Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Difference between UHC filters

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Golgie

Golgie

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2017
  • Loc: So Cal

Posted 31 March 2020 - 11:01 AM

I recently bought a UHC filter by lumicon and was wondering the difference between orion,celestron,televue etc.

Orions and celestron seem to be at $80 vs the $100 lumicon and $110 televue.

Is there any difference between the filters ?

Also going to be buying a O3 and H beta as well,any difference between the brands in these.

Most seem to be running at $100

#2 chrysalis

chrysalis

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 21,561
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2013
  • Loc: North Central NC

Posted 31 March 2020 - 11:41 AM

I have Lumicon UHC and DGM NPB as well as both makers' OIII.

 

To my eye, the pinkish cast of stars is more pleasing than the cyan cast of the UHC. In addition, it seems to me that there is more light throughput in the DGM versions of both filters than in the Lumicon filters.

 

YMMV.

 

There are vast differences in the light transmission curves among the various players. This will affect the overall performance.

 

http://www.astrosurf...#Lumicon [OIII]

 

http://www.astroamateur.de/filter/

 

Filter Spectrum Color Comparison.jpg


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#3 Spikey131

Spikey131

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2017

Posted 31 March 2020 - 08:17 PM

The biggest difference between the brands is consistency, ie, is the filter you get delivering what it claims.  From my limited understanding, Lumicon, Tele Vue and Astronomik test each filter to ensure quality.

 

Read more here:  https://www.cloudyni...ice/?p=10011710

 

Also, search the Eyepiece Forum, there is lots of info there on filters.


  • Gray and vdog like this

#4 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 01 April 2020 - 01:41 PM

The biggest difference is some pass red while others don’t. Seems like Lumicon has passed red in the past but doesn’t currently, so it depends on the vintage. I think I heard their current model is their 9th iteration. The red helps balance the tone rather than making stars appear bluish green, and helps with cameras that can see the h alpha region. The bluer ones block the most light, to try to provide the most enhancement to the nebulae.

Premium brands tend to be just a touch better in terms of passing the most possible light in nebulae wavelengths. Might be 97-98% versus 95-96% or something. Conceivably there could be a difference in polish or something that provides more pinpoint stars, but remember there really isn’t much price difference going from $80 to $110 so can’t expect dramatic differences. From what I hear you do see a difference with any of these compared to something like a $16 one shipped direct from China, but that is to be expected.

Scott

#5 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 01 April 2020 - 01:52 PM

The biggest difference between the brands is consistency, ie, is the filter you get delivering what it claims. From my limited understanding, Lumicon, Tele Vue and Astronomik test each filter to ensure quality.

Read more here: https://www.cloudyni...ice/?p=10011710

Also, search the Eyepiece Forum, there is lots of info there on filters.

And as I understand Astronomik makes the Televue filters. But there is a difference as one passes red and the other doesn’t, possibly because the TV one appears to be discontinued now? So it might be the older Astronomik model or something.

For a Nebula with a star cluster, like Orion, Lagoon, Rosette, it might be nice to have the red to improve the appearance of the stars. For planetary or Swan maybe the red isn’t a value add, unless you use a camera. I just got a DGM to go along with my Orion so I look forward to testing the difference of passing the red or not. Should help the camera at least.

Scott

#6 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 01 April 2020 - 02:36 PM

The main difference that I know with UHC filters is that some are narrowband and some are more like a broadband filter. 



#7 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 01 April 2020 - 04:54 PM

The main difference that I know with UHC filters is that some are narrowband and some are more like a broadband filter.

Good point. While in theory UHC is narrowband, there are some recent models like Lumicon UHC-S or Celestron UHC that are really more like broadband light pollution filters. So it pays to check the transmission and verify what you are really getting.

Scott

#8 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 45,581
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 01 April 2020 - 04:55 PM

I recently bought a UHC filter by lumicon and was wondering the difference between orion,celestron,televue etc.

Orions and celestron seem to be at $80 vs the $100 lumicon and $110 televue.

Is there any difference between the filters ?

Also going to be buying a O3 and H beta as well,any difference between the brands in these.

Most seem to be running at $100

Characteristics:

--bandwidth around the necessary emission lines in the spectrum

--suppression of out of bandwidth (OOB) wavelengths

--transmission percentages at the relevant spectral lines

--consistency from filter to filter.

--clear aperture on the filter

 

So, among the 52 filters I've owned, the highest quality ones (I had them all lab-tested) were:

Narrowband UHC-type filters: Lumicon Gen-3 UHC, TeleVue BandMate II Nebustar, Astronomik UHC, with a DGM NPB a runner-up to the first group

O-III filters: TeleVue BandMate II O-III, Astronomik O-III, Lumicon Gen 3 O-III

H-ß filters--TeleVue BandMate II H-ß, Astronomik H-ß, Orion H-ß

All the other filters in each class either had low tranmission, missed one of the spectral lines in question, had too wide a bandwidth to yield good contrast, or had other problems.

 

Use the filters at low power (10x/inch of aperture and lower), and be sure to be completely dark adapted (30-45 minutes outside, away from lights) before using them.


Edited by Starman1, 01 April 2020 - 05:01 PM.


#9 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 45,581
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 01 April 2020 - 04:59 PM

And as I understand Astronomik makes the Televue filters. But there is a difference as one passes red and the other doesn’t, possibly because the TV one appears to be discontinued now? So it might be the older Astronomik model or something.

For a Nebula with a star cluster, like Orion, Lagoon, Rosette, it might be nice to have the red to improve the appearance of the stars. For planetary or Swan maybe the red isn’t a value add, unless you use a camera. I just got a DGM to go along with my Orion so I look forward to testing the difference of passing the red or not. Should help the camera at least.

Scott

The TeleVue BandMate II filters are current since 2018.  Their older Band Mate filters were wider in bandwidth and discontinued several years ago.

 

TeleVue BandMate II filters are made by Astronomik, but, as you note, the TV Nebustar (their UHC filter) passes no red, while the Astronomik does have an output in the red at the H-α wavelength.

 

The DGM NPB (their UHC filter) passes a very broad swath of wavelengths in the red, so stars appear red.  That filter has given me my lifetime-best view of M17, M16, M8.



#10 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 01 April 2020 - 06:51 PM

Good point. While in theory UHC is narrowband, there are some recent models like Lumicon UHC-S or Celestron UHC that are really more like broadband light pollution filters. So it pays to check the transmission and verify what you are really getting.

Scott

I have an original Lumicon 1.25" UHC and a Baader UHC-S. The Baader is definitely closer to a broadband.

 

gallery_249298_5348_16878.jpg

 

I also have 1.25" and 2" Astronomik UHC-E filters, which seem to be midway between the two.

 

gallery_249298_5348_19975.jpg

 

The UHC-E also passes a couple of Swan bands I believe and can be used as a comet filter.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#11 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,129
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 03 April 2020 - 06:35 AM

Hello Shorty Barlow,

 

that's right.
The letter "E" on UHC-E filter stands for "economy", and it is a sort of what they are calling "clear skies" filter, like the CLS and the UHC-S, even if they have different spectral characteristics.

Yours should be a good allrounder, also for some comets.

 

Even if I have parted with a complete set of the Zeiss single narrow pass-band interference filters manufactured for the optics testing, I still have some  Zeiss (CZJ) and one Balzers (Liechtenstein) interference filter, back from the times before the filters for the hobby astronomy came on the market.

 

Let us know, how your UHC-E is on the C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS) doing,

JG


  • Shorty Barlow likes this

#12 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 45,581
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:20 AM

My UHC-E filter had its FWHM (Full width, half maximum) points at 474nm and 523nm for a 49nm bandwidth that included the C2 wavelengths of 511nm and 514nm.

And 644nm to 719nm, making it behave more like a broadband filter.

It should enhance the contrast some on the ATLAS comet.

 

My Baader UHC-S had a little wider blue-green bandwidth of 62nm (464-526nm) and a red bandwidth of 639-674nm, so a bit narrower in the red than the UHC-E.

It performs a bit more like the Lumicon Deep Sky, the original "broadband" filter.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#13 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:24 AM

Hello Shorty Barlow,

 

that's right.
The letter "E" on UHC-E filter stands for "economy", and it is a sort of what they are calling "clear skies" filter, like the CLS and the UHC-S, even if they have different spectral characteristics.

Yours should be a good allrounder, also for some comets.

 

Even if I have parted with a complete set of the Zeiss single narrow pass-band interference filters manufactured for the optics testing, I still have some  Zeiss (CZJ) and one Balzers (Liechtenstein) interference filter, back from the times before the filters for the hobby astronomy came on the market.

 

Let us know, how your UHC-E is on the C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS) doing,

JG

Hello JG,

 

I did get to test my 1.25" Lumicon Comet filter on C/2019 Y4 with a 19mm Panoptic. Although I first found it with a 27mm Panoptic without a filter. 

 

I'll use the 2" UHC-E with the 27mm Panoptic when I get the chance so I can compare it with the Lumicon. 

 

Clouds may be a problem in the immediate future. Pity there's no filter for them lol.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#14 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:33 AM

My UHC-E filter had its FWHM (Full width, half maximum) points at 474nm and 523nm for a 49nm bandwidth that included the C2 wavelengths of 511nm and 514nm.

And 644nm to 719nm, making it behave more like a broadband filter.

It should enhance the contrast some on the ATLAS comet.

 

My Baader UHC-S had a little wider blue-green bandwidth of 62nm (464-526nm) and a red bandwidth of 639-674nm, so a bit narrower in the red than the UHC-E.

It performs a bit more like the Lumicon Deep Sky, the original "broadband" filter.

I take it that the 511nm and 514nm are within the Swan band?

 

https://upload.wikim..._blue_flame.png



#15 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,129
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:45 AM

Hello JG,

 

I did get to test my 1.25" Lumicon Comet filter on C/2019 Y4 with a 19mm Panoptic. Although I first found it with a 27mm Panoptic without a filter. 

 

I'll use the 2" UHC-E with the 27mm Panoptic when I get the chance so I can compare it with the Lumicon

 

Clouds may be a problem in the immediate future. Pity there's no filter for them lol.

Keep yourself fit, my friend, I have also reduced my observing sessions.

 

Looking forward to your comparison,

JG
 


  • Shorty Barlow likes this

#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 45,581
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:50 AM

I take it that the 511nm and 514nm are within the Swan band?

 

https://upload.wikim..._blue_flame.png

The SWAN band wavelengths are more varied:

https://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Swan_band

But the strongest emission is the C2 lines at 511nm and 514nm, and those lines also happen to be in the area of greatest nighttime sensitivity of our eyes.

The Lumicon "Comet" filter picked up the O-III line at 501nm and the two C2 lines of 511 and 514nm but not much else, so it yielded a higher contrast image

than other filters that could be used for comet enhancement.


Edited by Starman1, 03 April 2020 - 09:53 AM.

  • Shorty Barlow and j.gardavsky like this

#17 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:54 AM

Keep yourself fit, my friend, I have also reduced my observing sessions.

 

Looking forward to your comparison,

JG
 

I will JG, you stay safe also. I've not reduced my observing sessions by choice lol. From the 23rd to the 27th of March I got five nights of observing in. I got a 30 minute look at the Moon last night with a Mak but the clouds inevitably came back. The weather's going to improve soon ... apparently. 


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#18 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:56 AM

The SWAN band wavelengths are more varied:

https://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Swan_band

But the strongest emission is the C2 lines at 511nm and 514nm, and those lines also happen to be in the area of greatest nighttime sensitivity of our eyes.

The Lumicon "Comet" filter picked up the O-III line at 501nm and the two C2 lines of 511 and 514nm but not much else, so it yielded a higher contrast image

than other filters that could be used for comet enhancement.

The Lumicon Comet filter is definitely very green lol.



#19 Shorty Barlow

Shorty Barlow

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2015
  • Loc: Lloegyr

Posted 03 April 2020 - 09:59 AM

The 2" version is an arm and a leg! lol

 

med_gallery_249298_5348_48997.jpg


  • j.gardavsky likes this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics