Jump to content


Photo

Considering my 1st filter

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Astrorookie

Astrorookie

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2010

Posted 29 September 2013 - 02:31 AM

Have a xt10, live in red/orange zone. Considering getting a filter for the 1st time. Not sure how much it will help in my zone. But I do want to try it.

If you can only buy 1 filter, which filter would help with the most nebulas.

Should I get uhc or OIII? Is there one that's like a hybrid between the two?

Thanks

#2 TexasRed

TexasRed

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 976
  • Joined: 17 May 2011
  • Loc: East Texas

Posted 29 September 2013 - 05:07 AM

UHC

#3 Mariner@sg

Mariner@sg

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Little Red Dot

Posted 29 September 2013 - 05:34 AM

UHC. Or more accurately, a narrowband.

#4 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15483
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Loc: southeastern Nebraska

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:23 AM

Have a xt10, live in red/orange zone. Considering getting a filter for the 1st time. Not sure how much it will help in my zone. But I do want to try it.

If you can only buy 1 filter, which filter would help with the most nebulas.

Should I get uhc or OIII? Is there one that's like a hybrid between the two?

Thanks


Get a narrow-band nebula filter like the Lumicon UHC, DGM Optics NPB, Thousand Oaks Narrowband LP-2, or Orion Ultrablock filter. Here, you can buy on price and still get a pretty good filter. The narrow-band filters tend to work on a majority of diffuse emission and planetary nebulae, while the OIII and H-Beta "line" filters tend to work well mainly on sub-sets of those emission nebulae. Thus, the narrow-band nebula filter is a sort of "one size fits all" when it comes to nebula filter performance. Later on, you may want to consider getting a good OIII filter, but for now, I might recommend you just get a good narrow-band filter like those I mentioned above. For more information about filters for deep-sky use, the following article may be of some use:

Light Pollution, Narrow-band, and Line Nebula Filters

Clear skies to you.

Attached Files



#5 REC

REC

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5060
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: NC

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:39 AM

I just picked up a NPB recently and have had the best views of M20,17,26,57 I have ever seen! Can't wait to see M42 in it:)

#6 Astrorookie

Astrorookie

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2010

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:13 PM

Is lumicon uhc the one to get or are there better choices that will work on more objects?

Thanks

#7 CelestronDaddy

CelestronDaddy

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 891
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 29 September 2013 - 07:47 PM

Have a xt10, live in red/orange zone. Considering getting a filter for the 1st time. Not sure how much it will help in my zone. But I do want to try it.

If you can only buy 1 filter, which filter would help with the most nebulas.

Should I get uhc or OIII? Is there one that's like a hybrid between the two?

Thanks


Astrorookie - I live in a red/orange zone near Austin TX. Plenty of glow from the City especially when I'm looking to the south from my location, which btw is looking toward Austin. After reading several good reviews and threads I decided on the DGM NPB. I had my first session with it and I can say, on emission nebula (at least the ones I looked at), it made a big positive difference. The sky was darkened and there was more detail seen on the nebula. I'm sure it is similar to the Lumicon and other narrow band filters. I believe the OIII is another good filter and maybe on some objects, better then my NPB. The filters are not really what I'd call inexpensive at least on my budget,g. I will add an OIII filter, probably a Lumicon, in the near future. I think between those two and my broadband I would be set. Good luck with your decision.... Tony

#8 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15483
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Loc: southeastern Nebraska

Posted 29 September 2013 - 11:33 PM

Is lumicon uhc the one to get or are there better choices that will work on more objects?

Thanks


The Lumicon UHC is in a class of filters intended for only emission and planetary nebulae, and is known as a "narrow-band" nebula filter. Other similar narrow-band nebula filters of good quality include the DGM Optics NPB, Orion Ultrablock, and Thousand Oaks Narrowband LP-2 filters. There is no single filter that will work well on all types of deep-sky objects, although under mild light pollution or a dark sky, the so-called "broad-band" LPR (Light Pollution Reduction) filters can provide a small boost in contrast for some of the larger and more diffuse galaxies. However, on emission and planetary nebulae, the narrow-band nebula filters like the Lumicon UHC can provide a nice boost in the contrast, so they tend to be one of the more valuable accessories for deep-sky observing. Clear skies to you.

#9 Astrorookie

Astrorookie

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2010

Posted 30 September 2013 - 09:26 AM

Is there a list somewhere online that shows all the emission and planetary nebulae?.

#10 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15483
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Loc: southeastern Nebraska

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:58 PM

There are many catalogs of emission and planetary nebulae. For Planetaries, there is Doug Snyder's Planetary Nebula Observer's Home Page:

http://www.blackskies.org/

The best way to find them is to use a good star atlas like Sky Atlas 2000 or Uranometria, which both show hundreds of planetaries and many of the larger more diffuse emission nebulae. However, if you want to know about which filter may work with which of the more prominent nebular objects, the following article may be of some use to you:

Filter Performance Comparisons For Some Common Nebulae

Clear skies to you.

#11 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 12641
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 30 September 2013 - 02:43 PM

#1 Lumicon UHC, #2 Lumicon OIII, #3 Lumicon HBeta.

#12 Mariner@sg

Mariner@sg

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Little Red Dot

Posted 30 September 2013 - 08:34 PM

I currently own the following:

1) Omega NPB
2) Lumicon OIII
3) Baader OIII
4) Orion H-beta

I happened to get the Baader O3 first before I stumbled on the Lumicon at a good price. Have yet to try out the Lumicon though but quite please with both the NPB and the Baader so far. The H-beta have seen limited use till now.

#13 aatt

aatt

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2012
  • Loc: CT

Posted 30 September 2013 - 08:44 PM

I concur with the majority here. Get a UHC first -it is the best all purpose filter. Follow up with an OIII.

#14 tomchris

tomchris

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 622
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2010
  • Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.

Posted 02 October 2013 - 07:14 AM

I currently have a Baader UHC-S filter which supposed lets in a little more light than the Lumicon. It works very well with my small refractors. Anyway, I agree that a UHC should be first.

#15 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2216
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 02 October 2013 - 09:45 AM

Ultrablock. Get it during the after XMAS sale.

#16 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15483
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Loc: southeastern Nebraska

Posted 02 October 2013 - 03:55 PM

I currently have a Baader UHC-S filter which supposed lets in a little more light than the Lumicon. It works very well with my small refractors. Anyway, I agree that a UHC should be first.


The Baader UHC-S is not at all a "true" UHC like the Lumicon model. The UHC-S is in a class of filter known as a broad-band "LPR" (Light Pollution Reduction) filter, and while it may help, it won't provide nearly the level of contrast boost on emission nebulae that a true narrow-band nebula filter like the Lumicon UHC, DGM NPB, Orion Ultrablock, or Thousand Oaks Narrowband LP-2 filters can. Basically, as a few other companies have done in the past, Baader just copied the "UHC" term from Lumicon without their permission (Lumicon created the UHC name which stands for "Ultra High Contrast"). Baader just helps confuse people by the misuse of the UHC term. The "true" UHC is the Lumicon UHC (other UHCs need not apply :) ). Clear skies to you.

#17 George9

George9

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 427
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2004

Posted 02 October 2013 - 04:10 PM

I admit I have less experience than many on this thread, but I am wondering about starting with the OIII instead if you are in a light-polluted region. I have found that some objects do noticeably better in a narrow OIII (e.g., Lumicon). Others where the UHC may have a slight advantage (combo of OIII and H-beta) are not noticeably different in the two filters. And objects only seen in the UHC (e.g., pure H-beta) are invisible under those skies anyway. So if I bring only one filter with me (my portable set up), I bring a good OIII. But maybe I am missing some objects.

George

#18 rgm40

rgm40

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 431
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Western Kentucky

Posted 10 October 2013 - 07:44 PM

I've owned many of the filters mentioned in this thread. For the price, I have been really, really impressed with the Orion Ultrablock. This being said, I just purchased it this year, and have not used it much yet due to time constraints. Many here have compared it to the Lumicon UHC. I had a UHC once, and sold it--mainly because I didn't really know how to fully utilize it to its fullest potential. And, at the time, I had a 8 inch scope whereas now I have a 10. Can't go wrong with the Ultrablock on the used market. I have seen them used advertised for 50-60 dollars. On the used market you could probably find an Ultrablock filter and Celestron/Baader OIII for the same price as you would pay for a new Lumicon of any type. Best of luck and enjoy.

#19 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10276
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:18 PM

UHC


+1 - see it as a slightly more liberal OIII but stronger than a general light pollution filter. Dave covered the true origin of the UHC - there is only ONE UHC and any other company using it outside of Lumicon is merely piggybacking on its good name. I find it objectionable that a company like BAADER would stoop to that. Oh well.

Pete

#20 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 20036
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:39 PM

Usually folks recommend a UHC like the Orion Ultrablock. Personally, however, if I could have just one filter, it'd be an O-III. While the "target count" favors the UHC filter, the gains provided by an O-III on O-III favorable targets are significantly more dramatic.

I have a bunch of O-III filters. On-paper bandpass differences aside, I think the Celestron branded O-III (same as the Baader; made for Celestron by Baader's supplier) is often the best deal though not the most optimal in terms of peak throughput for both O-III lines.

Regards,

Jim

#21 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15483
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Loc: southeastern Nebraska

Posted 11 October 2013 - 01:39 AM

I admit I have less experience than many on this thread, but I am wondering about starting with the OIII instead if you are in a light-polluted region. I have found that some objects do noticeably better in a narrow OIII (e.g., Lumicon). Others where the UHC may have a slight advantage (combo of OIII and H-beta) are not noticeably different in the two filters. And objects only seen in the UHC (e.g., pure H-beta) are invisible under those skies anyway. So if I bring only one filter with me (my portable set up), I bring a good OIII. But maybe I am missing some objects.

George


While I often recommend a narrow-band nebula filter like the Lumicon UHC as the best "single purchase" option, I will often recommend that if they can afford it, the amateur should at least have *both* a narrow-band nebula filter (Lumicon UHC, DGM Optics NPB, Orion Ultrablock, etc.) *and* a good Oxygen III (OIII) line filter. That way, you are basically covered. Not every object responds in the same way to every filter, so often for specific objects or even specific detail within objects, you may need different types of filters. From a modestly dark sky site, a narrow-band nebula filter will show a somewhat larger area of nebulosity than an OIII filter with slightly higher surface brightness and star brightness, while an OIII filter will often provide more contrast, sharpness, and greater dark detail. This isn't universally so, but it is a good rule of thumb to remember. One example of this is M27. From my dark sky site, the nebula shows its faint outer "wings" better in a narrow-band nebula filter like the Lumicon UHC, while in the OIII, it is somewhat smaller. However, from in-town or when the moon is bright, I often prefer the view in the OIII filter of that same object, as it still provides a little more contrast under heavy skyglow than the UHC does.

The difference in filter performance with different objects or detail is why I did my survey of various nebulae to see which filter might work on which objects which was cited in an earlier posting. As a rough idea of what the various filters may provide, here is an approximation of how the various filters may present the emission nebula NGC 281 under dark sky conditions in a 10 inch Newtonian:

Attached Files



#22 Olee

Olee

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 01 May 2013

Posted 11 October 2013 - 07:40 AM

Dave

On your recommendation I bought a DGM NPB filter and use it allot. It makes a big difference in my light polluted yard. I compared it directly to my friends TV Nebustar and a Lumicon UHC. To my older eyes they all worked well.

However several of us preferred the more neutral color of the NPB. It would definately be the first filter I would grab when looking at most nebulae.

I'll be anxious to try this at a dark site too.



Steve

#23 Astrorookie

Astrorookie

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2010

Posted 11 October 2013 - 07:18 PM

Well, I guess I am definitely going to go for a uhc 1st.

But, I have a dillemma here. Should I get a 2 inch or 1.25. For the price of a single 2 inch, I can get both the uhc and OIII in 1.25.

I only have 1 2 incher, which is my finder piece, but, I have 3 1.25 pieces.

Also, is the brand of the filter makes that big of a difference, or is the celestron or zhumell filter works just as well? There is a huge price difference between a zhumell uhc vs a lumicon uhc.

Thanks

#24 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 22711
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 11 October 2013 - 07:32 PM

Since filters are most effective at low powers (under 10X/inch of aperture), you should buy the filter to fit the lowest power eyepiece.
Most 1.25" to 2" adapters are threaded on the bottom for 2" filters anyway, so 2" is the universal size.

The brand of filter DOES make a big difference. There is more than one brand of decent narrowband (aka UHC) filter, though.
Some recommended ones are:
Lumicon UHC
DGM NPB
Thousand Oaks LP-2
Orion Ultrablock

The Celestron is very wide, more like a broadband filter. And the Zhumell has mixed reviews:
http://www.cloudynig...hp?item_id=2060
but, read the posts in this thread:
http://www.astronomy...should-i-buy... especially the posts by Gardavsky.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics