Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Astronomik CLS Light Pollution Clip Filter for Canon Cameras

Beyond_Vision

Recommended Posts

Beyond_Vision

Beyond_Vision

Posted
Posted

This is a before the lens filter system designed for Canon DSLR such as the 300D, 350D, 400D and 40D etc. For full details of what cameras are compatible and how it is fitted see the web page http://www.astronomik.com/english/eng_eos_filter_clip_system.html.

This rear of the lens system is a great idea as it will allow you to use the same light pollution filter for lenses that have different size apertures. Before this system was available a typical 77mm front of lens filter costed around £275 if you had other lenses of different sizes then you would have to buy another filter therefore you may end up spending over £500 on filters. This new filter costs just £99. The only caveat is that it is not compatible with Canon EF-S lenses due to the rear of the lens assembly protruding into the camera body and clashing with the filter. My Tokina 28-70mm EF lens and my two APS-c format lenses from Tamron and Sigma don't have this rear protrusion and therefore are compatible.

The following shots were taken with and without the filter fitted. Both shots were a single 18 minute exposure at ISO400 F5.6. Taken with a Canon 400D with a Sigma EX DC 10-20mm lens.

The left hand images are with filter and the right hand ones without. I have shown the unprocessed pictures first followed by a set which have has a soft colour gradient removal in Photoshop CS Noel Carboni Tools. The final shots are fully processed versions which give you and idea of what you can do with software to get rid of light pollution given a diffrent starting point.

4392_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

4393_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

4394_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

From these pictures you can see that the light pollution does get dramatically reduced by software processing only but cannot really compete with filtering beforehand. The Rosette and M42 amongst other things stands out much better in the filtered image.

I am really pleased with the filter and it has now opened a lot of opportunities for taking picture from my light polluted back garden which I would have not considered before hand. There will also be a Ha filter and OIII and SII filter available. Another exciting development is the use of a UV/IR filter that will restore the normal white balance for day time photography when the sensors IR filter is replaced with a clear window. This will allow you to increase the Ha response of the camera by taking out the clip IR/UV filter for astro use and fitting it back in for daytime use.

Regards

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Beyond_Vision

Beyond_Vision

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Very interesting Kevin, shame it is not compatible with EF-s lenses as this is what I will be getting initially.

Also none of the images are showing above!

If you can I would avoid buying EF-S lenses as they are not compatible with this system and also if you ever upgrade to a full format sensor camera you will still be able to use EF lenses. You could use third party lenses that are for the APS-c size chip that do not protrude into the camera body. I was reasonably lucky in that 3 out of my 4 lenses will be compatible. I will post some pictures of the rear of the EF-S 18-55mm lens in comparison to my others so that you can see the difference.

Regards

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beyond_Vision

Beyond_Vision

Posted
  • Author
Posted

As promised heres a shot of the rear of a stock Canon 18-55mm EF-s lens and a Tamron Di II 70-200mm APS-c Digital Only lens. The Canon lens on the left has a protrusion which is grey in colour at the rear of the lens. This is taller than the contact area and will clash with the clip filter. The Tamron lens rear does not protrude above the contact area.

4427_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

4428_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

Hope this helps but please check carefully to see if your lens is compatible as the filter could be damaged if the wrong type of lens is used.

Regards

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

Without a "lens" in place it migh be worth putting a small piece of tape across the filter and the camera housing.. as ocassionaly the clip-ins can fall out.. especially if they have been taken in and out a few times..

The other option is give the two sprung sections a slight tweak with a thin blade...

Peter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simon84

simon84

Posted
Posted

Nice to see what that filter can achieve. I've just got one myself so will hopefully be out there with it soon.

I'm putting the Baader replacement filter in my camera when I perform the mod and am now looking for the curves for both the baader replacement filter and the astronomik cls ccd filter, if they uv/ir cutoff levels are the same then it looks like you would be able to use the cheaper CLS filter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tooth_dr

tooth_dr

Posted
Posted

AFAIK you can use the cheaper CLS filter with the 1000d regardless of if you choose to do the filter replacement or removal only, since the Baader (and the 2nd internal Canon filter) block UV and IR in the same region as the CLS-CCD filter. HTH to save you some monies ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simon84

simon84

Posted
Posted

I found the curves for both the Baader replacement filter and the Astronomik CLS CCD filter. The Baader starts cutting at 400nm whereas the CLS CCD cuts at 440nm. They both perform more or less the same at the other end of the spectrum.

Still excellent results looking at the above images, looking forward to getting mine out under the stars.

post-17668-133877474705_thumb.jpg

post-17668-133877474712_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simon84

simon84

Posted
Posted

I found this which shows that a Canon cutoff filter is fairly poor compared to the astro filters that are available.

The blue line shows the Canon filter.

Sorry for going away from the main thread but its interesting to see how the other filters in the mix compare to the UV/IR cutoff ability of the CLS CCD.

post-17668-133877474716_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MickyWay

MickyWay

Posted
Posted

I use the Astronomik CLS filter which filters out the orange glow from mercury vapour and sodium vapour type street lights very well. Unfortunately, this type of filter is not so effective with the new 'white lights' the councils are fitting now. The spectrum is so broad that selective filters, like Ha, are much more effective.

Seems you just can't win sometimes!

Excellent review Kevin, very informative, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simon84

simon84

Posted
Posted

Quite lucky here, all our lights are the old school type lights so I'm hoping to get some good use from my CLS filter, if they change the lights to the new white bulbs I think I might have to send the local council a bill for a new set of filters.... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tooth_dr

tooth_dr

Posted
Posted
I found this which shows that a Canon cutoff filter is fairly poor compared to the astro filters that are available.

The blue line shows the Canon filter.

Sorry for going away from the main thread but its interesting to see how the other filters in the mix compare to the UV/IR cutoff ability of the CLS CCD.

Yes and of course that is the filter you remove from your 1000d when doing the mod! I'd love to see a graph of the other filter which is supposedly very good indeed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
bamus

bamus

Posted
Posted

after few months of using eos clip filter, I have to say I am disappointed. I was expecting to see huge difference, but in fact I can not see any difference at all.

here is my yesterdays m33 with filter (on the right) and without (on the left). I am able to get same, or even more signal on pictures without filter with much less hassle as RGB channels are much closer together comparing to the ones with filter (pictures 5 minutes exp. iso 400)

post-22553-133877681245_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.