Nebula filter

[Craig solomon]

Hi all., slowly getting used to my dobsonion skywatcher, have had the pleasure of observing orions nebula m42 last few nights , what a wonderful sight , I managed my expectations having read online about how much I would see . My question would a nebula filter make a significant difference to what I view to justify the expense ?

[Jiggy 67]

The short answer is yes. A UHC filter and an OIII filter are the minimum requirement in any serious observers kit. I would recommend Astronomik in both cases. UHC first followed by OIII as and when 

[Mick H]

2 hours ago, Craig solomon said:

Hi all., slowly getting used to my dobsonion skywatcher, have had the pleasure of observing orions nebula m42 last few nights , what a wonderful sight , I managed my expectations having read online about how much I would see . My question would a nebula filter make a significant difference to what I view to justify the expense ?

Glad you got to see Orion Nebula with your Dob, I have been viewing it with my 25x100 Binoculars and as you say "what a wonderful sight".

I agree with Jiggy67 on the Astronomik UHC filter which I use viewing Nebula with my 8se, brings it out in more detail.

Edited January 30, 2022 by Mick H

[John]

I use both UHC's and O-III's on the Orion Nebula. Sometimes a H-beta as well, just to see the differences that the filters make to various parts of the nebula. I enjoy the filterless views as well. Having these tools adds to the variety of observing I find. In some cases the O-III can show you something that is otherwise practically invisible without the filter in place eg: the Veil and Owl nebulae.

Astronomik are a good filter choice. Lower cost brands are available but from my experience, are noticeably less effective. Although they look like simple things, making a good narrowband or line filter is an exacting business.

 

[Jiggy 67]

4 minutes ago, John said:

Astronomik are a good filter choice. Lower cost brands are available but from my experience, are noticeably less effective. Although they look like simple things, making a good narrowband or line filter is an exacting business.

I agree, I think I described cheaper filters as a false economy in a similar thread. Filters are something worth spending a bit of money on. You could get one for £10 but when you look through a more expensive one at a Star Party or similar, you’ll be getting your wallet out again, best to just bite the bullet first time.

I do think UHC are better all rounders, and I use mine more that the OIII which is why I would buy that first

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @Craig solomon and welcome to SGL. 

My first 'nebula' filter was the Baader neodymium. It was ok, (and still is with some targets). I often call or refer to it as my 'Swiss-Army knife' filter.

A few years ago I purchased secondhand an Explorer Scientific UHC and Olll from the classifieds section here on SGL. Out of the three, the ES UHC is a clear winner for for visual IMHO. 

I could not afford the Astronomik prices, (or should that read... Astronomik[al] prices), at the time, so I settled on the ES ones instead... plus I like the ES boxes!

[Starslayer]

54 minutes ago, Jiggy 67 said:

The short answer is yes. A UHC filter and an OIII filter are the minimum requirement in any serious observers kit. I would recommend Astronomik in both cases. UHC first followed by OIII as and when 

Novice question - could you / should you use these at the same time or is that a no no?  

[Jiggy 67]

7 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Novice question - could you / should you use these at the same time or is that a no no?  

No way. An OIII will darken the image significantly. Add a UHC and it’s game over. You have to understand how they work. Filters filter out different wavelengths of light, allowing only certain wavelengths through, in the case of OIII, it allows oxygen through. So a nebula that emits light in the oxygen (because there is a lot of oxygen in the nebula) can be seen better….or at least differently. I don’t think stacking filters will work….others may disagree 

[Louis D]

Stacking an OIII with a UHC will just pass the OIII lines if the UHC was designed correctly.  Of course, if the UHC passes OIII less efficiently than the OIII, the OIII lines will be dimmer.  If the UHC doesn't pass OIII (they all should, but some are off a bit), then you'll see basically nothing.

Short answer, don't stack nebula filters.

You can stack other filters types like the moon & skyglow filters with a yellow filter to more strongly cut unfocused violet light when using an achromatic refractor.  The combination can improve sharpness a bit in that usage case at the cost of some blue light.

[John]

I find that I use O-III filters a bit more than UHC's but I guess that's down to observing preferences.

I had an ES UHC for a while and found that while it did work, the Astronomik UHC was noticably more effective. Being an observer who prefers not to use a filter unless it's going to make a significant difference, I happily paid the extra.

[PeterStudz]

I have a Skywatcher 200p Dob. And I’m also guilty of having a cheap UHC. It’s a Svbony UHC. For me on the Orion Nebula it darkens the overall view, gives the stars a greenish hue, but improves the contrast. Eg the the “wings” of the nebula extent somewhat further and I can see more structure to the nebulosity.

I also have a feeling that your light pollution will play a part. I suffer from Bortle 7 sky’s.

Whether spending 3 times more on something like the Astronomik UHC would show me something 3 times better I obviously can’t say. But I might well try and if it is that much better sell the Svbony on eBay.

Another way to show a different view of the Orion Nebula is to hover your smartphone camera (Surely everyone has a smartphone these days!) over the eyepiece. I’m not talking about taking a picture. Or better still use a cheap smartphone holder. Then you should see vivid colours too. Last year, when I first showed my then 9 yr old daughter the Orion Nebula in a telescope, she thought it nice enough but I could tell she was a tad disappointed. But when I carefully positioned my phone over the eyepiece the view literally had her jumping up and down.

Edited January 30, 2022 by PeterStudz

[bosun21]

6 hours ago, PeterStudz said:

Whether spending 3 times more on something like the Astronomik UHC would show me something 3 times better I obviously can’t say. But I might well try and if it is that much better sell the Svbony on eBay.

I myself initially bought the Svbony UHC filter. Then after hearing about the Astronomik UHC filter being better, I bought myself one. There’s a substantial difference in my opinion and I immediately then added the Astronomik OIII. I also have a Lumicon OIII which is another marvelous filter. To me, the world of filters is definitely one where you get what you pay for and it’s a no win situation buying cheaper makes.

[LaurenceT]

From what I've read here and elsewhere it seems that you get what you pay for in terms of the premium UHC filters but Astronomik have 2 UHC offerings, the UHC and the UHC-e. There is a considerable cost differential between the two, is this borne out in the observing effect?

Are these UHC and OIII filters discussed here confined to observing or can they be used for imaging too?

[PeterStudz]

@bosun21 - thanks for that. I might just get one and upgrade. Although, like many, I have a list of upgrade so it’ll have to join my list

[Kon]

To add another brand into the mix, I have the Televue Bandmate type 2 OIII filter, based on recommendation from experienced observers of the SGL forum with my 200P Dob.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/televue-filters/tele-vue-bandmate-oiii-filter.html

At first, itt seems expensive for what it is but it has already paid dividends over the summer and winter months with several faint nebulas and I do not regret it. If you are into observing the faint DSOs then a high quality filter is a must. I usually prefer unfiltered views but in some instances they bring out more details or make them easier to pop.

[John]

3 hours ago, Kon said:

To add another brand into the mix, I have the Televue Bandmate type 2 OIII filter, based on recommendation from experienced observers of the SGL forum with my 200P Dob.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/televue-filters/tele-vue-bandmate-oiii-filter.html

At first, itt seems expensive for what it is but it has already paid dividends over the summer and winter months with several faint nebulas and I do not regret it. If you are into observing the faint DSOs then a high quality filter is a must. I usually prefer unfiltered views but in some instances they bring out more details or make them easier to pop.

If I didn't already have my Lumicon and Astronomik filters, those are what I would go for now.

The newer TV Bandmate Type 2 filters (as per the link) are made for TV by Astronomik to TV's spec. The older TV Bandmate Type 1 filters were not and were not all that effective to be honest. Worth knowing if anyone is considering buying a used TV filter - go for the Type 2's !

 

 

[Louis D]

4 hours ago, LaurenceT said:

Astronomik have 2 UHC offerings, the UHC and the UHC-e. There is a considerable cost differential between the two, is this borne out in the observing effect?

From my understanding of their offerings, the UHC-E is a bit cheaper because it has a wider passband around the H-β and O-III lines than the UHC.  The general rule in passband filters is, the narrower the passband, the more expensive the filter, all other variables being equal.  The UHC-E also seems to pass a bit less of the H-β and O-III lines, but you'd be hard pressed to see this difference visually.

Astronomik also recommends the UHC-E for 5" and below telescopes and the UHC for larger scopes; although if you have both, I would get the UHC.

In use, having a narrower passband will eliminate more light pollution and sky glow.  This will in turn increase contrast making nebula features easier to see.  At a dark sky site, this would be of less importance.

UHC-E:

UHC:

Astronomik points out that the UHC-E filter passes at least one of the C2 carbon lines at 511nm and 514nm associated with comet filters like the Lumicon Swan Band Comet filter.  Thus, it might serve double duty.  I'm kind of surprised they didn't include them in the UHC-E passband image above for positive marketing purposes.

Lumicon Swan Band Comet Filter:

Edited January 31, 2022 by Louis D

[Starslayer]

7 hours ago, John said:

If I didn't already have my Lumicon and Astronomik filters, those are what I would go for now.

The newer TV Bandmate Type 2 filters (as per the link) are made for TV by Astronomik to TV's spec. The older TV Bandmate Type 1 filters were not and were not all that effective to be honest. Worth knowing if anyone is considering buying a used TV filter - go for the Type 2's !

 

 

I would be very surprised if the TV ones are not identical to the Astronomik ones. Think about it. The only reason they supply TV is for money of course but why would they then supply what purports to be a superior product, that TV then mark up, but for assumably the same profit margin? They make clear that this is an Astrom product. It is in the sales pitch.  Ok so the sales of their brand ones may suffer and they still get the TV revenue but I smell a rat and that rat is that the product is the same.  For discussion. 😃😃😅

[John]

2 hours ago, Starslayer said:

I would be very surprised if the TV ones are not identical to the Astronomik ones. Think about it. The only reason they supply TV is for money of course but why would they then supply what purports to be a superior product, that TV then mark up, but for assumably the same profit margin? They make clear that this is an Astrom product. It is in the sales pitch.  Ok so the sales of their brand ones may suffer and they still get the TV revenue but I smell a rat and that rat is that the product is the same.  For discussion. 😃😃😅

To clarify this a bit further, my understanding is that the TV Bandmate Type 2 Nebustar filter is a unique design manufactured by Astronomik exclusively to be marketed under the Tele Vue branding. 

This is from the Tele Vue website:

"The Nebustar filter is a unique narrowband design specifically for Tele Vue. Unlike other UHC designs, Nebustar blocks red wavelengths normally passed by typical UHC filters. The design eliminates star bloat to produce sharper, more natural looking stars along with enhanced nebulosity."

The TV Bandmate Type 2 O-III and H-Beta filters are the same as the Astronomik branded ones but go through additional testing by Tele Vue before being distributed for retail.

 

 

 

Edited January 31, 2022 by John

[Louis D]

If you go out to SearchLight Spectra Viewer and select the Astronomik and TV Bandmate II OIII filters, you'll see they're basically the same.

Add in some other OIII filters, and you'll see that these and the Chroma are a cut above the rest.  The Lumicons are as good in the OIII band, but bleed red.  I can vouch for this.  My 1990s Lumicon OIII shows OIII emission lines really well (no rust, thankfully), but bright stars have a weird green/red duality that I find distracting.

I wonder if my cheapie Zhumell OIII is like the StarGuy OIII and passes C2 comet bands as well.  The SG OIII is nearly identical to the Lumicon comet filter.  That would be neat to have gotten a comet filter for $16 because it makes for a pretty poor OIII filter. 🤨

Edited January 31, 2022 by Louis D