Which Filter, O-III or Deep Sky?

Hi. I've been thinking of buying a filter to help with deep sky objects in my relatively light-polluted skies. I live near the edge of a town of 8000 or so, about two miles from the local Super Walmart/Home Depot/fast food strip, and 1 mile from the local high school with its athletic field lights.

My question is, if I'm only buying one filter now, would I be better off with a Deep Sky Filter or O-III filter? Many of you probably own both. What are the advantages/disadvantages of one over the other? (Visual use only with 5" f15 refractor.)

Thanks,

Gary

This question got buried in a hurry, so I thought I'd bring it to the front. I'm planning to go with Lumicon filters by the way.

Gary

Actually Gary, I would (and did) get the UHC first. It is helpful on many more objects than the O-III or any other nebula filter for that matter. You will want an O-III too, a little further down the road.
Linton

(see the O-III thread in the Deep Sky forum: http://www.astromart.com/forums/viewpost.asp?forum_post_id=359259&poll_id=&news_id=&page= )

Hi Gary,

I agree with Linton on this one. I would get a UHC, but skip the 0III all together. I think at 5" and f/15 the OIII will darken things up way to much. I myself would not use a OIII filter on a scope that small.

"...if I'm only buying one filter now, would I be better off with a Deep Sky Filter or O-III filter?"

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

Neither IMHO.
Instead consider a UHC. It works well on a far greater number of objects. An O111 can yield more dramatic results, but on fewer targets, and best with more aperture.

Thanks everyone. I think you've talked me into the UHC. Since I made my original post, I have also looked at the review on the other site. It seemed to recommend the UHC for my needs as well.

Gary