Dismiss Notice
New Cookie Policy
On May 24, 2018, we published revised versions of our Terms and Rules and Cookie Policy. Your use of AstronomyConnect.com’s services is subject to these revised terms.

Astronomik UHC-E Filter

Discussion in 'Eyepieces, Barlows, and Filters' started by Mak the Night, May 18, 2017.

Astronomik UHC-E Filter

Started by Mak the Night on May 18, 2017 at 7:15 PM

4 Replies 2168 Views 2 Likes

Reply to Thread Post New Thread
  1. Mak the Night

    Mak the Night Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Posts:
    4,919
    Trophy Points:
    113
    UHC-E.jpg

    The Astronomik UHC-E comes complete with its own protective plastic case, there are the usual male and female threads and there is a slight ‘crown’ on one side of the filter housing. Astronomik claim a 94% transmission with a range of 480nm to 525nm and 645nm plus. First impressions are that it is indeed less aggressive and has a better transmission percentage than the similar Baader UHC-S. Both filters supposedly work well with smaller apertures up to and around 125mm. Looking through it by hand held up to a light source it has a very nice turquoise/blue tint. It looks very well made and I assumed the filter thread would be M28.5x0.6 as it seemed to suggest this on their site.

    http://www.astronomik.com/en/visual-filters/uhc-e-filter.html

    UHC-E 2.jpg

    However, I soon discovered that it doesn't thread properly into a lot of my eyepieces, which is a bit of a disappointment. I think this is important as I don't want anything falling off into the OTA and causing any damage. It fits well on anything Meade, GSO and Bresser, but not my 14mm Baader Morpheus, any of my Japanese made Abbe orthoscopics or anything Vixen. It threads into all of the TeleVue 1.25" Plossls, 2x and 3x TeleVue Barlows, 2.5x TeleVue Powermate, but not my 16mm T5 Nagler or 19mm and 24mm Panoptics.

    TVx2 plus UHC-E.jpg

    I used the UHC-E at 164x with a 130mm f/6.9 Newtonian on Jupiter around transit and then, after a break, several hours later as it was setting. I was impressed with the overall brightness and view. It really manages to display certain features well on Jupiter with good clarity and distinction. I could easily see the GRS slowly disappearing near the south western limb, and later still a fair amount of detail in the equatorial belts and north temperate zone. It seemed equally as good, if not better than, Wratten #80A Blue and 82A Light Blue filters.

    Baader Astronomik UHC.jpg
    Astronomik UHC-E compared to the Baader UHC-S (the UHC-E is on the left).

    However it doesn't fare so well on Saturn. It does make the rings appear very bright and contrasted though. It improves the Cassini Division slightly but doesn't really do much for surface detail. Titan was easy to see with it. I got a hint of the Lagoon Nebula at 64x with a 14mm Bresser 60° 'Plossl' and the UHC-E. I couldn't see the nearby Trifid Nebula at all. I doubt this is a light pollution issue as I live over 180 metres above mean sea level in the greenbelt. Although this was probably as it was starting to get light and the overall transparency wasn't too good to start with anyway. I inevitably compared it with a Baader UHC-S threaded onto a 19mm TeleVue Panoptic for 47x. The Lagoon seemed a bit more pronounced with the UHC-S but that could have been because of the lower magnification with the Panoptic. The Astronomik certainly seems to have a better transmission than the Baader, and is easier to locate targets with. Basically as it gives a more natural view than the Baader UHC-S, especially of star fields, in my opinion. All in all, I like the Astronomik UHC-E, it wasn’t overly expensive and is adequately designed for use with smaller apertures. However, the lack of M28.5x0.6 filter threads does limit its use for me.
     
    Dave In Vermont and george like this.
  2. Don Pensack

    Don Pensack Vendor

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Posts:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    The UHC-E is a wide UHC-type filter, designed for nebulae only.
    As such, it isn't really designed for planets .
    Keep the magnification lower than 10x/inch of aperture for optimum results.
    Reflection nebulae, like M78 or the blue part of the Trifid, will not be helped by this type of filter.
    The UHC-S, on the other hand, is a CLS/Broadband filter (despite its name) and will not produce as high a level of enhancement, but it can be used at a bit higher magnification due to its wider bandwidth, say, 12x/inch of aperture.
     
  3. Mak the Night

    Mak the Night Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Posts:
    4,919
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh right, thanks Don. That does explain the result with the Trifid. The UHC-E is often surprisingly good on Jupiter. I have the 2" version now as well.

    UHCE 2.jpg

    Although this is for my ST80 and magnifications of between 11x and 21x (maybe 27x at a push).
     
  4. Dave In Vermont

    Dave In Vermont Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Posts:
    3,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Excellent way to find surprising results with filters: Tell Mak it's not supposed to work on (fill-in-blank). Then wait a little while! :D

    He's also right!

    Who'da thunk it?

    Dave
     
  5. Mak the Night

    Mak the Night Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Posts:
    4,919
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think Don's right about the UHC-E being a 'wide' narrowband though.

    UHC-E.jpg

    It's definitely more of a narrowband than the UHC-S.

    Baader UHC-S 1.jpg

    The Astronomik UHC is a little wider than the original Lumicon UHC:

    UHC.jpg Lumicon UHC.jpg

    I've been pondering on a 2" Orion Ultrablock for the ST80. It's been difficult finding one where I don't have to wait three months for delivery though. But being as the Astronomik UHC-E is a narrowband specifically designed for smaller apertures (unlike the broadband Baader UHC-S) I think I'll stick with it for a while. Plus it passes some of the Swan bands.
     

Share This Page