Televue Planetary Filter Feedback?

[bomberbaz]

I think you may be right, Luke. The brain sees very much what it knows should be there. This is also why taking your time on a planet to tease out the detail is so important. I have often noticed that after one or two of those fleeting moments of good seeing, the image seems to be better. Once the brain has picked something up, it needs only a hint to keep seeing it, it seems. I might try the UHC filter I have first, to see if I can duplicate your results, before forking out for this TV filter. The filter-switch diagonal means I can change filters in and out of he light path quickly, so I should be able to make rapid comparisons.

I was intrigued by the filter switch diagonal mention but they are a tad pricey https://www.denkmeier.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=75 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

It is pricey, mine was second-hand, which made a big difference. It is an excellent tool for hunting down small planetary nebulae.

[John]

Interesting observation from Luke on the TV planetary filter. I wonder if one of the factors involved was that Luke's eye became "trained" in picking out the subtle planetary details while the filter was used, with the filter perhaps helping with that adjustment ?

A bit like stabilisers on a bike perhaps ?

I've experienced something like that when viewing the same object with 2 scopes of varying aperture on the same mount. To start with the larger aperture shows more details but then you find when you go back to the smaller aperture you can in fact see the same details, perhaps not quite as distinctly and not on the same image scale, but they are there.

[rwilkey]

Some great experiences of the TV Planetary filter expressed here, I know mine has helped me a great deal with viewing and training ny eye to see the subtle details of Jupiter, and consider the filter to be one of my best purchases (cost me £124 with import duties from AgenaAstro, the only retailer at the time of my purchase).

[bond19]

Here's my feedback on the Tele Vue Planetary Filter

Pros

1. It does give more detail on the belts, albeit very minor

4. Precision fit and robust, well made filter

Cons

2. Hard to find focus

3. Seems to 'soften' the image somewhat

3. Wraps the image in a garish 'bubble gum' pink hue (not the 'true' photo colours I had read about)

Overall, I'm still trying to decide if I like this filter. I did try a cheap moon filter instead and while the contrast was dulled too much , it did seem to show the same level of detail and a more pleasing and true colour.

I was hoping for a more positive experience, especially considering the high cost 

This was @x175 with average/good seeing

[bond19]

Could I have received the wrong filter mistakenly? I know TV do two Mars filters. It does have printed 'Planetary Filter' on the barrel. Can anyone comment who maybe has both?

[bond19]

Here's a photo from the website. Once picture shows the bubble gum pink I clearly see when using this filter. The other photos does not show this? 

[bond19]

Opp. here is the pic

[Stu]

I have both but am still waiting for a decent chance to use them. Will report back when I finally do!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bomberbaz]

Opp. here is the pic

Here is the description of the filters from SCSastro site so if your says planetary I reckon you have the right one.

Did you use the televue, how does the planet normally look without filter?. I would assume no CA as a TV scope but I am not familiar with this model.

• Tele Vue Mars Type A BMA-0125:
• Tele Vue Mars Type B BMB-0125:
• Tele Vue Planetary Filter BPL-0125:

[bond19]

Yep, I've spoken to the vendor and it is the correct filter (been using it with my TV 102 & Ethos 8mm plus 1.6 barlow). Jupiter looks super sharp and with good details without the filter, just to bright so the fainter stuff is washed out. I'm returning the filter (the vendor did say slight pink cast is common, but mine looks like bubble gum). Anyway on recommendation I'm trying a Orion variable polariser filter. The moon filter I tried today seems to be just as good as the TV Planetary filter and a MUCH more natural colour  (£5 v £125) but just too dark. Here's hoping the variable filter will give pleasing views. 

I was able to spot (for the first time ever BTW) the GRS this morning visually, both with and without the filter (albeit I could only just notice it). Looked more like a very small persistent floater lol. But I stumbled upon a Jupiter capture taken this morning (see attached capture, NOT mine I hasten to add) which was posted on FaceBook this morning, and the GRS is exactly where I perceived it to be.

Of course views are subjective and everyone else here is more than pleased with their TV Planetary filter, so either I had a bad egg or it just didn't suit my eyes.

[bomberbaz]

Never tried one iain but I find a uhc is great on Jupiter

interesting the use of UHC and never though about this. So just did a little daytime playing around to see what conclusions I could draw and I am surprised at the UHC-S findings. However as I suspected when I had a look around just now outside into daylight everything had turned very green using the UHC (skywatcher brand). The browns are standing out stronger but you cant get from the fact there is a strong green tint to everything.

So I tried the Baader UHC-S as well which has a broader bandpass than the UHC  and the results were quite striking. Looking out from my house into the garden there is only a mild changing of a blue tint over into the blue spectrum but the browns and reds stand out really strongly with no change of colour, in fact the colours are stronger. The garage in constructed of light and dark brown bricks, these darker ones are much more prominent and the reds on the fast fading flowers seem to really stand out much stronger, a lot jumps out.

Yes this is a daylight test in a garden so its not conclusive by any means so I am going to do a test tonight assuming the clouds play ball and will get back to you. I will be trying both UHC filters, a variable polarising and Neodymium 0.9. Also if there is time a blue and yellow filter too. trouble is I will be on my own and a 2nd set of eyes would be good but lets see how the initial trial gets on.

Steve 

[jetstream]

I find viewing Jupiter at dusk or dawn to be beneficial and at these times my Baader single polarizer really enhances contrast. It does change the band color to dark, enhancing the white spots, ovals, GRS etc. I like light, high cloud up there too, natures great filter and when this coincides with good seeing, high mag brings everything out nicely.

I am intrigued by this TV filter however.....

[jetstream]

interesting the use of UHC and never though about this. So just did a little daytime playing around to see what conclusions I could draw and I am surprised at the UHC-S findings. However as I suspected when I had a look around just now outside into daylight everything had turned very green using the UHC (skywatcher brand). The browns are standing out stronger but you cant get from the fact there is a strong green tint to everything.

So I tried the Baader UHC-S as well which has a broader bandpass than the UHC  and the results were quite striking. Looking out from my house into the garden there is only a mild changing of a blue tint over into the blue spectrum but the browns and reds stand out really strongly with no change of colour, in fact the colours are stronger. The garage in constructed of light and dark brown bricks, these darker ones are much more prominent and the reds on the fast fading flowers seem to really stand out much stronger, a lot jumps out.

Yes this is a daylight test in a garden so its not conclusive by any means so I am going to do a test tonight assuming the clouds play ball and will get back to you. I will be trying both UHC filters, a variable polarising and Neodymium 0.9. Also if there is time a blue and yellow filter too. trouble is I will be on my own and a 2nd set of eyes would be good but lets see how the initial trial gets on.

Steve 

Nicks trick! Cotterless45 knows again.....

[faulksy]

I was viewing Jupiter on Monday night at 320x ( smallest fl ep I have) need to get something better, anyway detail was amazing the cloud bands were realy rich and dark and there was a lovely barge visible, popped in the uhc and it definitely improved contrast and give a more photo like view

[GavStar]

Interesting that I'm not the only person a bit disappointed with this filter, I guess it does vary from person to person. But I will keep perservering for now with it comparing it to the baader moon and Skyglow.

[Moonshane]

Like eyepieces, scopes, finders, mounts and most other bits of kit, filters split views of all astronomers.

[jetstream]

I was viewing Jupiter on Monday night at 320x ( smallest fl ep I have) need to get something better, anyway detail was amazing the cloud bands were realy rich and dark and there was a lovely barge visible, popped in the uhc and it definitely improved contrast and give a more photo like view

LZ LZ LZ !!!   in reference to "smallest fl ep I have". Seriously Mike, try one on the planets.

[faulksy]

Hi gerry, it was my 5mm bgo, on Jupiter need something like a ethos or pentax

[jetstream]

Hi gerry, it was my 5mm bgo, on Jupiter need something like a ethos or pentax

The Pentax, TV will be great, but the Leica zoom will most likely out compete them for planetary. See if you can borrow one to try, with a VIP 2x barlow, just so you know if you like it. They really do work well. If I was nearby you could take mine for a spin...

[John]

Jupiter is where TV plossls come in I feel. Their slight "tint" that is often mentioned seems to work wonders on Jupiter IMHO. Almost as if it's a built in planetary filtering. Interestingly University Optics actually tried this a few years back with special versions of their "Volcano top" orthos which had an added filtering layer to the coating. They seem to be prized eyepieces in the USA although rarely found over here in the UK.

[alan potts]

Gerry,

Big claim to make about a zoom out gunning a fixed focal length eyepiece, I'm sure it is of the highest quality but something I would need to see with my own eyes, any zoom always has compromises in the design somewhere in the range even if it a a Leica.

Sorry I have gone of track.

Alan

[bomberbaz]

Ok as mentioned earlier on in this thread before it digressed  , I don't have a TV filter but I do have a Baader UHC-S which if my reading of what the TV filter does, it might not be that different. In case anyone missed my earlier post on here when I did a daylight test on colours, it made darker shades as well as browns and reds really stand out and I think that has got to be a boost to any viewing of our largest solar system planet.

Anyway went to try it last night but forgot the trees mask where it is early on, so I don't get to see it until 11.30 earliest and I was really tired from a long trip the day before. So just for a bit of a try of the filter I gave it a shot on the moon to see how that would work double up with my Neodymium to cut down the brightness of (almost full of course) the moon and I was very impressed with the detail it brought out, especially on the mares. And the meteor blast lines out of Archimedes stood out far better than I had seen before by some margin, definitely a big improvement that just the Neodymium filter alone. 

I am hoping to get out to a darker site later this month on a decent night when the moon is waning. Jupiter will be top of the list to try it out and see how well the Baader performs with it. Pity I dont have the TV option to compare it to but it will still be good to see what the findings are. 

Steve

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I am itching to test my UHC filter on Jupiter, but the skies are solid grey, weeks on end

[bomberbaz]

I am itching to test my UHC filter on Jupiter, but the skies are solid grey, weeks on end

what make of uhc is it please  michael ?