Baader Continuum Solar Filter

[Pig]

Does anyone own or have you used the Baader Continuum solar filter ?

I would be very interested to know the level of detail that can be realised

[Steve Ward]

Never bothered with one myself , may indulge when I eventually get a wedge though.

Was advised by Pete Lawrence that the improvement in detail is marginal when using with Baader film , same levels can be achieved with a Wratten #56 Green filter.

Am planning to get the Scopium wedge soon and should get my newly mono-chipped SPC900 back from Andy Ellis tomorrow , the Continuum should go well with this set-up.

Time will tell ... 

[cs1cjc]

I have one and have used it visually in my 70mm refractor along with Baader solar film.  It has been a disappointment as I have not found it to show much if anything more than the solar film on its own, though the image is different - green and a bit too dark.  I shall keep it for a little longer both to try photographically and because it is so good for star testing, showing very clear diffraction rings even in refractors.

[Pig]

Never bothered with one myself , may indulge when I eventually get a wedge though.

Was advised by Pete Lawrence that the improvement in detail is marginal when using with Baader film , same levels can be achieved with a Wratten #56 Green filter.

Am planning to get the Scopium wedge soon and should get my newly mono-chipped SPC900 back from Andy Ellis tomorrow , the Continuum should go well with this set-up.

Time will tell ... 

Thank you Steve I have just been reading up on the Continuum and apparently you need to use an IR filter as well due to a "Red leak" condition attributed with the Continuum

[Pig]

I have one and have used it visually in my 70mm refractor along with Baader solar film.  It has been a disappointment as I have not found it to show much if anything more than the solar film on its own, though the image is different - green and a bit too dark.  I shall keep it for a little longer both to try photographically and because it is so good for star testing, showing very clear diffraction rings even in refractors.

Thank you Chris I think I may give it a miss for the moment  are you aware of a different make of filter that will give enhanced views ?

[Luke]

Thank you Steve I have just been reading up on the Continuum and apparently you need to use an IR filter as well due to a "Red leak" condition attributed with the Continuum

That's interesting.

I recently got a Lunt 1.25 inch Herschel Wedge and was really happy with its performance visually with a Solar Continuum filter. When I imaged, though, the result was a bit disappointing, it was like the seeing suddenly got worse for imaging! I was a bit confused as the visual image was fine.

I recently got the Baader UV/IR cut filter and added this in front of the Solar Continuum and it seems to have made a big difference. Now I am super happy with image capture with the Lunt wedge.

[Pig]

Luke,

I am only really after one for visual use, would I be better off simply buying a Herschel Wedge ( does the wedge simply replace the diagonal ) and using inline with solar film ?

[Pig]

Here is the link to the thread Luke

http://solarchat.natca.net/index.php/en/this-is-solar-chat/6-this-is-solarchat-/3170-about-that-baader-continuum-filter-part-1

[RikM]

This is odd. I love the solar continuum filter used with Baader ND5 film on a 70mm refractor. I think it helps reduce the glaring white disc and brings out contrast in the surface granulation as well as penumbral detail in the sunspots. I almost always use it for visual observing and imaging. I stack it with an IR cut and additional ND0.96 filter for imaging with a mono QHY5.

It is one of three filters that I feel are 'worth it' for visual. A UHC, Oiii and the Baader solar continuum. Makes a neat high contrast moon filter as well.

A Hershel wedge is used instead of Baader film rather than instead of the continuum filter.

[Pig]

Rik,

I have a Lumicon UHC Oiii would this work on the sun ?

I have the full aperture film so I will forget about the wedge, thank you

[RikM]

You could try the Lumicon filters but I find the solar continuum filter better (for enhancing solar observation) than the Astronomic UHC and SkyWatcher Oiii filters that I also have.

A Hershel wedge gives 'the best' white light views, but Baader film is not that far behind. Certainly better than any glass based filter that I have tried. I think wedges are limited to refractors of less than 6" though, so probably not compatible with a C9.25 anyway. £20 for a sheet of Baader film vs. nearly £400 for a 2" wedge is too much of price jump for me at the moment.

[Luke]

I do observe as well but I always use the Continuum filter, so I don't know what the view is like without it! I do know that the wedge + continuum filter gives a sharper view than the ND5 film I used before. How much of that is the wedge and how much is the filter, I have no idea.

Luke,

I am only really after one for visual use, would I be better off simply buying a Herschel Wedge ( does the wedge simply replace the diagonal ) and using inline with solar film ?

[Pig]

You could try the Lumicon filters but I find the solar continuum filter better (for enhancing solar observation) than the Astronomic UHC and SkyWatcher Oiii filters that I also have.

A Hershel wedge gives 'the best' white light views, but Baader film is not that far behind. Certainly better than any glass based filter that I have tried. I think wedges are limited to refractors of less than 6" though, so probably not compatible with a C9.25 anyway. £20 for a sheet of Baader film vs. nearly £400 for a 2" wedge is too much of price jump for me at the moment.

I will think about getting the Continuum. However, some of the reviewers come across as disappointed and its almost as if the Continuum makes it worse !!!

Maybe their expectations are too great

£380 is quite a difference

[Stu]

You could try the Lumicon filters but I find the solar continuum filter better (for enhancing solar observation) than the Astronomic UHC and SkyWatcher Oiii filters that I also have.

A Hershel wedge gives 'the best' white light views, but Baader film is not that far behind. Certainly better than any glass based filter that I have tried. I think wedges are limited to refractors of less than 6" though, so probably not compatible with a C9.25 anyway. £20 for a sheet of Baader film vs. nearly £400 for a 2" wedge is too much of price jump for me at the moment.

The 1.25" Lunt wedge is a lot less than that, around 199 euros plus the filters if I remember correctly.

I use mine with the top polarizing filter mainly. The Continuum does enhance certain things like faculae but I do find it marginal.

Luke, I read a test quite some time ago where they tried out various combinations of filters and I think the continuum plus IR cut came out best for white light imaging so your results confirm this.

Cheers,

Stu

[Pig]

I do observe as well but I always use the Continuum filter, so I don't know what the view is like without it! I do know that the wedge + continuum filter gives a sharper view than the ND5 film I used before. How much of that is the wedge and how much is the filter, I have no idea.

Thank you Luke, it seems the continuum is the way to go

[Merlin66]

I tested various coloured filters, narrowband and CLS etc and found the Continuum to be the best visual solution. A Dark green 2nd.

For visual work you really don't need the IR addition. It gives a marginal improvement while imaging.....

[hunterknox]

In my experience a Continuum is slightly better than a Wratten 58 and a Wratten 58 is slightly better than Baader film alone.

Likewise a Herschel wedge is slightly better than Baader film visually, and a whole heap better for imaging. I guess the question is how much you're happy to pay for incremental gains.

I'm solely a visual solar astronomer these days and would happily buy another Continuum and a Herschel wedge if I had to start again, but I reckon your average astronomer who dabbles in solar would be happier if they spent the money elsewhere.

[Luke]

Ah, this is all very interesting. Thank you, Shaun, you might have helped clear up something that was really puzzling me.

I use two different setups for white light imaging:

• Equinox 120 + Baader Wedge + continuum
• Celestron Onyx 80mm + Lunt wedge + continuum

The Equinox setup was fine for both visual and imaging.

The Onyx setup was fine for visual, but poor for imaging. Once I added the UV/IR cut, the Onyx setup was also fine for imaging.

Why was the Equinox setup okay for imaging without the UV/IR cut?

Having read through the solarchat thread, what I think is happening is that my Equinox 120 copes much better with IR light than my Onyx 80. In the thread, Chris mentions that Schott glass naturally blocks IR light. My Equinox 120 has a Schott glass element...

My little mystery solved?

For visual work you really don't need the IR addition. It gives a marginal improvement while imaging.....

[Pig]

That's excellent news Luke, I am pleased the thread turned out useful to you 

There was another thread I was reading but for some reason I cant find it now and its not in my internet history !!! It was a fuller version of the link I posted

[Qualia]

I am only really after....visual use, would I be better off simply buying a Herschel Wedge ( does the wedge simply replace the diagonal ) and using inline with solar film ?

Like many, Shaun I started out with the Baader Solar Film and for its price to quality ratio, feel that it is an exceptional bit of kit. After a year or so of white light solar viewing, I upgraded to the Lunt Herschel Wedge with ND 3 and Baader variable polarizing filter which came with quite a nice silver box to house it all in.

The wedge itself is a solid and very sturdy diagonal which passes about 5% of the light through towards the eyepiece; the rest goes into the heat sink which in the summer months here in Spain can get quite hot to the touch but there’s nothing to worry about. Needless to say, this mere 5% is still too bright for the eye, so there’s an ND 3 filter built in which reduces the brightness by something like a factor of 1000. Some Lunt wedges don’t have this filter built in so you need to purchase it separately. Again, even with the ND 3 in place the Sun is still too bright for observing, so you use a variable polarising filter fitted in the eyepiece’s barrel to reduce it even further. By rotating the eyepiece you adjust the brightness to the optimum level of the day.

When at the eyepiece, the performance of the Herschel Wedge as compared to the Baader Solar Film is analogues to an upgrade from a standard eyepiece to something like a Delos. The Herschel wedge not only gives a more aesthetically pleasing experience but also brings out detail which is lost with the Baader Solar Film. Needless to say, the views are probably the best visual experiences you’ll get of the Sun in white light. Contrast and detail on faculae, the umbral and penumbral regions are outstanding, sunspots are sharp and crisp and there is granulation across the entire surface.

With the Baader Solar film, I found anything beyond 70x to 80x magnification and the image would often mush whereas with the wedge you can keep on pushing up and beyond 100x and still maintain clarity and sharpness. I find this feature really important when wanting to tweak detail from sunspots or observe penumbral filaments or the gorgeous glare from Light Bridges, and so on.   

When comparing my sketches with white light photos, I find that I have captured the same amount of detail as the camara, limited only by my own ability, skill and time to sketch this as such. I’ve also found that the naked eye views through the wedge are sometimes more pronounced than those of the image. It’s been on more than one occassion, for example, where I’ve observed some faint pore, or tiny blimp of an umbral region that the image hasn’t picked up on. Whether this is due to better seeing conditions or other factors is unknown.

I do not own a Baader Continuum Filter for I feel the asking price does not accord with general feedback. I’ve read dozens of reviews and posts here at SGL, on Cloudy Nights and the forum here in Spain and the consensus seems to be that it either makes a tiny improvement, or is redundent in light of other, cheaper options. In this way, I feel unless one has the ready cash, it is better to wait until the filter crops up on the secondhand market. However, I have experimented with a number of other filters and this is what I have found:

A red filter can help pick up contrast on sunspot regions. A deep blue filter can help with contrast on faculae areas. A light blue and yellow filter together make for a nice combination, through which the Sun’s whiite light features are all clearly observable. And finally, a green filter produces very much the same effect.

The outlay for the Lunt Herschel Wedge was about €200 to which I reasoned would become marginal in a relatively short time. The upgrade is worth it, then, but maybe only to those who are reasonably serious about solar viewing. I spend an average of 20 to 30 hours a month with the Sun, but that 560% price difference when compared with the Baader Solar Film (if I’ve done the math right) might not make a whole lot of sense for one only viewing the Sun sporadically.

Nevertheless, if you have a frac and you’re into your solar viewing the difference in detail over film is so significant that purchasing a Lunt Herschel Wedge almost becomes a necessity. In fact, on purely rhetorical terms, if you didn’t have a frac it might make sense to buy one just to experience what is possible in white light.

Hope this helps a little

[Merlin66]

Just to reinforce - the Baader Herschel wedge is ONLY suitable for safe use on a refractor - NOT recommended for SCT's and other reflectors.

[Luke]

+1 for the amazing value of the film.

Hmmm, would Shaun get better results visually when conditions are good with solar film + large aperture (SCT), or with a compatible refractor + wedge?

And is it worth me trying to view and image with solar film (ND5 fllm for visual and ND3.8 for imaging) on an Edge 8 inch SCT versus wedge and 120mm refractor? Sometimes I'd like to push the resolution a bit more when conditions are good than I feel I can get with the 120.

I was thinking the wedge and refractor would win, but some of the most amazing solar pics I have seen have been done with big reflectors and the film - does that also translate into amazing for visual? My jaw is on the floor with images like this:

http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/soleil/wl/2012/AR1520-7July2012-red.jpg

[Steve Ward]

I think the biggest determining factor is the atmosphere , I've seen some stunning fine detail with the Mak180 and just the film , but only when the seeing has been very good and then only got fleeting moments .

I'll always struggle imaging-wise using the DSLR as opposed to using a fast framerate camera , looking forward to trying the mono webcam though ... 

[Pig]

I have only ever seen is a perfect white disc with sunspots on, the sunspots are very clear and I can magnify what seemed like one sunspot into 5 or 6 overlapping smaller spots,  I have never managed to see any granular effect on the surface 

[Merlin66]

Good seeing, practise in focusing and studying the image and an aperture >100mm should show not only the surface granulation but the brighter areas of plage....