New Filters Arrive

[iPeace]

Looking forward to trying them out.

[John]

I'll be interested to hear what you think Mike

I have the Lumicon O-III (2") but I went for a DGM NBP filter for the UHC-type slot.

 

[iPeace]

7 minutes ago, John said:

I'll be interested to hear what you think Mike

I have the Lumicon O-III (2") but I went for a DGM NBP filter for the UHC-type slot.

 

As will I.

Limited experience with filters, didn't get much use out of the 2" TeleVue NebuStar before I passed it on. For the months ahead I will be 1.25" only and it will be fun to see whether these help me get a glimpse of targets previously unattainable.

Will share in due course.

[jabeoo1]

Well judging by the packaging the quality control looks second to none. Nice gear Mike. 

[estwing]

very nice, here's my filter..

[John]

The UHC type tends to enhance the already attainable nicely wheras the O-III shows stuff that is otherwise barely visible at all in small to medium apertures

 

[estwing]

this is the best filter I've used...

[iPeace]

54 minutes ago, John said:

The UHC type tends to enhance the already attainable nicely wheras the O-III shows stuff that is otherwise barely visible at all in small to medium apertures

 

That's a nice concise guideline, easy to keep in mind.

[Littleguy80]

I'm simarly waiting to try out an Astronomik UHC and OIII ? Have you got any targets in mind to test them with?

[iPeace]

2 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

I'm simarly waiting to try out an Astronomik UHC and OIII ? Have you got any targets in mind to test them with?

Well The Veil first comes to mind for the O-III. Otherwise, I will have to read up.

[John]

3 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

I'm simarly waiting to try out an Astronomik UHC and OIII ? Have you got any targets in mind to test them with?

The Owl Nebula (M97) in Ursa Major

The Veil Nebula in Cygnus

The Dumbell Nebula (M27) in Vulpecula

The Ring Nebula (M57) in Lyra

Just for starters.

IMHO the first two get the biggest kick from O-III. I tend to prefer the latter pair with UHC or unfiltered but they are good test beds for both filters.

 

 

 

[iPeace]

On 04/28/2017 at 19:34, John said:

The Owl Nebula (M97) in Ursa Major

The Veil Nebula in Cygnus

The Dumbell Nebula (M27) in Vulpecula

The Ring Nebula (M57) in Lyra

Just for starters.

IMHO the first two get the biggest kick from O-III. I tend to prefer the latter pair with UHC or unfiltered but they are good test beds for both filters.

 

 

 

Right. Well, last night I gave it a go with the TV85, certainly with results but feelings a bit mixed for the moment (as is the nature of feelings).

Found and clearly saw M97 with the O-III, not possible without it.

M57 was indeed enhanced by both filters.

Of the Veil, not a trace.

My mixed feelings, I suspect, stem from me pondering whether the use of filters is worth the difference it makes in combination with the scopes I use. And perhaps, what I like to observe.

I do enjoy hunting fuzzies, but once found there's not much to linger on in most cases. Increasing the magnification dims the image while not providing much more to see (with exceptions such as M13 - the image is dimmer, but the cluster does resolve into stars). This dimming at higher magnification is something that puts me off, I have noticed, and I wonder whether I am alone in this or whether I may be going about things in a less than ideal way.

Conversely, I can study the Moon or Jupiter for hours on end and open clusters and rich fields of stars like in Cygnus are a delight.

I do appreciate the difference between barely seeing a DSO and not seeing it at all, but still I wonder.

How much more interesting and enjoyable are fuzzies with a big dob? Do I find them less so because I don't have one? Or do I not have a big dob because I just don't find fuzzies that interesting?

[Paul73]

I'm surprised that you couldn't get the Veil with 85mm. The Lumicon OIII made it jump out for me. The NA nebula is well worth a go with the UHC. The wide field scopes and extended objects seem to go well together.

Paul

[iPeace]

7 minutes ago, Paul73 said:

I'm surprised that you couldn't get the Veil with 85mm. The Lumicon OIII made it jump out for me. The NA nebula is well worth a go with the UHC. The wide field scopes and extended objects seem to go well together.

Paul

Tried the NA as well, with both filters, not a sausage. I will keep trying, there will be better nights.

[iPeace]

I should add that last night was one of my best of the year so far. Jupiter with the GRS and my first look at Saturn in quite a while. Stayed up to see the Scorpion rise. Not a bad night at all.

[scarp15]

I have used a UHC (Lumicon) with my TV76 to view the North America on two occasions last year, on a camp site in the Lake District and on a dark sky outing. This was August and September when Cygnus was at altitude and it worked fine encapsulating the nebula. I have the advantage of using two dobsoninas when this target and the Veil are very distinct, therefore Know what to look for.  I do though intend to use my TV76 on a range of targets from late Summer with both UHC, which is probably most suitable and OIII also selectively H-beta, at a dark sky location and when the intended target culminates.

[Stu]

9 hours ago, iPeace said:

How much more interesting and enjoyable are fuzzies with a big dob? Do I find them less so because I don't have one? Or do I not have a big dob because I just don't find fuzzies that interesting?

To me they give different perspectives on the same objects. With a widefield frac, you can take in the whole Veil complex at once, and see it in context, whilst with a larger scope, with an inevitably longer focal length, you tend to get larger, more detailed views of sections of it at a time.

There is no doubt that to get the image scale on smaller galaxies and nebulae, a dob is a great way to go. With a 4" frac say, the Veil doesn't hit you in the face exactly, but with careful observing it is amazing the detail you can trace out.

I sometimes observe with a four inch frac and an SCT side by side. This is a perfect way to get both perspectives at once; I now have a C9.25 to give me a bit of aperture.

Dark skies are, however, the key thing in any scope you happen to be using. A four inch scope under the darkest skies will show you wonderful widefield views of these larger objects. A big dob will show you amazing views of anything from parts of the Veil down to small faint galaxies.

I confess that I tend to get a bit punch drunk when I've been on galaxy hunts when I had my 16" dob. There some amazing objects up there, Markarian's chain in a big dob is amazing for instance, but beyond the brighter ones I tend to lose interest after a while.

The filters you have got are not magic bullets, and will still benefit from being used under dark skies and with good dark adaptation, particularly with a smaller scope. Put a blanket over your head if you have light pollution around  

[Stu]

11 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

I have used a UHC (Lumicon) with my TV76 to view the North America on two occasions last year, on a camp site in the Lake District and on a dark sky outing. This was August and September when Cygnus was at altitude and it worked fine encapsulating the nebula. I have the advantage of using two dobsoninas when this target and the Veil are very distinct, therefore Know what to look for.  I do though intend to use my TV76 on a range of targets from late Summer with both UHC, which is probably most suitable and OIII also selectively H-beta, at a dark sky location and when the intended target culminates.

Cygnus is fab at that time of year, one of my favourites.

[Louis D]

5 hours ago, iPeace said:

Right. Well, last night I gave it a go with the TV85, certainly with results but feelings a bit mixed for the moment (as is the nature of feelings).

Found and clearly saw M97 with the O-III, not possible without it.

M57 was indeed enhanced by both filters.

Of the Veil, not a trace.

My mixed feelings, I suspect, stem from me pondering whether the use of filters is worth the difference it makes in combination with the scopes I use. And perhaps, what I like to observe.

I do enjoy hunting fuzzies, but once found there's not much to linger on in most cases. Increasing the magnification dims the image while not providing much more to see (with exceptions such as M13 - the image is dimmer, but the cluster does resolve into stars). This dimming at higher magnification is something that puts me off, I have noticed, and I wonder whether I am alone in this or whether I may be going about things in a less than ideal way.

Conversely, I can study the Moon or Jupiter for hours on end and open clusters and rich fields of stars like in Cygnus are a delight.

I do appreciate the difference between barely seeing a DSO and not seeing it at all, but still I wonder.

How much more interesting and enjoyable are fuzzies with a big dob? Do I find them less so because I don't have one? Or do I not have a big dob because I just don't find fuzzies that interesting?

Well, at 75x in a 15" dob with a Lumicon OIII filter, the brighter parts of the Veil fill the FOV and display lots of wispy detail from as seen from Texas.

[Littleguy80]

7 hours ago, Stu said:

The filters you have got are not magic bullets, and will still benefit from being used under dark skies and with good dark adaptation, particularly with a smaller scope. Put a blanket over your head if you have light pollution around

I'm glad I read this before testing my filters.   A good bit of expectation management! Plus any problems can now been blamed on the tea towel over my head ?

[iPeace]

People at work must be giving me funny looks now, but I can't see them with this blanket over my head.

I have many faults, but do not lack dedication.

[estwing]

9 hours ago, iPeace said:

do enjoy hunting fuzzies, but once found there's not much to linger on in most case

This is where bigger aperture comes in, then there's plenty to linger on!

[JOC]

I have filters too now, but not flash ones like you are all posting pictures of above.  I've got the Skywatcher UHC and O-III and the Explore scientific H-Beta for the horsehead.  What I thought I'd start with are nebulas that are big enough in an EP to know when I'm on them.  OK, so I know that depends on which EP I am viewing with, but lets assume that I can get from, in reasonable jumps, from 32mm to 7-8mm with my F6 1200mm.  At about 10mm I can fill the EP with M42 and I can see it's faint grey fuzziness (Yey!) so there is my yardstick and that is what I am basing my expectation of what colour a FGF is.  I am given to understand that the veil should be similarly large  with the O-III - when the clouds finally clear.  I've obviously still got to find the veil which is not guaranteed, but I'd appreciate just a few more that will be fairly big and an idea of what size EP I'd need to use so that I kind of know when I've found them.  I can't see the point in going after small wispy FGF's if I can't even find a larger one.

[YKSE]

10 hours ago, iPeace said:

Of the Veil, not a trace.

My mixed feelings, I suspect, stem from me pondering whether the use of filters is worth the difference it makes in combination with the scopes I use. And perhaps, what I like to observe.

For the Veil and fuzzies, no filter can replace a dark sky, The Veil, e.g. is an easy no filter target in 80ED in mag 7 sky.

In light polluted backyard, OIII helps a great deal, still, EPs with proper exit pupil should be used. too small exit pupil(too high mag= too dim image)  kills this large nebula. 4mm is about minumum, preferably 5-6mm exit pupil.

[John]

I love the view of the Veil with my 4" Vixen refractor with my 31mm Nagler and the Lumicon O-III filter. It's one of my favourite astro observing sights of all

With my 12" dob I can examine each segment of the Veil in detail breaking down the individual elements. Almost "photographic" views with that combination

I found that a humble ST80 refractor showed it reasonably clearly using the Baader UHC-S filter. The Lumicon O-III is a lot more potent than that