Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

  • Announcements

    SGL 2017 SP

N3ptune

Astronomik UHC or Lumicon UHC ?

Recommended Posts

N3ptune    716

Hello to all of you, again!

I am looking to buy a UHC filter for the nebulas (for my instrument in my signature) and now I don't know which brand to take.

http://www.astronomik.com/en/visual-filters/uhc-filter.html

or

http://www.lumicon.com/store/p/30-1-25-UHC-Ultra-High-Contrast-Telescope-Filter.aspx

Has I can see on my local store website, the first one is around 90CAD + taxes and the second one around 124CAD + taxes, 38$ difference between both.

Question: Are they both almost the same quality or the 40 extra bucks makes a true difference?

--> If the Lumicon is absolutely better, then I can pay an extra 40$.

--> If they are almost equal, then I might want to save 40$ instead.

What should I buy?

Thanks.

==========================

2016-09-12 - And the winner is, this combo DNG Narrow Pass Band filters: 2" and 1.25 inches, they are on their way by mail.

VwIACtv.png

Edited by N3ptune

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    3,830

The Lumicon is excellent but I would check the company's recent status and quality control. Astronomik filters are top notch with great optical and build quality. The filter I would like to try now is the Farpoint, these just may prove to be at least equal to the best of the UHC's. I want one myself to test against my superb Lumicon UHC.

fuhcvbrands.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    16,324

I've not used either but my Lumicon O-III is a terrific filter in my scopes from 4" to 12". For the UHC type filtering I use the Omega DGM NBP filter which seems a great performer as well.

I suspect in quality terms there is little or nothing to choose between the Lumicon and Astronomik UHC filters so it's probably best to look at the band pass charts see if there is a clue there to which you might prefer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N3ptune    716

That's a nice chart with all the curves from different filters, thanks for sharing it Jet. The Farpoint looks like a wider OIII. I can't tell about the band pass right now because my only experience is with a low quality OIII filter. It's working on some nebulas but the problem with it is that it distorts the field of view, it's a bummer.

--> I guess the difference from a Farpoint and a OIII must be subtle, really precise little things.

John, yeah I believe you it must be a great filter your Lumicon OIII, i am surprised you even get good results with a 4" OIII are severe filters despite everything.

Thanks for the advices

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave In Vermont    4,375

Beware of the common myth that you need an 8" scope to gain any benefit from narrowband-filters. This myth has been passed around for years. And it's simply not true. Yes - they will dim the target, but where this is either problematic or consequential is a personal opinion. I've had good results down to 80mm scopes before. I've tested this out as I have over 36 filters in my cases.

A 'Filter-Nut' -

Dave

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    3,830

Its all about exit pupil and filter bandpass N3ptune, John has been using the filters with "too small" apertures for quite a while and to great effect. Inspired by John I have played around extensively myself with a 90mm APO and the SW120ED with OIII,Hb and UHC. The filters work great in these scopes.

I had a poor narrowband filter (UHC type) that didn't do its job. In the garbage it went...

Off topic a bit but have you considered a 2" filter? Much better on the big nebs IMHO, just a thought.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ronin    3,612

There seems to be 2 varieties of UHC filters. Some transmit effectively only the OIII wavelengths - in the diagram given above all 4 transmit at OIII. Then there are UHC filters tht transmit at OIII AND Ha - if you look at the diagram you will see only 2 transmit both OIII and Ha.

So which do you want - a UHC that is only OIII or one that is OIII and Ha ?

The relevance is that the Astronomic appears to pass both OIII and Ha while the Lumicon passes OIII but very little Ha (about 10-15%).

The effect is that nebula that emit predominently Ha will disappear when used with the Lumicon.

The term "UHC" seems to becoming somewhat unspecific these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stu    13,812
3 minutes ago, ronin said:

There seems to be 2 varieties of UHC filters. Some transmit effectively only the OIII wavelengths - in the diagram given above all 4 transmit at OIII. Then there are UHC filters tht transmit at OIII AND Ha - if you look at the diagram you will see only 2 transmit both OIII and Ha.

So which do you want - a UHC that is only OIII or one that is OIII and Ha ?

The relevance is that the Astronomic appears to pass both OIII and Ha while the Lumicon passes OIII but very little Ha (about 10-15%).

The effect is that nebula that emit predominently Ha will disappear when used with the Lumicon.

The term "UHC" seems to becoming somewhat unspecific these days.

I do agree with this Ronin. UHC filters vary in whether they include the Ha line or not so you have to look into the data carefully to understand what you are getting. I believe targets like M101 have plenty of Ha regions to study with the correct filter, not something I've done myself but I know of others who have.

I have the Lumicon OIII and UHC filters, alongside a DGM NPB. The Lumicons have so for seen much more use, and I think they are fabulous. My own filters have very high % stats for their passing of the target frequencies, I think I just got lucky with them both.

Mine are mainly used in a 4" scope as it's often all I can take with me to a dark site. That is a valid point to make too. People often think these filters are ways around LP and that you don't need them so much at darks sites. In my experience, they come into their own when at a dark site and with good dark adaptation they are very useable in a small scope.

As Gerry says, using a large exit pupil in the smaller scopes really helps, and often the targets are widefield ones anyway, such as the Veil. In good conditions you can see the whole veil complex in a small, widefield scope using and OIII or UHC filter. Lovely stuff.

My belief is that the Astronomiks have a slightly wider band pass than the Lumicons, so MAY be better in a smaller scope, but otherwise, QC and trading problems aside, I would get the Lumicon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    16,324

For quite a while I used an Astronomik O-III as my only filter for the deep sky and didn't really feel that I was missing out by not having a UHC type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
glynnlondon    162

I have a lumicon uhc filter , bought recently , which I have used on the ring nebula in light polluted suburban skies.

I agree with Dave and Stu , I was surprised at the difference that it made in my 4 inch frac , I don't regret the purchase one of the most noticeably useful ones I have made.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    3,830

I'm a bit confused.... I thought that a "UHC" type filters primary goal was to include both OIII lines and also squeeze in the Hb line (@ 486.1nm) as tightly as possible? The graph shows the Lumicon follow this line closely until about 88% transmission where it is then clipped. My own UHC has 90%+ in the Hb range. I think that the Ha line transmission in the curves is an incidental "leak"- possibly by design but not a primary design consideration. Some say like Vogel does that this leak might be advantageous on extremely faint objects for some but our (some people) eyes will act as a cut off there anyway...http://www.reinervogel.net/index_e.html

The most important thing is the bandwidth along with transmission- Lumicon has been the pioneer with some of the tightest filters out there- and with high transmission. A typical new Lumi UHC has a 26nm bandwidth or less and these 2 factors are what make it excel.IMHO.

 

Lumicon_UHC_RSx.jpg

Astronomik_UHC_TKx.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rwilkey    739

i have the Lumicon versions and have no regrets, great engineering and great in 2" format to give the widefield options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stu    13,812
38 minutes ago, jetstream said:

I'm a bit confused.... I thought that a "UHC" type filters primary goal was to include both OIII lines and also squeeze in the Hb line (@ 486.1nm) as tightly as possible? The graph shows the Lumicon follow this line closely until about 88% transmission where it is then clipped. My own UHC has 90%+ in the Hb range. I think that the Ha line transmission in the curves is an incidental "leak"- possibly by design but not a primary design consideration. Some say like Vogel does that this leak might be advantageous on extremely faint objects for some but our (some people) eyes will act as a cut off there anyway...http://www.reinervogel.net/index_e.html

The most important thing is the bandwidth along with transmission- Lumicon has been the pioneer with some of the tightest filters out there- and with high transmission. A typical new Lumi UHC has a 26nm bandwidth or less and these 2 factors are what make it excel.IMHO.

 

Lumicon_UHC_RSx.jpg

Astronomik_UHC_TKx.jpg

Why confused Gerry? I agree with everything you said, but some products out there are marketed as UHC but include the Ha line aswell.

Like you, I love the tight band pass of the Lumicon, it noticeably helps the contrast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    3,830
6 hours ago, ronin said:

There seems to be 2 varieties of UHC filters. Some transmit effectively only the OIII wavelengths - in the diagram given above all 4 transmit at OIII. Then there are UHC filters tht transmit at OIII AND Ha - if you look at the diagram you will see only 2 transmit both OIII and Ha.

So which do you want - a UHC that is only OIII or one that is OIII and Ha ?

The relevance is that the Astronomic appears to pass both OIII and Ha while the Lumicon passes OIII but very little Ha (about 10-15%).

The effect is that nebula that emit predominently Ha will disappear when used with the Lumicon.

The term "UHC" seems to becoming somewhat unspecific these days.

I'm confused by this, no offence intended to the poster. UHC and narrow band filters by design include the Hb line-important- and not mentioned here. I must also say that each individual filter will test differently a bit, with some Lumi's including the Ha line substantially from tests I've seen anyway.

The DGM NPB is very narrow and by design includes the Ha line, some like this filter some not so much. The main feature of the UHC type filter is the inclusion of Hb,OIII as tightly as possible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Louis D    595

I have both the Lumicon UHC and OIII filters, and I find that I rarely use the former because the latter does a much better job boosting contrast on most nebula.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N3ptune    716

My first idea was to get the OIII and HBeta, a filter that will inhance more nebulas but maybe with less contrast then a OIII. I saw the UHC gives better results overall (OIII is close behind), more enhancements on the total lot of major nebulas.

--> I would sacrifice some contrast provided by the OIII to get results on more nebulas. So, it would be great to get the H beta also.

Now between the specs from the lumicon and Astronomic in the red range.. (Stu) I don't know what to say, the 2 curves are differents regarding transmission on %. The lumicon curve is interesting they cut in between 625 and 700 nm. Strange

 

Edited by N3ptune

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Highburymark    838

I have not tried the Lumicon, but the Astronomik UHC performs incredibly well on the right targets - particularly from light polluted locations. I use it with an 80mm Equinox and a C8 - the first time I saw M42 through the filter was one of those rare OMG moments - never to be forgotten. But I have no experience of other UHCs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stu    13,812
4 hours ago, jetstream said:

I'm confused by this, no offence intended to the poster. UHC and narrow band filters by design include the Hb line-important- and not mentioned here. I must also say that each individual filter will test differently a bit, with some Lumi's including the Ha line substantially from tests I've seen anyway.

The DGM NPB is very narrow and by design includes the Ha line, some like this filter some not so much. The main feature of the UHC type filter is the inclusion of Hb,OIII as tightly as possible.

Gerry, I think that Ronin's point was that there is no accepted standard as to whether a UHC filter includes Ha at high band pass or not. OIII and Hb are a given (although Ronin does not mention the Hb) but it's the Ha which seems to vary. Does that make sense?

I have not really seen a response curve for the DGM NPB so it's good to hear that it is tight on the Hb/OIII

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    16,324

My general approach is that I prefer to view nebulae unfiltered if feasible and reasonably rewarding. While a UHC does make some difference to a wider range of objects, often I still prefer the unfiltered view. An O-III however makes a really significant difference to the objects that it majors in - so much so that it can sometimes make the difference between a really nice view and seeing practically nothing of the target object.

There is quite a large degree of personal preference with filter choice and use though I think - some like narrow and agressive and others more subtle enhancement.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    3,830
1 hour ago, Stu said:

Gerry, I think that Ronin's point was that there is no accepted standard as to whether a UHC filter includes Ha at high band pass or not. OIII and Hb are a given (although Ronin does not mention the Hb) but it's the Ha which seems to vary. Does that make sense?

I have not really seen a response curve for the DGM NPB so it's good to hear that it is tight on the Hb/OIII

Thanks for the clarification Stu, I found another set of curves including the NPB. Product variability most likely accounts for its response.

 

uhc filter specs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N3ptune    716

John that's an interesting point, you truly believe in the OIII filter and it's shifting my attention towards it. It's true because I saw a huge difference on the dumbbell nebula last WE with my low quality OIII filter.

 

Edited by N3ptune

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    16,324
32 minutes ago, N3ptune said:

John that's an interesting point, you truly believe in the OIII filter and it's shifting my attention towards it. It's true because I saw a huge difference on the dumbbell nebula last WE with my low quality OIII filter.

 

Try it on the Veil Nebula with your lowest powered eyepiece :wink:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N3ptune    716

Veil Nebula I never saw it yet, it's going to be a nice surprise (: Thanks for the suggestion. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    16,324
11 minutes ago, N3ptune said:

Veil Nebula I never saw it yet, it's going to be a nice surprise (: Thanks for the suggestion. 

 

It's the best Summer DSO in my opinion. It's large and has several sections but is located in Cygnus so nicely placed during the coming months. I was viewing it last night with my 4" refractor and the Lumicon O-III filter as it happens. Glorious sight with the filter, practically invisible without it :icon_biggrin:

Edited by John
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N3ptune    716

John,

I made a mistake here, last week I pointed the telescope toward the Veil Nebula (with no filter), but I didn't see a thing except for star 52 and other stars.(I didn't know it was invisible without the OIII) It looks quite faint, magnitude of 7 and no information on the surface magnitude in my NGC catalogue.

If you can see it with a 4" refractor, I should be able to see something. Has map bellow I was at my spot #2, it could be a pollution matter for me.

6dyy3m9.png

Cygnus is beautiful and inside the milky way.. what a nice place to watch your are lucky to see the Veil John.

Edited by N3ptune

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×