Re: Astronomik UHC filter?
From: Martin Brown (|||newspam|||_at_nezumi.demon.co.uk)
Date: 06/18/04
- Next message: Rod Mollise: "Re: A REALLY NEAT CLOSE-UP OF COMET NEAT FROM KITT PEAK OBSERVATORY (STScI-NN040617)"
- Previous message: Rod Mollise: "Re: RETRACTION - DAVE BARRETT & HIGH POINT SCIENTIFIC"
- In reply to: Lawrence Sayre: "Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Next in thread: Lawrence Sayre: "Re: Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Reply: Lawrence Sayre: "Re: Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 07:47:29 +0100
In message <hPrAc.47287$Oa7.18308@fe1.columbus.rr.com>, Lawrence Sayre
<lsayre@neo.rr.com> writes
>OK, the consensus regarding the Sirius NEB1 filter was that it is less
>than great, so now I'm asking for comments on the Astronomik UHC
>narrowband nebula filter vs. the likes of the Lumicon UHC and the Orion
>Ultrablock.
What sort and level of light pollution are you observing under? The
optimum filter depends on the ambient conditions as well as not being
entirely objective. I prefer the Orion Ultrablock on price and for its
minimal light leak at the red end under HPS lighting YMMV.
Under mercury lighting the result would be different.
Regards,
-- Martin Brown
- Next message: Rod Mollise: "Re: A REALLY NEAT CLOSE-UP OF COMET NEAT FROM KITT PEAK OBSERVATORY (STScI-NN040617)"
- Previous message: Rod Mollise: "Re: RETRACTION - DAVE BARRETT & HIGH POINT SCIENTIFIC"
- In reply to: Lawrence Sayre: "Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Next in thread: Lawrence Sayre: "Re: Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Reply: Lawrence Sayre: "Re: Astronomik UHC filter?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]