Yeah, I think certain narrowbands can sometimes work on emission nebulae. But I'd wager you'd need a larger aperture than around 80 ~ 100mm, possibly with a relatively large exit pupil. Most probably f/5 or above as well. It's not so easy on a Mak. I'll try the UltraBlock if I get the chance though. The UHC-E doesn't improve the nebula as much as the UHC-S with my ST80 in my experience. NPB filters aren't easy to come by here, it would be interesting to see its transmission curve. I found it difficult to perceive the Lagoon Nebula and lost the Trifid Nebula completely on a 130mm Newtonian and my ST80 with the UHC-E. Yet the UHC-S showed them well.

Baader are a German company but I'm guessing most of their products are manufactured somewhere in the Pacific Rim. Orion are an American distributor, AFAIK they don't actually manufacture anything but a lot of their stuff is commissioned from Synta rather than just rebranded.

Orion Synta Mak's are a wine colour, whereas Sky-Watcher Mak's are a speckled black colour sometimes with white. Orion Synta ST80's were white whereas Sky-Watcher ST80's are a speckled black. I have both Orion and Sky-Watcher ST80's but the customised one is the Orion. There's no difference, except my Sky-Watcher ST80's dew shield is stuck fast. So I customised the Orion.

There is a UK based company called Orion Optics UK, just to make things more confusing. I believe they actually manufacture their products, although how many component parts come from China is anyone's guess.



http://www.orionoptics.co.uk/home.html

 

Orion (USA) gets it's 'stuff' from both GSO and Synta these days. Which is to say from both the People's Republic of China and Taiwan (Republic of China or Formosa). Amusing anecdote:

I bought what was supposed to be a Synta-made 200mm F/4 Rich-Field Newtonian back in 2000. It was priced very low. As it turned out, it was made by a real, honest Master Optician for the then-poorly thought of GSO. When Orion found out - by getting the bill - what they were selling was absolutely world-class fantastic instrument, they freaked-out!

They pulled 'em off the market as quick as a starship. Too late for me though. I already had one! Actually I had 2 come in. The first one was returned as UPS had a drunken belligerant at the warehouse. He'd kicked and smashed-in the first one. There were holes in the shipping container that matched a hole made by a steel-toed work boot! And the same with the OTA.....

Orion shipped me a new one sight-unseen. And fired UPS. They then shipped exclusively by Federal Express from then on. They're back to UPS now. I've never seen that drunken-driver/worker again. Likely UPS fired him for blowing-up a major corporate customer account.

And FedEx hired him!

​

 

I often wonder where Orion get their RACI's from, they seem different to both GSO and Synta.

 

Maybe.....'Uncle's Ernie's Bait & Tackle?' Seriously - if it has a winding-mechanism, it could contracted out of Shimano of Japan (and made in god-knows-where, China), which manuactures tons of bicycle parts. Like derraileurs & gear-shifters, etc. As well as a huge bunch of reels for fishing-rods.

Now For Sommething Completely Different:

Go find your #58 Green Filter. See if it needs a good dusting. Here's why & goodbye. Off to answer more correspondence:


Comparing Minus-Violet to Wratten #58.pdf

 

Cheers for the PDF Dave. Oddly, I had to replace my #58A the other day as it had become horribly scratched for some reason. It's a very subtle green when in use, I may have to get the 2" now for my ST80 and give it a go. Although at 24% transmission I'm not sure what it would be like at high power on a target other than the Moon. It seems like I'd probably only use the 1.25" version anyway. I don't think the ST80 is the best scope to split doubles, I have Mak's for that.

 

Lumicon! What's the final outcome with their changing of the recipe for their new filters?, are they back with the old formula? if not, why?

 

I have no idea, my Lumicons are the old ones.




I had a quick grab’n’go session on M42 while the seeing was above average and the transparency held. I used the 90mm Orion Mak with a 25mm SvBony Kellner/0.5x Altair reducer combo giving 25x for an exit pupil of 3.6mm and 1°, 48‘ of TFOV. I predominantly wanted to compare these six filters:

1/ Orion SkyGlow
2/ Baader UHC-S
3/ Astronomik UHC-E
4/ TS Optics UCF-1
5/ Lumicon LF3025 UHC
6/ Orion UltraBlock

Criteria were clarity of nebula cloud, detail, brightness, contrast and ability to easily perceive the four main Trapezium stars. The above list is shown in the order of the particular filter attaining the criteria.

It was close between the first three, with the UHC-S and the SkyGlow showing the most general detail. These were almost identical in performance and after much changing between filters and general zigging and zagging about with filter replacement, the SkyGlow just edged the UHC-S out, with its slightly better contrast.

The Astronomik UHC-E wasn’t bad though and predictably gave a performance somewhere between the broadband filters and the narrowbands. The TS Optics UCF-1 gave the brightest image but as it had no colour (the others displaying varying shades of green) it seemed to lack detail by comparison.

The two narrowbands were surprisingly close to view through, considering the cost difference between them. The Lumicon just edged out the Orion as I thought it showed the Trapezium better. It also transmitted very slightly more detail with a more natural green hue. Both seemed a bit aggressive for a 90mm Mak however, even with a 3.6mm exit pupil.

 

The "new-Lumicon Rep." I interrogated in Cloudy Nights (I have the transcripts) admitted they are now selling a cheaper-to-make version of their filters, as their profits would suffer if they still sold the original. He then went on to claim it was the fault of the outfit that did the actual mixing and cooking of the substrate to apply into the melted glass. But they would offer the filters in the original form - later - for a BIG price increase.

This the corporate-pig stated after he realized he'd been cornered. He probably thought he was getting us in CN to say: "Aww! Sure! We understand!" Guess again - his saying this was in full-on conflict with his previous statements to us.

We walked away/clicked away in disgust!

So I wouldn't touch "Lumicon" anything just on general principles. Phooey!

D.

p.s. - The only known spectra-transsmission chart I've seen - done by an independent firm - showed the "new-Lumicon OIII" as being all-over-the-map, OIII, Comet-Bands, & a touch of UHC and Ha. Bizarre!

 

I don't know what the crack is with Lumicon these days Dave, maybe they priced themselves off the market, who knows what really happened?

The Orion UltraBlock and Astronomik UHC/OIII look like decent enough replacements though.

 

After I "interviewed" Cary from Lumicon (a bunch of us did actually), I wouldn't advise you to touch a Lumicon filter from any new batch - unless you can get them independently analyized. And as they are the only manufacturer of the SWAN (Comet)-Filter, we need these tested.

I wish someone would step-up and buy one for testing. And some other outfit (Astronomik?) start making these.

R & D

 

The Astronomik UHC-E passes some Swan bands, so I think it could be an economical alternative. I thought it helped viewing Comet Johnson anyway.

 

UHC-E & SWAN

 

I'm guessing the Swan frequencies are somewhere here.



It passes a spectral line of carbon apparently, although they aren't too specific which exact spectral line on their page: http://www.astronomik.com/en/visual-filters/uhc-e-filter.html


This is your field really though Dave, I'm an arts graduate lol. Your gonna have to buy a UHC-E and compare it to your old Lumicon Swan filter. The UHC-E can't be worse than the new Swan filter.



The UHC-E has all sorts of other uses.

 

The classic 'SWAN' is used for eliciting better contrast in tails of gaseous comet-tails. And what it brings is done by eliciting views of the carbon & nitrogen lines. This as comets contain cyanogen - C2N2 - which is the simplist cyanide. It exists as a gas at room temperature with a smell of almonds and is very poisonous. Cyanide gas, though not the same as the nazi's made famous (and they got the idea from the Americans who used it in the gas-chamber to execute people with) - Hydrogen Cyanide, or HCN.

Here's the irony: Cyanogen from comets peppered the primordial Earth with this 'Cyanogen' which gave rise to Amino Acids which gave rise to life itself! So we owe our existence to a poison-gas that would kill us if we inhaled it. I call it, and was the originator of, 'Cosmic Cyanide.'

And thus concludes your chemistry lesson for today.....

R & D

p.s. - this little spectra of the SWAN shows you the C2 (carbon) line:

 

The "new-Lumicon Rep." I interrogated in Cloudy Nights (I have the transcripts) admitted they are now selling a cheaper-to-make version of their filters, as their profits would suffer if they still sold the original. He then went on to claim it was the fault of the outfit that did the actual mixing and cooking of the substrate to apply into the melted glass. But they would offer the filters in the original form - later - for a BIG price increase.

After I "interviewed" Cary from Lumicon (a bunch of us did actually), I wouldn't advise you to touch a Lumicon filter from any new batch - unless you can get them independently analyized. And as they are the only manufacturer of the SWAN (Comet)-Filter, we need these tested.

=================

It's a shame.. I don't believe any of that. Almost every serious amateur would pay whatever the price to get the Lumicon UHC anyways and now some guys comes in to talk about marketing strategy. It looks like a few of them will make a bunch on money with the coup and ruin the name perhaps forever. At least these people will be able to buy nice houses and cars, I would bet the production will end up in China eventually...

I think Ill stay clear of the newer Lumicon Dave, you are right it's not safe.

 

I would like to read the transcript too!

 

OK thanks Dave, although I'm not sure if I'm quite all learned up about this yet lol.



So, if the UHC-E passes the C2 line shown in the bottom line curve graph here, it's a pretty good ersatz comet filter?

 

@Dave In Vermont It's a tight race in Alabama, are you looking at the numbers ?

 

The old Lumicon SWAN-Filter is a bit more specific C2N2-lines at 511nm & 514nm bands. I've never heard of anyone comparing the UHC and SWAN in a side-by-side test.

Sounds like a worthy project to me! I'll put it on my burner for future amusements.

I'll go fishing for the CloudyNights transcripts, Neb. I'm in the middle of sifting and re-indexing the 'Miles-O' at present. So I'll keep an extra eye peeled. Simplicity in searches is why I'm doing this re-indexing project. As is, I'm 'flying by the seat-of-my-pants' - so I'm making it easier to locate such things as transcripts. Don't hold your breath - but it shouldn't take too long. Currently I'm assembling my Stellar-Data Files.

Bomb's Away!

R & D

p.s. - Not yet on the Alabama-mess, Neb. I will tune-in shortly though. The polls just closed 16mins. ago.

 

Yes, I remember the 511nm & 514nm bands now. I suppose the UHC-E passes one of them at least.