Stupid Question about Incorporating of a Light Pollution Filter

[gnomus]

Hi

I am considering incorporating a light pollution filter into my imaging train.  I am connecting a modded Canon to a Skywatcher ED80 using a 48mm T-Ring.  

I am thinking about getting one of those Hutech IDAS LPS thingies.  How do I incorporate this into my image train as it currently stands?  Do I need to get a different T-Adapter?

Thanks again in anticipation. 

[wxsatuser]

This what I used, it is screwed onto the reducer and the filter screws into it.

Thats if you have the reducer of course.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adaptors/flo-adapter-for-skywatcher-focal-reducers.html

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I use a CLS -CCD clip filter, but 2" filters, like my UHC could be put anywhere the 48mm thread shows. A reducer would be one option. The field flattener another

[SkySurfer]

You would be better off to use the AStronomik CLS LP clip in filter when using a Canon DSLR, much easier and cheaper that the IDAS

:)

SS

[PeterCPC]

+1 for the CLS clip filter - it helps to keep the sensor clean as well.

Peter

[SkySurfer]

If you do get the clip in filter, and you have an unmodded camera or a canon camera with the usual single filter removed, then you only need the CLS LP filter not the CLS CCD LP which is more expensive, the reason being the difference is one has the IR cut and the cheaper one does not, but there is still an IR cut filter in your canon camera after the mod, the second filter in these cameras is left in for that reason.

Unless of course you have a full spectrum mod and both filters have been removed, then you would need the CCD version.

Hope that helps and congrats to me on an edit button and the option to sell on here....my 250th post. :)

SS

[Rico]

This what I used, it is screwed onto the reducer and the filter screws into it.

Thats if you have the reducer of course.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adaptors/flo-adapter-for-skywatcher-focal-reducers.html

A Baader QuickLock would be needed with this I imagine. 

I wouldn't bother buying a CLS LP filter, I'd get a CCD version instead. Buy once not twice!! 

[gnomus]

This what I used, it is screwed onto the reducer and the filter screws into it.

Thats if you have the reducer of course.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adaptors/flo-adapter-for-skywatcher-focal-reducers.html

Thanks all for the advice.  I have gone with the item suggested by wxsatuser.

[Rico]

Don't forget you need something to go between that and the focusing tube.

[wxsatuser]

Don't forget you need something to go between that and the focusing tube.

He is good to go with the SW reducer....... the whole lot should just push into the ED80s clamp.

It's exactly how I have mine mounted.

[Rico]

There was a thread earlier on, where people complained about the clamp that comes with the ed80 and instead found the Badder click-lock much better. The one that comes with relies on two screws to clamp it in, whereas the baader click-lock has an all round compression fitting. 

[laser_jock99]

-1 for the clip filters.

2" are more versatile- you'll be able to use them with almost any camera.

[Rico]

-1 for the clip filters.

2" are more versatile- you'll be able to use them with almost any camera.

What about with a normal camera lens?

[SkySurfer]

What about with a normal camera lens?

Very good point.......

:)

SS

[wxsatuser]

What about with a normal camera lens?

I have mounted a Hutech 2inch filter in stepdown rings when imaging with my EF 200mm L.

Only problem I found, it dewed up very quickly and could'nt get heat to it efficiently.

With lenses I now always use the clip filter.

[wxsatuser]

There was a thread earlier on, where people complained about the clamp that comes with the ed80 and instead found the Badder click-lock much better. The one that comes with relies on two screws to clamp it in, whereas the baader click-lock has an all round compression fitting. 

I was going to change to the click lock but never got round to it.

With the SW clamp just make sure any adapter is pushed up hard so it's square and do the screws up evenly.

[Rico]

I have mounted a Hutech 2inch filter in stepdown rings when imaging with my EF 200mm L.

Only problem I found, it dewed up very quickly and could'nt get heat to it efficiently.

With lenses I now always use the clip filter.

That's still a really good idea with the step-down rings! I was thinking of using some with my 200mm lens as well. Do they work well? Because from what I can see the rings build up outwards? Some on this form have used bespoke aperture marks.

[gnomus]

I have mounted a Hutech 2inch filter in stepdown rings when imaging with my EF 200mm L.

Only problem I found, it dewed up very quickly and could'nt get heat to it efficiently.

With lenses I now always use the clip filter.

I have no Canon lenses, but I do have a bundle of nice Nikon fixed focal length lenses, and a Nikon to EOS adapter.

If I decide to use the step-down filter option for shooting with my Nikon lenses, am I right in thinking that the Hutech is a 48mm thread filter?

Would not a dew heater (like the one I have for my ED80) work to prevent dew?

[wxsatuser]

I have no Canon lenses, but I do have a bundle of nice Nikon fixed focal length lenses, and a Nikon to EOS adapter.

If I decide to use the step-down filter option for shooting with my Nikon lenses, am I right in thinking that the Hutech is a 48mm thread filter?

Would not a dew heater (like the one I have for my ED80) work to prevent dew?

It is marked 48mm and fits into a 48mm stepdown ring.

BTW my filter is the P2 2inch but is 48mm.

With the hood on it was near impossible to get heat into the filter, then I gave up using the 200mm as I got

weird stars near the edge of field, think the filter as a stopdown was to far out from the lens.

I think the clip filter is best for ease of use although the Hutech is better IMO.

It does'nt matter so much as in the end the images turnout the same after post.

[wxsatuser]

That's still a really good idea with the step-down rings! I was thinking of using some with my 200mm lens as well. Do they work well? Because from what I can see the rings build up outwards? Some on this form have used bespoke aperture marks.

I'm not sure it is a good idea as I got weird stars out near the edges with the 200mm.

The filter sits a fair way from the front element and at the time I thought it was causing the odd stars.

I have'nt had time to experiment as I have concentrated on the widerfield of the 105mm.

If you try would be interested if it works ok for you.