Uhc Filter

Uhc Filter

Best telescope filters for viewing nebula?

just wondering what if any type of filter would give me better views of feint objects like nebula and galaxys.
Only hav moon filter at min. Would a Light pollution, UV/IR, UHC, or OIII filter be any use for viewing or are these only useful for imaging purposes??
hav skywatcher127 mak, viewing near Glasgow, any help advice would b great thx

The two basic filters you want are OIII and UHC. In the end you will want both, it's just a question of which first. David Knisely did a detailed evaluation of how nebulae show in filters on Cloudynights.com. This is the most thorough evaluation you're likely to find.

The gist of it is this. The UHC may do better on more objects, but the most spectacular objects do best in OIII. I would recommend the Lumicon OIII and maybe a Baader UHC. I own several filters and use the OIII most.

Your most cost effective option is 1.25 inch filters on 1.25 inch eyepieces: make sure your eyepieces are all threaded, but be aware that thread sizes are not standardized.

A five inch aperture does noticeably better with these filters than a four inch, I use both four and five inch apo refractors (102mm and 128mm). You are missing something however because your scope will not fully illuminate a two inch eyepiece with a two inch filter etc.: Maks and SCTs of this size have vignetting due to the baffle size, that is, the tube in the middle of the hole in your mirror.. So you won't get a really wide field. Also you're at higher magnification as a result of your focal length and so that will dim things a bit.

Since the Veil Nebula and M17 are among the most spectacular sky objects that you will want to look at over and over, I strongly suggest getting OIII first and UHC second. But it's ultimately an empty debate because if you're into this for any length of time you will get both.

Your next filter after those two should be the Baader Neodymium filter because it really does great things on Jupiter and Mars, and can be used at least a bit to help cut down moon glow. Ultimately you're going to want to experience some of these nebulae in an 8 to 10 inch or bigger range, in two inch wide field eyepieces, because you get so much more. This is especially true of the nebulae. However, it is simply not true that you can't enjoy these objects in four and five inch (127mm) apertures with a filter. The fact of the matter is you can, people do, and it is routinely done with good results. On certain objects like the California Nebula you really don't have much choice, to get a field of view wide enough you have to use a smaller aperture. But that's an H-alpha filter and should be way down on your priorities--few targets there.

As a general rule galaxies don't respond well to filters. For light pollution the already-mentioned neodymium (Baader sky and moon glow) filter helps as much as anything, but not much. You can readily sell your filters on astromart if you don't like them so you'll get back 70% of your outlay and won't have much money at risk.

Hope that helps,
GN

Power View Zoom

Power View Zoom

Why doesnt my sony Cyber-shot 6.0 MP camera zoom in anymore?

my camera used to zoom in when i wanted to take a pic, and now it doesnt. Whenever I zoom in before i take a pic, it tells me to TUR THE POWER OFF AND ON AGAIN. so i do that, i gives me the same thing over and over. I dont know what could be the problem. Can u help me?

more info: once i take a pic and see it on the camera, the zoom in works. it doesnt work before the picture is taken but i works once its viewed. help..

You need to check with Sony directly on this one. You possibly have a broken camera. Plus you'll likely get a correct answer quicker.

HTH.

Monocular Case Nib

Monocular Case Nib

Cmos Sensor

Cmos Sensor

Are non-full-frame CMOS sensor DSLR's adequate for producing top quality landscape photos ?

I've talked to a few "pros" who have varying opinions. One buddy of mine, from the Brooks Institute , insists that if you want a good image you cannot compromise. As such, recommends the 5D or 1D ONLY. I have spoken with others who say the 20D or 50D are sufficient.

Note : No, I'm not a professional, but I do want very high resolution to capture that detail in wide vista shots and other subjects shot from a distance.

I use D300 and D3 Nikon's and I am a Brooks grad... I think you may have misunderstood your buddy.

While it is true in general, that you cannot compromise when it comes to image quality, that quality is not dependent upon a camera brand or model. It is dependent upon the skills of the photographer and upon the format size, but comparing a APS-C and FF digital is like comparing a 645 to a 6x6 medium format camera ... the difference is only slight ..

I am sure your friend will agree that the difference between the images produced with a Sinar vs. a Toyo is negligible ... again, it is dependent upon the skills and eye of the photographer.

Just think, six years ago, there were no full frame DSLR's and images produced by cameras that had "only" APS-C sensors are still high enough quality to be sold as stock and provided images perfectly fine for use in magazines and posting on clients websites.

Obviously he is a Canon guy and as a survivor of Brooks, where only perfect cuts it, he may be overstating the issue, but in general you have to always by the best equipment your skills can support (plus some to grow into) and can afford.

Oh, yes .. don't fall in love with CMOS ... there is little difference in quality between CCD and CMOS ... CMOS is just cheaper to make and most of the processing is done on the sensor, rather than within the electronics found on the camera that uses CCD's

Now to your shooting needs.

You basically want a camera that will produce high quality landscape images.

If you shoot any of the Nikon or Canon system cameras using the same techniques used when using a view camera, they will all produce high quality images ... how large do you intend to enlarge these images? That may well be the issue. It may well be, for your needs, you will have to buy a medium format camera, film or digital.

Since you have so many friends, I would suggest you do what most of my colleagues do ... go out and shoot using each others cameras.

In the past two months, I have used two 1Ds, Mark III's (different revisions) a 5D and my D3 and D300. Next week I will be testing the D700 and D90. It is on these outings, you can get a feeling for the different lenses and bodies available from the top two makers of professional miniature cameras.

It was on these outings, I got to use a Nikkor 200 mm f/2 and Nikkor 200-400 mm as well as a Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8 and 70-200 mm f/2.8. I now have head to head comparisons of those two fine focal lengths made by Canon and Nikon

Do your research ... remember you are not buying a camera, but a system ... later if you want to use the nice Canon 10-22 mm EF-S lens, but you have upgraded to a nice Canon 5D, Mark II, you cannot use that lens ... no EF-S lenses can be used on FF Canon camera ... on the other hand Nikon ....

Eyepiece Barlow

Eyepiece Barlow

on a reflector- what is the difference between barlow lens and erecting eyepiece& wich goes where on telescope

A Barlow lens is a negative lens that increases the effective focal length of the telescope. An erecting eyepiece is a positive lens designed to turn the image upside down. When used in an astronomical telescope that normally shows things upside down, an erecting eyepiece shows things right side up. Both the Barlow and erecting eyepiece go in the eyepiece holder of the telescope and a regular eyepiece is then inserted into the Barlow or erecting eyepiece.

Next Page »