Lumicon oiii filters - important information

[Scooot]

23 hours ago, Scooot said:

Nope, it was meant to be an OIII, so I guess I've been tricked, or diddled, maybe a genuine mistake. Today is the first time I've looked at the box, and I don't use it very much. Unless of course it's just the box that's wrong?

Ps

i'm not at home to look at the moment but I think from memory the filter itself is marked as oxygen III, so I reckon it's just been sent back in the wrong box. I only have two filters and the other is an astronomic Uhc.

another edit. Thanks for pointing it out Gerry, I had no idea it was HB filter box until you mentioned it, not even when it was staring me in the face this morning  I hope I at least have the right filter.

Update.

Now checked and they did return an OIII filter, the filter itself is clearly marked and the front of the box is labelled Lumicon LF3045 Oxygen III Filter. So it's just the reverse of the box that seems to have HB filter transmission details on it for some reason.  

[Dave In Vermont]

4 hours ago, Racey said:

I know you were empathetic to what @Mrs Racey and I might have been "grumbling" about John. But your recent research echoes what we did before we pulled the trigger... And what we believed we'd be getting...

Ah we'll. One lives...

First world problems. And others have greater than ours this and other weeks...

I hope those that misrepresent themselves, their products and company sleep as well as I do. Somehow I suspect those with no conscience or morality do sadly... 

?

The true definition of a psychopath: One who is without the ability to feel empathy or compassion for another. Everything of any value is that which serves their enjoyment or happiness. Nothing else matters whatsoever.

Many people exhibit this behavior or profile. It does not mean they are likely to be violent or dangerous to others. Nor does it mean that those who are violent or dangerous are all psychopaths.

That's the real stuff - not the stuff of movies. But if you're wondering about those who shouldn't be able to see their own face in the mirror every morning... well....

Dave

[jetstream]

7 hours ago, Racey said:

Let me be clear. I bought a premium priced Oiii filter. Purportedly being a premium Oiii filter.

If its any consolation I have been burned twice in the filter world- an Orion Ultrablock - $140USD- and a Lumicon Hb -$240 USD.

[John]

16 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

The true definition of a psychopath: One who is without the ability to feel empathy or compassion for another. Everything of any value is that which serves their enjoyment or happiness. Nothing else matters whatsoever.

Many people exhibit this behavior or profile. It does not mean they are likely to be violent or dangerous to others. Nor does it mean that those who are violent or dangerous are all psychopaths.

That's the real stuff - not the stuff of movies. But if you're wondering about those who shouldn't be able to see their own face in the mirror every morning... well....

Dave

Thanks for the analysis Dave. So glad that I'm not a psychopath and not a risk to others

 

[Jonk]

Interesting thread - I have 2 Lumicon filters, a 2" OIII and a 2" Ha.

I've had mine a while so should be ok. Sounds like I need to keep these very well looked after.

I bought the OIII purely to look at the Veil Nebula! I'm certainly glad I did.

I can't compare to anything else however.

 

[jetstream]

These 2 filters work fantastic and the DGM NPB equals the UHC but with a bit different "view" if you know what I mean.

 

[Piero]

My 2" Lumicon OIII arrived today from the Nederlands. Hope it works well.  

 

[jetstream]

1 hour ago, Piero said:

Hope it works well.  

I find this feature in the Veil a very good test for filters and sky conditions- the "tube" in the western Veil nebula. An even greater test is the 3rd split in the broom (bottom) as shown in this superb (borrowed) image.

I can see the tube in the 10" dob so your excellent SW 200 dob should show it as well, a trip with faulksy and co to their sites should reveal it if the filter is top notch.

[John]

Good to have some test objects like that Gerry

It's only by really pushing the equipment, observer and conditions on challenging objects and noting the results, that the performance differences between equipment options become noticable, especially when comparing decent quality items.

 

[GavStar]

The original thread on cloudynights has now disappeared!!!

[Davey-T]

28 minutes ago, Gavster said:

The original thread on cloudynights has now disappeared!!!

So what now ? do the M.I.B. come round and delete our memories with their red flashy thing 

Look out Dave in Vermont they'll be round your house first

Dave

[Stargazer McCabe]

33 minutes ago, Gavster said:

The original thread on cloudynights has now disappeared!!!

There's a new one in which a few are tackling the subject contained in the one you referred to:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/581172-what-brand-of-nebula-filters-for-small-scope-oiii-and-uhc/

[Piero]

If they really took that thread down, it is rather unfair..

In my opinion, although there were some posts which were too aggressive against Lumicon, most of them were really about the fact that keeping the same product name, while changing the specs, was kind of deceiving. Eventually, this was the reason of that (and this) thread. 

They could have just cleaned up the most aggressive posts rather than taking down a thread which is highly relevant for the astro community, I feel.. 

[estwing]

Mine ...not sure how good it is but stuff looks good with it!

[Davey-T]

10 minutes ago, estwing said:

Mine ...not sure how good it is but stuff looks good with it!

Looks "better" than mine, not that I've got to look through it yet, clouds, clouds and more clouds.

Dave

[John]

As long as the pass is over 90% on both the O-III lines then it should work well.

My Lumicon O-III is somewhere between those two.

[Piero]

As far as I understand the most critical between the two is the 501nm, but for visual the 496nm is also quite relevant. There is a post by Don Pensack on CN where he describes the difference between the Lumicon OIII and the Baader OIII (which only passes 10nm cutting half 496nm signal) when observing the "Witch's broom" feature (see Gerry's post) in the Veil nebula:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/482946-celestron-vs-baader-oiii/#entry6679817

 

There is also a third OIII lane which is not critical and for this reason is discarded.

Personally, I am more than happy with an OIII filter with specs:

• +90% transmission;
• both 501nm and 496nm;
• ~12nm `rectangular-shaped` transmission width

Basically the old Lumicon OIII.. 

[cathalferris]

One wonders if those threads have been hidden pending a possible lawsuit by the new owners of Lumicon. It would be pretty standard business behaviour to take legal action against a forum where the postings (especially when moderated) may materially affect the business. I wouldn't expect to see those threads again anytime soon, and that's a pity.

I think that Lumicon as a brand will be killed very effectively by this kind of situation where the new products are seen to be substandard. Lumicon have only one real choice here to survive -  the new owners should take great pains to fix the problems and to be seen to fix those problems that the customers are seeing. The Lumicon brand will be seen as worthless by the community otherwise, and the fact that the threads detailing the issues are hidden does not bode well for decent customer service for Lumicon customers. 

 

[scarp15]

If nothing else, this is a good prompt for users of the original Lumicon OIII to document the filter specifications as a future proof reference, because with use the readings will fade out.

 

[jetstream]

4 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

If nothing else, this is a good prompt for users of the original Lumicon OIII to document the filter specifications as a future proof reference, because with use the readings will fade out.

 

Hey Iain, I'll trade ya?!

[cathalferris]

^ Indeed, my UHC and rather decrepit OIII filters have gotten to the point where the handwritten numbers have faded almost completely off. I should document those, or track down the original sale numbers.

The OIII filter I bought used and cheap, as the coatings were deteriorating around the extremity, but the center portion was fine. The center portion is also the only part that would be used at moderate to high magnifications after all. Sounds like it might still be a better operator than the current offerings from the same company.

[scarp15]

3 hours ago, jetstream said:

Hey Iain, I'll trade ya?!

Last year I got to show a bunch of die hard imagers the Veil using this filter, they were each blown away 

[jetstream]

6 hours ago, scarp15 said:

Last year I got to show a bunch of die hard imagers the Veil using this filter, they were each blown away 

Yes I don't doubt it, your filter specs are superb! and better than mine

[Dave In Vermont]

10 hours ago, cathalferris said:

One wonders if those threads have been hidden pending a possible lawsuit by the new owners of Lumicon. It would be pretty standard business behaviour to take legal action against a forum where the postings (especially when moderated) may materially affect the business. I wouldn't expect to see those threads again anytime soon, and that's a pity.

I think that Lumicon as a brand will be killed very effectively by this kind of situation where the new products are seen to be substandard. Lumicon have only one real choice here to survive -  the new owners should take great pains to fix the problems and to be seen to fix those problems that the customers are seeing. The Lumicon brand will be seen as worthless by the community otherwise, and the fact that the threads detailing the issues are hidden does not bode well for decent customer service for Lumicon customers. 

 

Quite right you are.

I, for one, am in possession of proof that Lumicon hasn't been honest with their customers (or would-be). As CN "vanished" the long thread showing this without a word (a 'moderator' was also a poster on this now-missing thread. Removing the thread is exactly what a lawyer (barrister) would suggest both sides do at present.

The Astronomik OIII - both 'visual' and CCD-models - are what I presently recommend. No one need fear in the UK/Europa. Lumicon's lawyer can't touch you outside of the USA. If they tried - that would be the last nail in their coffin!

All the Best -

Dave - Filter-Nut

 

[jetstream]

1 minute ago, Dave In Vermont said:

As CN "vanished" the long thread

Its back Dave and locked.