Filter advice

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Interesting analogy John

[bonox]

Originally Posted by ausastronomer

If you live in the middle of Sydney and want to pursue astronomy, IMO you would be better specialising in an area where the targets aren;t affected by light pollution. eg Double Stars, Variable stars, Moon, Planets, Solar.

just happens that i'm only really interested in dso and can't make it to a dark site particularly often - would you rather I sat in a corner and did nothing, or made use of technology and knowledge to be able to continue my hobby where and when i'm able? My point was that the types of filters the OP was asking about do work - sure you'll never get a replacement for a dark site, but not all of us have silver spoons up our .... either.

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Sorry Bonox, I know light pollution is a harsh fact of life in a big city, but I agree with John here. DSOs look plain pathetic in heavy light pollution filter or no filter. I have to admit that nebulae look even more pathetic without a filter. I cannot make it to dark skies as often as I'd want to but my first couple of trips were enough so that I hardly ever bother observing DSOs from my backyard. I don't spend clear nights sitting in a corner either though, but observe planets and the Moon mostly, doubles sometimes. When seeing is good Jupiter can be quite a spectacle. Occasionally I do observe DSOs at home as target practice for when I'm next at a dark site. I use DGM NPB filter on nebulae.

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

Originally Posted by bonox

My point was that the types of filters the OP was asking about do work

Yes they work very well, particularly when used in telescopes over 4" in aperture.

Originally Posted by bonox

sure you'll never get a replacement for a dark site, but not all of us have silver spoons up our ....

True; and not all of us are so ill informed as to recommend a filter thats totally unsuitable for a 70mm telescope, which is what the OP owns

CS-John B

[CoombellKid]

Originally Posted by ausastronomer

...No matter how good a set of filters you have there is no substitute for dark skies...

CS-John B

oooooooh Yeah! aint that the true then you find on some targets
your expensive UHC filter is meant for, it can make little difference.
Sometimes I find I'll blink my UHC filter in and out this gives the effect
similar to shaking the tube on faint fuzzies. After which I go back to the
natural look. In fact I use my UHC so little that I forget that it is there.
Usually if I'm going to use it, I'm looking for small Hartung planetaries
near the milky way or nestled in star fields.

regards,CS

Rob

[dugnsuz (Doug)]

Hi All,
At present, I'm considering a couple of "budget" UHC filters - the Baader UHC-S filter at $129 and the UHC from Exploration Optics at $125.
Does anyone have hands on with either of these filters?
I've heard on the bush telegraph that the Baader has better transmision of background stars than others, and that the Exploration Optics filters are of Thousand Oaks/Lumicon quality.
Any comments or ideas greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Doug