that would be the case , I think I'll wait and save up a bit longer for the 2" Oiii, at least there are cheaper alternatives to the Lumicon /Astronomik which seem to be getting high appraisals.

Thanks again for all the input.

And thanks to Alr for being patient in my hijacking of his own topic

[alro]

No drama, im learning quite a bit from you guys and hoisting it all in. Where to look, best fl eo and fov. Plus lots of goid reviews and links if i do need to upgrade in future. But im more than happy with my filters, even though my oiii hasnt been battle tested.

al

[John]

It's an odd thing with these O-III and UHC filters. Mine really don't get much use because I prefer to observe "filterless" where feasible. So the filters get used when the difference they make is significant and then they are invaluable. Then they go back in their cases for quite some time !.