2" Eyepiece Filters

I am looking for some advice on what 2" filters to use with my 12" F/5 dob.

For the small range of e/p's that I have I would like to get filters for planetary and deepsky (nebulas) viewing. I have been looking at some sites for info but I've ended up more unsure of my needs. All these colours and types what are they for ?.
There is some details at www.astrobuffet.com but their website looks a bit dodgy.
Celestron do a "kit" but it also contains e/p's which I don't want.
Any help/advice is much appreciated.

I only have one 2" filter and its a light pollutuion filter.
Would you really be using 2 " wide angle eyepieces on a F5 dob for the planets??
For the planets, I'd use simple 1.25 inch colour filter at high mag, the meade/celestron filter kits are seperately.
I do find a yellow filter deduces the glare of Jupiter and Saturn, while a red oneworks well on Mars, but they dont magically transform the image, the mike almost invisible details slightly more visible.
Most light pollution/O3 filters do come in 2 " varieties, if you have a SCT, you can get an adapter to make a 2 " filter work for prime focus photography, very handy.

Thanks Dave.
I have a 7mm 2" e.p which I got for Planetary observing so the idea of having filters for it would be sensible.
I have an ETX125 with a number of 4000 plossls and a 1.25"/2" adaptor but I hate the chopping and changing ep's with the dob.

It appears easy enough to get 1.25" filters but I'm still not knowledgable enough to know what is what when it comes to filters.

regards
Johnno

John,
You can get 3 types of filters:
Planetary
Deep Sky
Light Pollution

In terms of planets, they are usually sold by Wratten no. which is a number representating an exact colour. Have a look at this website which may help to explain a little: www.lumicon.com/filterspec.htm
I have used colour filters on the planets and I have come to the conclusion that I prefer to observe without them.
Firstly, as Dave said, they do not magically alter the image. They subtly change the contrast as opposed to dramatically revealing loads more detail.
Secondly, the darker filters tend to make more dramatic changes in the initial appearance of the planet but you then tend to lose alot of detail as a result. Example: using a dark green filter will help improve the contrast of the equatorial cloud bands on Jupiter. However, because it's such a strong dark colour, you mightn't see any detail in the bands themselves as a result. Lighter colours tend to make more subtle changes and tend to work better.
Thirdly, the planet changes colour completely. The question is, do you want Jupiter to look completely green/magenta or other? Personally, I prefer it in it's original colour.
Finally, it's a bit more hassel at the eyepiece, screwing filters in and out. Last thing you want is to be out in the middle of the Curragh and everyone looking for a lost filter!
Don't get me wrong, it's interesting to try them out just to experience what they are like. However, personally, I found that if I spent time at the eyepiece, I could see more detail without them.

As for deep sky, different story. I use a UHC filter and find it great. It's made the difference between seeing nebulae and not. However, like all deep sky filters it's only of use on nebulae - no use on galaxys or clusters. Still well worth buying though in my opinion. UHC btw stands for Ultra High Contrast and is basically a combination of an OIII and a Hydrogen Beta filter. It's for this reason that I bought it. Have a read of this: www.visualdeepsky.org/netastrocatalog-announce/msg01734.html

As for light pollution filters, they filter out the light emitted at the same wavelengths as streetlights. Different types apparenty from what i understand Don't know much more about them as I've never used them.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the info Michael.
At last I'm getting somewhere.
The UHC certainly seems to be the popular choice.
It's spec looks the best overall for visual deepsky observing.
Now off to try and buy one somewhere.
Regards
Johnno