Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_lunar_landings.thumb.jpg.b50378d0845690d8a03305a49923eb40.jpg

GTom

Baader vs Astronomik narrowband filters?

Recommended Posts

I see a significant price difference between the Baader and the Astronomik filters, has anyone compared recent H-alpha/beta, O-III, S-II filters from the two brands?

Astronomik claims higher transmission, but like to see if that's true. Question is also if a 10-15% difference in transmission justifies an almost 2x higher price tag? (Looking it the other way around: the price of a 12nm

Astronomik H-a almost buys me a 3.5nm Baader piece, which would allow me to make use of full-moon nights, which, according to Murphy, are usually the only clear nights for multiple months around here).

 

So far from the charts Astronomik seems to be better, however this post says otherwise: behind higher transmission values of the Astronomik filters there is a higher tolerance against undesired parts of the spectrum.

 

Apart Baader & Astronomik: are there <5nm O-III and H-beta filters around? Astronomik offers only a 12nm piece for H-Beta and the Baader is 8.5nm FWHM with around 75% transmission, there is some potential here...

Edited by GTom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For visual I prefer to have the highest % of transmission that I can get - the objects I'm generally trying to see are faint enough as it is !

For imaging this might be much less of an issue.

 

Edited by John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to say, these are for photography = I don't see much issue increaseing the exposure time with 20%.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GTom said:

Forgot to say, these are for photography = I don't see much issue increaseing the exposure time with 20%.

My fault too - I didn't notice that you had posted this in the imaging section :rolleyes2:

I don't come in here much for fear that I will get trapped, catch the imaging bug and spend lots more money ! :shocked:

Edited by John
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, John said:

My fault too - I didn't notice that you had posted this in the imaging section :rolleyes2:

I don't come in here much for fear that I will get trapped, catch the imaging bug and spend lots more money ! :shocked:

Yeah, that's the point here... The price of a smaller OTA lies between the two filter sets in question :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask you for links showing this price disparity of around 2X between the Baader and Astronomik filters you're referencing? You've piqued my curiosity as I just purchased a new OIII-Filter from Astronomik to do a side-by-side comparison with my older Baader OIII.

Price wise, they appear to be the same over here from my perch.

Thanks!

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By AstroRuz
      As new condition ultra narrowband 1.25" Baader filter. 3.5nm bandpass for nice small stars.
      Bought and loved it, but planning on going from mono back to OSC so won't have a use for this narrow a bandpass.
       
      £130



    • By knobby
      Slowly dabbling with narrow band and the processing that is becoming more like art than science 🙂
      I really am enjoying it though, Imaged this in my red zone back garden last night, it's 10 x  300 secs each of Ha Oiii and Sii ( no darks as they looked weird )
      Thanks for looking / feedback.
      DSS - Photoshop levels / curves - gradient xterminator - photoshop channel combine as per @swag72 tutorial - photoshop levels to balance colours to my taste - slight noise and star size reduction  (Noels tools)

    • By Viktorious
      Time for yet another cry for help when it comes to choosing diagonal. I have read the many similar threads and gathered some knowledge (too many to start linking). I have come some way in my process and now that it is coming to final decisions I would like to hear from the experts. Not many of threads I have read end with the OP returning to deliver some review/verdict of his/her final decision. While I wait for response on some thread where I asked about the result, the eagerness in me forces me to write my own thread. Perhaps some of the people asking these questions before can now answer in my thread as experts!

      I have the Nexstar Evolution 9.25 and am currently using the stock diagonal. My eyepieces are the Baader 8-24 mm zoom and the stock 40 mm Plössl. I would also like to upgrade EPs and there I'm looking at something better in 24 mm range, as well some nice low power for more FOV. I'm following threads about EPs and SCTs with great interest for this (on CN). Can say that I'm currently leaning towards the 1.25" 24 mm ES 68° and 2" 36 mm Hyperion aspheric (if going 2" route).

      I'm thinking 2 alternatives (including a budget alternative for one of them). I'm looking at Baader mainly for ClickLock (and expect good optics):
      Baader T2 Zeiss prism with a 1.25" ClickLock EP (T2 part #08) -OR- the 2" prism with 2" ClickLock (splurging that is). The budget alternative would be to get the non-Zeiss T2 prism instead for the 1.25". Worth noting that I would like to get the Celestron f/6.3 Reducer/Corrector. This would be for future purposes of delving into EAA but of course I would use it visually as well (especially if choosing the T2 route). The reasoning for my alternatives:
      Go for the 2" Zeiss prism to theoretically get the best of the best in visual terms. I would make better use of the 46 mm baffle tube opening. Theoretically possible to combine with the R/C thanks to relative short light path (although not necessarily needed with 2" EPs). Downside of going to 2" accessories would be the cost, EPs, filters etc., on top of diagonal. Would not be able to spend all these costs at once. Cheaper route with T2 prism (especially the non-Zeiss), not only diagonal but also the other accessories. Cost of the R/C would be comparable to e.g. the 36 mm aspheric and give similar power and FOV with the 24 mm ES, i.e. the 24 mm would act as both. Extra plus is the ClickLock clamp for 1.25" with built in fine focusing not involving the mirror. Downside of knowing that not all light coming out of baffle tube is used. To get the wide FOV (24 mm + R/C) I'm adding glass to the optical train (theoretically not a good thing). I'm leaning towards the T2 as it would be a cheaper diagonal and for EPs I would only need the 24 mm and then the reducer instead of a 30-40 mm, so saving the expense of one EP. Then I would already have the reducer for continuing into EAA. The questions I hope the experts here can help with:
      The old reducer vs 2" diagonal question. With R/C and the 24 mm I can get roughly the same mag and FOV as e.g. the 36 mm Hyperion (technically 38 mm vs 36 mm and 68° vs 72°). Also reading good things about the ES 68° and with R/C the EP should behave the same. Am I missing something here? The logics say that the I would lose some contrast with the R/C (not using full opening + adding elements), correct? Possibly flatter fields though (not important now, hopefully the EP threads might tell soon enough). The Zeiss vs non-Zeiss T2? Big differences? I have read a few posts on this so most to get some updated views here (have read that Baader has changed some things over the years). Using the R/C (f/6.3) with these prisms. I know f/7 is mentioned as "the limit" but also remember BillP's test where he was happy down to f/6 with the prisms (in 2014 at least). Perhaps most important: have I missed some other obvious alternative here? Maybe I have forgotten some question here but perhaps for the best as I assume those who have gotten this far are tired of reading now. Thanks for getting here though!

      Thanks,
      Viktor
    • By tooth_dr
      I scrapped all the Oiii and Sii data I previously took during a full moon (about 15 hours worth) and retook it all when the moon was a bit smaller at 76%.  Ha was taken during 98% and 67% moon.  All the lights were taken on the following nights: 12th, 19th and 20th September 2019.
      Integration times, all in 600s subs unbinned:
      Ha = 28.33 hours
      Oiii= = 5.67 hours
      Sii = 5.67 hours
       
      The Ha data is really nice, and unsurprisingly the Oiii and Sii is not as strong (or nice).
      I'm missing that (vital) step in my processing routine of getting the Sii and Oiii properly stretched to match the Ha, before combining.  I dont really know how to deal with the weaker data properly.  Any pointers would be appreciated.
      What I do currently:
      All the data is loaded into APP into separate channels/sessions.
      The data is stacked and registered against the best Ha sub
      This produces individual stacks of Ha, Sii and Oiii that are all registered
      Each channel is processed with DPP in APP and then saved as a 16bit TIFF
      Each is opened in PS
      Stars removed with AA and any remnants removed and tidied up
      I then open a blank RGB document in PS
      I paste Ha into Green, Sii into Red and Oiii into Blue
      Adjust the selective colour settings to get 'Hubble palette'
      Adjust levels, curves, saturation until looks ok
      All the Ha Sii Oiii data is then combined together in a single 'super' stack in APP using quality weighted algorithm to create a 'luminance'
      That luminance layer is adjusted using levels, curves, and NC tools such as local contrast enhancement and deep space noise reduction (using masks to apply as required)
      The luminance is pasted onto the above colour layer, and incrementally added using gaussian blur
      Cropped and saved.
       
       
      Here it is anyway   I haven't intended on any more exposure time for this one, but will consider it, if the expert opinion dictates otherwise!
       
      CS
      Adam
       


    • By Ewan
      Not many chances of Solar Imaging this year so far but caught this one.
      AR2741 from the 12th late afternoon
      AZEQ6-GT
      152mm Technosky Refractor @ f5.9
      135mm Baader D-ERF
      Daystar Quark Chromosphere + Eliminator
      PG IMX174
      5862 Frames, 4Ms 30 second capture @ 195Fps 1024 x 768 Mono16
      Best 45% Frames stacked in AS!3, ImPPG then tweaked in PS
      Atb


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.