UHC filter

[Galen Gilmore]

I want to get a UHC filter and I found this one.

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

is it any good? Or is it just a rubbish cheap filter?

[John]

First Light Optics don't sell rubbish

It's a low cost UHC filter but it will do what UHC filters are supposed to do which is to make nebulosity stand out a little better by blocking the wavelengths of light that are not emitted by nebulae.

 

 

[alanjgreen]

I have the both skywatcher & astronomik UHC filters.

The skywatcher UHC was my first purchase due to its cheaper price and it gave me good service.

I can now compare it to the much more expensive astronomik and here are my thoughts.

1. the astronomik UHC is better than the skywatcher (you can see it at the eyepiece!) having a better pass through of non-UHC blocked light. It makes a better all round view.

2. the skywatcher UHC is good value for money. ( Note that I dont feel the same love for the skywatcher O3 as it is blown away by the astronomik O3 !!)

So I say, buy with confidence - its a good filter and works well on UHC targets.

If you want the best then buy Astronomik.

 

HTH,

Alan

[laudropb]

I used the sky watcher filter for a couple of years and was very happy with it.

[Galen Gilmore]

Ok thanks for everybodys advice. I will probobly get the skywatcher UHC soon.

[John]

Spring is a good time to get a UHC filter. There are some good targets which will benefit from it coming into view such as the Veil Nebula in Cygnus and the Dumbell Nebula in Vulpecula

[ronin]

I assume that you were asking about the filter in general and not about FLO. Just it seems odd you being in Missouri.

The Baader item looks good as it transmits to the eye the OIII and Ha wavelengths, and I gather that the Skywatcher item is a Baader product - came up a couple of years back on CN.

The Lumicom Deep Sky filter looks useful but oddly not the Lumicon UHC filters, they only pass OIII. So you lose the Ha aspect.

The Astronomic is another that passes both so a good alternative.

[swamp thing]

On 16 April 2017 at 18:16, ronin said:

 

The Lumicom Deep Sky filter looks useful but oddly not the Lumicon UHC filters, they only pass OIII. So you lose the Ha aspect.

 

The lumicon UHC passes H-Beta and O-III lines. This is what UHC filters do. Lumicon should know they invented the term UHC. 

No one cares about Ha when visually observing nebula as you won't see it anyway, it's far to dim for our eyes to detect.  

[Stu]

On 16/04/2017 at 18:16, ronin said:

The Lumicom Deep Sky filter looks useful but oddly not the Lumicon UHC filters, they only pass OIII. So you lose the Ha aspect.

As Steve says, Lumicon UHC does pass H-Beta line at high transmission. OIII does not. They have tight bandpasses but high transmission of the relevant frequencies which is exactly what you want.

[YKSE]

On ‎2017‎-‎04‎-‎16 at 19:16, ronin said:

The Lumicom Deep Sky filter looks useful but oddly not the Lumicon UHC filters, they only pass OIII. So you lose the Ha aspect.

I'm mildly surprised that someone never have used a narrowband filter keeps on giving errorneous information about filters. Is getting up post count (now over 10000) that important?

 

[Littleguy80]

On 16/04/2017 at 15:53, alanjgreen said:

Note that I dont feel the same love for the skywatcher O3

Are there any decent budget OIII filters? I had the SkyWatcher one on my shopping list. Though I want to get the UHC first

[rwilkey]

I have had and used the Sky Watcher (branded 'Optics' on the filter itself) UHC filter and it does exactly what it says on the tin, so if you want to try it out this is a good one to start with, as I did.  I have now repleced it with the Lumicon, which is much better engineered but does exactly the same job.  I have not tried the Astronomik. 

[LukeSkywatcher]

I have the Skywatcher UHC filter which i bought from FLO. It was within my budget. I am more than happy with it. There are others in the same price range which people seem to like, such as Castell.

I'd say, go ahead and purchase. I also have a Skywatcher OIII filter which i am also very happy with.

I see you live in the States. I know Skywatcher isnt a common brand over there. It's mainly Celestron and Meade. Not sure how much it would cost you to buy and ship a single filter from FLO (in the UK) to the States.

[Galen Gilmore]

26 minutes ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

I have the Skywatcher UHC filter which i bought from FLO. It was within my budget. I am more than happy with it. There are others in the same price range which people seem to like, such as Castell.

I'd say, go ahead and purchase. I also have a Skywatcher OIII filter which i am also very happy with.

I see you live in the States. I know Skywatcher isnt a common brand over there. It's mainly Celestron and Meade. Not sure how much it would cost you to buy and ship a single filter from FLO (in the UK) to the States.

Yea, I was about to get it but then I saw the $20 shipping price... 

[LukeSkywatcher]

23 minutes ago, Galen Gilmore said:

Yea, I was about to get it but then I saw the $20 shipping price... 

I by no means want to take business away from FLO, but i think you can source a similar UHC filter closer to home and the shipping wont be as much.

[Galen Gilmore]

33 minutes ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

I by no means want to take business away from FLO, but i think you can source a similar UHC filter closer to home and the shipping wont be as much.

I think I already found one. 

https://www.optcorp.com/opt-1-25inch-uhc-filter-uhc-1.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwldzHBRCfg_aImKrf7N4BEiQABJTPKLBAvjsO6wUwfnQcwNGnyY9TlzGy2BSsWDBQZ-HdNYgaAqKv8P8HAQ

again no idea if this is good, so anybody's who used this filter give your opinion.

[rwilkey]

Orion also do one I believe, I had their 'skyglow' filter and it was excellent, you might also try 'Explore Scientific' as they have a good reputation from what I have seen, and come in a nice box.