Oxygen III filers
Any opinions on which Oxygen III filters are best (for the money)? We have an Orion 1.25, but after Craig bought some larger eyepieces, he now wants a 2" for them. We were out in Rush Valley Saturday night, and either we went to the wrong place, or no one else chose to go, but just the two of us were looking at various nebula in Sagittarius between midnight and 1:00 (the Lagoon was sooo lovely) and that got us in the 2" filter wish mode. I've been told that Lumicon is better, but not necessarily enough better for the $. A Lumicon costs about $200, and Orion about $150. A salesperson at OPT claimed that the Baader filter at $98 for a 2" is better than the Orion. There are also filters by Teleview or Thousand Oaks. Any suggestions from you pros? Thanks! Ann M. Blanchard Executive Assistant to the Associate VP Undergraduate Studies 110 Sill University of Utah (801) 581-3188 a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu
I have a Lumicon 1.25. I use it on 2" eyepieces by holding it between my eye and the eyepiece. This has worked well when I or another astronomer wanted to see something through a 2" eyepiece. The $98 Baader filter is tempting so that I could use it at public parties. Dave -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Ann Blanchard Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 12:42 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Oxygen III filers Any opinions on which Oxygen III filters are best (for the money)? We have an Orion 1.25, but after Craig bought some larger eyepieces, he now wants a 2" for them. We were out in Rush Valley Saturday night, and either we went to the wrong place, or no one else chose to go, but just the two of us were looking at various nebula in Sagittarius between midnight and 1:00 (the Lagoon was sooo lovely) and that got us in the 2" filter wish mode. I've been told that Lumicon is better, but not necessarily enough better for the $. A Lumicon costs about $200, and Orion about $150. A salesperson at OPT claimed that the Baader filter at $98 for a 2" is better than the Orion. There are also filters by Teleview or Thousand Oaks. Any suggestions from you pros? Thanks! Ann M. Blanchard Executive Assistant to the Associate VP Undergraduate Studies 110 Sill University of Utah (801) 581-3188 a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Ann,
Probably which ever one you can get the best price. I bought my 2" Lumicon filters at Riverside for about $100. Jack Marling (Lumicon Founder) was the original maker of these but I don't think they are noticeably better. I am happy with my Orion Filters although they do not thread onto Lumicon Adapters. If you own one filter the OIII is the one. The Lumicon UHC filter is also a good one. Erik Any opinions on which Oxygen III filters are best (for the money)? We
have an Orion 1.25, but after Craig bought some larger eyepieces, he now wants a 2" for them. We were out in Rush Valley Saturday night, and either we went to the wrong place, or no one else chose to go, but just the two of us were looking at various nebula in Sagittarius between midnight and 1:00 (the Lagoon was sooo lovely) and that got us in the 2" filter wish mode. I've been told that Lumicon is better, but not necessarily enough better for the $. A Lumicon costs about $200, and Orion about $150. A salesperson at OPT claimed that the Baader filter at $98 for a 2" is better than the Orion. There are also filters by Teleview or Thousand Oaks. Any suggestions from you pros? Thanks!
Ann M. Blanchard
Executive Assistant to the Associate VP
Undergraduate Studies
110 Sill
University of Utah
(801) 581-3188
a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Hi Ann Buy the Baader !! I bought their 2" Continuum filter and the quality is fantastic. I had purchased an Orion 2" polarizer and after a few months, the polarization element fell out from the Chinese aluminum cell. Lumicon makes nice products also but I don't have any of their filters. AND if the filter is $98, it's a great price aloha Rob
I compared my Lumicon with one of the early TeleVue OIII's a couple of years ago and it was considerably better. I have no idea if TV has improved their coatings (or QC) since then, FWIW. --- Ann Blanchard <a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu> wrote:
Any opinions on which Oxygen III filters are best (for the money)? We have an Orion 1.25, but after Craig bought some larger eyepieces, he now wants a 2" for them. We were out in Rush Valley Saturday night, and either we went to the wrong place, or no one else chose to go, but just the two of us were looking at various nebula in Sagittarius between midnight and 1:00 (the Lagoon was sooo lovely) and that got us in the 2" filter wish mode. I've been told that Lumicon is better, but not necessarily enough better for the $. A Lumicon costs about $200, and Orion about $150. A salesperson at OPT claimed that the Baader filter at $98 for a 2" is better than the Orion. There are also filters by Teleview or Thousand Oaks. Any suggestions from you pros? Thanks!
Ann M. Blanchard
Executive Assistant to the Associate VP
Undergraduate Studies
110 Sill
University of Utah
(801) 581-3188
a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Okay, that was vague -- let's try again. The Lumicon was considerably better than the TeleVue when I did the comparison. TV may have since improved the filter overall, or maybe the one I was testing happened to be defective, I don't know. I do know that Lumicon actually puts the filter bandpass rating on each one they sell, so you should have some idea up front how "good" it is. Might be worthwhile at an upcoming star party to do some comparison benchmarking of various OIII filters from different manufacturers and see if we can come up with a consensus; do some blind, objective comparisons, with only one person knowing which filter is in use taking notes... --- Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
I compared my Lumicon with one of the early TeleVue OIII's a couple of years ago and it was considerably better. I have no idea if TV has improved their coatings (or QC) since then, FWIW.
--- Ann Blanchard <a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu> wrote:
Any opinions on which Oxygen III filters are best (for the money)? We have an Orion 1.25, but after Craig bought some larger eyepieces, he now wants a 2" for them. We were out in Rush Valley Saturday night, and either we went to the wrong place, or no one else chose to go, but just the two of us were looking at various nebula in Sagittarius between midnight and 1:00 (the Lagoon was sooo lovely) and that got us in the 2" filter wish mode. I've been told that Lumicon is better, but not necessarily enough better for the $. A Lumicon costs about $200, and Orion about $150. A salesperson at OPT claimed that the Baader filter at $98 for a 2" is better than the Orion. There are also filters by Teleview or Thousand Oaks. Any suggestions from you pros? Thanks!
Ann M. Blanchard
Executive Assistant to the Associate VP
Undergraduate Studies
110 Sill
University of Utah
(801) 581-3188
a.blanchard@ugs.utah.edu
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Lumicon used to give a print-out of the throughput curve, back in the old days, but I haven't bought from them since sometime around 1990. When you purchase a filter mail-order, you have to take what the order puller grabs off the shelf, so it boils down to the luck of the draw. It should be remembered that interference filters are dependent on the f-ratio of the telescope for maximum efficiency at the stated bandpass. They generally work better on longer f-ratio scopes. A larger angle of convergence (shorter f-ratio) means the light path is longer between the top and bottom layers of the filter coating. This affects the effectiveness of the filtration because of the nature of interference filters. They do not work in the same manner as colored glass filters, which work well regardless of the telescope's f-ratio. Something to consider. On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
. I do know that Lumicon actually puts the filter bandpass rating on each one they sell, so you should have some idea up front how "good" it is.
participants (6)
-
Ann Blanchard -
Chuck Hards -
Dunn, Dave -
erikhansen＠TheBlueZone.net -
Richard Tenney -
Rob Ratkowski Photography