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.

stargazine_ep3_banner.thumb.jpg.5533fb830ae914798f4dbbdd2c8a5853.jpg

Thalestris24

Narrower narrowband?

Recommended Posts

Hi all

Just thought I'd put this out there to try and get some opinions. From time to time I've been imaging in Ha with a 2" Baader 7nm. It's fine except that I still get lp gradients which is very annoying. I'm wondering whether doubling up would likely help? There are the Astrodon 3nm or 5nm but they are fiendishly expensive, especially in the larger size.

Any thoughts/experiences? I'm quite happy with what I can get with the the 7nm - it's just the lp....

Cheers

Louise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A narrower filter will indeed help. The 3nm Astrodons are expensive, but they are very, very good. I think there was another brand doing a 3nm, Chroma? I'm not sure how they compare in price or performance though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnrt said:

A narrower filter will indeed help. The 3nm Astrodons are expensive, but they are very, very good. I think there was another brand doing a 3nm, Chroma? I'm not sure how they compare in price or performance though.

Hmm... What do you think about doubling up on the 7nm? It would be cheaper! Also, I'd hate to fork out on a narrower filter only to find I still had bleed-through... The Chroma filters are still expensive - £775 for a 2" 3nm Ha :shocked: I think I'd rather live with the lp than spend that much!

Thanks though

Louise

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thalestris24 said:

Hmm... What do you think about doubling up on the 7nm? It would be cheaper! Also, I'd hate to fork out on a narrower filter only to find I still had bleed-through... The Chroma filters are still expensive - £775 for a 2" 3nm Ha :shocked: I think I'd rather live with the lp than spend that much!

Thanks though

Louise

Do you mean stacking x2 7nm filters on top of each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 3nm Chromas on one of my rigs and Astrodons on another.  There is no doubt in my mind that they are better than the wider filters.  The Ha especially has a wonderful 'creamy' quality to it, and they require little in the way of post-processing.  I have stopped DBEing them, for example.

The two rigs are different scopes and cameras, but I am just as happy with the Chromas as I am with the Astrodons.  The Chromas are a little cheaper than the Astrodons, but not substantially so.  You can get the Chromas from Bern at Modern Astronomy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Thalestris24 said:

Hmm... What do you think about doubling up on the 7nm? ....

I don't think that would work.  You would still only have a 7nm filter but with 4 surfaces now instead of 2 and reduced light transmission.   (At least I think so.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. How about a Wratten deep red #29 long pass in front of it? This one or the same on AliExpress: if you can wait until after their new year celebrations... HTH.

29_deep_red.jpg

Edited by alacant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost is a killer on these filters and I dithered for a time before getting them.  The 5nm filters are cheaper, Louise and people do go back and forth on 3nm vs 5nm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi. How about a Wratten deep red #29 long pass in front of it? This one or the same on AliExpress: if you can wait until after their new year celebrations... HTH.

No sure how that would help - it's a relatively broadband filter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thalestris24 said:

No sure how that would help

It cuts out all lp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, gnomus said:

I don't think that would work.  You would still only have a 7nm filter but with 4 surfaces now instead of 2 and reduced light transmission.   (At least I think so.)

It was just a thought... As I say, I'm fine with the quality I get from the 7nm and I can't afford 3 or 5nm filters really. I get no lp if I image in infra red but obviously no nebulae or colour either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, alacant said:

It cuts out all lp.

If the narrowband Ha doesn't cut it enough, I don't see how a long pass filter would either. Sure, infra red filters cut it but then no Ha.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One point that is often missed when talking about different narrow band filters is the transmission level of the different makes. a 3nm by two different makers can have widely differing transmissions. Astrodons are quoting around 98% if memory serves whilst Baader ?  Not sure at all. The only real way is to test each filter with a bandpass analyser. I once had a very narrow band UV filter for 285nm that was quoted at 70+%. I got very poor results and was at a loss to explain it whilst testing new equipment. I managed to check it out at another university, on their machines and found its transmission was  around 6%. We got our money back and went elsewhere.

Derek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Physopto said:

One point that is often missed when talking about different narrow band filters is the transmission level of the different makes. a 3nm by two different makers can have widely differing transmissions. Astrodons are quoting around 98% if memory serves whilst Baader ?  Not sure at all. The only real way is to test each filter with a bandpass analyser. I once had a very narrow band UV filter for 285nm that was quoted at 70+%. I got very poor results and was at a loss to explain it whilst testing new equipment. I managed to check it out at another university, on their machines and found its transmission was  around 6%. We got our money back and went elsewhere.

Derek

The Baader 3.5nm are certainly more affordable but can't find a transmission spectrum for them... Anyone tried them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First - I dont know, no experience ! but :-

You raised a very interesting question ! so I went to the Baader site to look for its spec, in particular what the tolerance was on the position of the skirt responses and/or on the width and centre of the passband  No joy so far, perhaps there is some literature that came with it ?

What I am thinking is that if for ex the the two skirt responses began to fall off at a slightly different knee wavelength then the two will combine to give a (very slightly ?) narrower pass band. Significant ? I dont know without their spec ! If there is tolerance on the centre then that also would contribute to a narrowing of the overall response. There is room for hope there maybe because I imagine that 5nm is wide enough to accommodate all the Ha if the 5nm is positioned slightly to one side or other a bit ??

Worth a try !! umm can you borrow one or three  :)

The effect of stacking the out-of-band ressponses would (probably?) be negligible as there is probably very little getting through there anyway.

As for £775 wow, I'd start saving for a new house somewhere else :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SilverAstro said:

First - I dont know, no experience ! but :-

You raised a very interesting question ! so I went to the Baader site to look for its spec, in particular what the tolerance was on the position of the skirt responses and/or on the width and centre of the passband  No joy so far, perhaps there is some literature that came with it ?

What I am thinking is that if for ex the the two skirt responses began to fall off at a slightly different knee wavelength then the two will combine to give a (very slightly ?) narrower pass band. Significant ? I dont know without their spec ! If there is tolerance on the centre then that also would contribute to a narrowing of the overall response. There is room for hope there maybe because I imagine that 5nm is wide enough to accommodate all the Ha if the 5nm is positioned slightly to one side or other a bit ??

Worth a try !! umm can you borrow one or three  :)

The effect of stacking the out-of-band ressponses would (probably?) be negligible as there is probably very little getting through there anyway.

As for £775 wow, I'd start saving for a new house somewhere else :D

 

The Baader 3.5nm are half the price but, as I say, couldn't find any info on the transmittance. As far as I can tell, there aren't any other filters that could help if combined with the Baader 7nm. I'm not sure that a 3nm or 3.5nm filter would help against the lp brightness. I think I'm doomed! Oh well. I suppose I should maybe try harder with the post processing...

Edited by Thalestris24
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the LP is narrow-band like sodium or mercury lighting, it won't reduce the LP any more but it will reduce wideband light such as from the moon and maybe LED lighting.  Personally I haven't any experience of light pollution other than the moon (and aircraft).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Thalestris24 said:

I don't see how a long pass filter would

Cut out the lp before it gets to the Ha. Just an affordable alternative. If it really isn't strong enough, you've another filter to have a go with and you can get great effects...

HTH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stacking 2 should make no difference except to reduce the light throughput, Baaders are apparently rated at 90% at the peak so that would drop to around 80% (0.9 squared).

Any "narrowing" would be to chance - slight difference in where the peak lies or one just happened to have a width of 6.5nm not 7nm.

I see there is a Baader 3.5nm filter around in the Ha: BaaderEnF

Little info on it and not sure how the cost compares to the Astrodon item either.

The Baader 7nm has transmission up at 1150nm, not sure if that could be a problem but doubtful.

One possible problem is that the available curves will be the theoretical ones issued by Baader, what the actual filter does could be another matter. Some time back there was a post where a selection of filters were tested at OIII. Quite fun, one missed the OIII wavelength peak altogether and only caugh some owing to the width. The Baader OIII transmission claims about 87% at peak the measured one in the comparison gave fractionally under 70%.

I assume you have seen: Ast-Baader-Ha

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ronin - that link you provided at the end of your post makes a very strong case for the 3nm Astrodons.

Edited by gnomus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ronin said:

Stacking 2 should make no difference except to reduce the light throughput, Baaders are apparently rated at 90% at the peak so that would drop to around 80% (0.9 squared).

Any "narrowing" would be to chance - slight difference in where the peak lies or one just happened to have a width of 6.5nm not 7nm.

I see there is a Baader 3.5nm filter around in the Ha: BaaderEnF

Little info on it and not sure how the cost compares to the Astrodon item either.

The Baader 7nm has transmission up at 1150nm, not sure if that could be a problem but doubtful.

One possible problem is that the available curves will be the theoretical ones issued by Baader, what the actual filter does could be another matter. Some time back there was a post where a selection of filters were tested at OIII. Quite fun, one missed the OIII wavelength peak altogether and only caugh some owing to the width. The Baader OIII transmission claims about 87% at peak the measured one in the comparison gave fractionally under 70%.

I assume you have seen: Ast-Baader-Ha

Interesting to see the difference between the Baader and Astrodon filters, but since they are different bandwiths it's not really conclusive.

I would love to see a test between Baader 7nm/3.5nm and betwen Astrodon 3nm/Baader 3.5nm

I have a Baader 7nm and i'm thinking about getting a Baader 3.5nm so if i get one i will make sure to compare them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gina said:

If the LP is narrow-band like sodium or mercury lighting, it won't reduce the LP any more but it will reduce wideband light such as from the moon and maybe LED lighting.  Personally I haven't any experience of light pollution other than the moon (and aircraft).

It's yellow street lights, Gina. Nothing seems to suppress the light completely - it always seems to show up whatever I do :( I suppose I'll just have to live with it. You're so fortunate to be out in the country!

Louise

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only echo Steve's comments about the Astrodons, 3nm in my case. Compared with the Baader 7 you get much smaller sars, far more local contrast and a remarkably smooth look. Once given a stretch the images look almost finished. In a back to back comparison during bright moonlight the 7nm data was scrap while the 3nm was perfectly serviceable.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

I can only echo Steve's comments about the Astrodons, 3nm in my case. Compared with the Baader 7 you get much smaller sars, far more local contrast and a remarkably smooth look. Once given a stretch the images look almost finished. In a back to back comparison during bright moonlight the 7nm data was scrap while the 3nm was perfectly serviceable.

Olly

Thanks, Olly, though I'm not really willing to fork out on an Astrodon... Besides, I suspect I'll still have the same problem since the longer exposure required by the 3nm would still let the lp in since it's clearly getting through regardless of the filter bandwidth. Wish I could move to somewhere better but that's not going to happen - unless I win the lotto jackpot, of course!

Louise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Thalestris24 said:

Thanks, Olly, though I'm not really willing to fork out on an Astrodon... Besides, I suspect I'll still have the same problem since the longer exposure required by the 3nm would still let the lp in since it's clearly getting through regardless of the filter bandwidth. Wish I could move to somewhere better but that's not going to happen - unless I win the lotto jackpot, of course!

Louise

The price is horrendous but exposure times are not longer. I remember reading an account of why this is but can't remember the explanation. However, I find I collect a satisfactory 3nm signal in less time than I need for the 7nm.

Olly

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By rgrickert
      Hello
      I am wondering if anyone has a suggestion that might help me
      My imaging set up is an RC reflector with an FLI proline 16803 camera and 50mm Astrodon filters (LRGB + 5nm narrow band)
      I have had a string of issues...everything from my mount had mechanical problems to my telescope had issues with the mirror cell to some family distractions...but at long last I seem to have everything working with the exception of the Astrodon Ha filter.
      Attached are representative 30minute subframes of the horse head and Pacman nebulae in Ha, SII, and OIII.  I get similar results with different objects although for bright, broad spectrum targets like M42, I will get data from the Ha filter (much as the stars shine thru on the HH and Pacman) although even that data does not comport with other imager’s Ha images of those objects. The LRGB performance appears to be normal.  My hypothesis is that this Ha filter is defective, perhaps not centered on 656.3nm
      I have contacted Astrodon and exchanged a couple of emails with Cary Chleborad seeking some help.  At first he claimed there was no issue because with enough manipulation some data could be extracted from the Ha. Later, when confronted with the other narrowband frames and the obvious difference to the Ha, at first he ghosted me, but when I said I would ask other imagers for help, he responded with a new position stating that because of the way the filters are made and their robust quality processes, it is impossible for the filter to be defective and therefore something else must be at issue.  He does not offer a suggestion of what might be the problem, nor is he interested in having me send the filter back for evaluation. Frankly, I’m more than disappointed given the premium I paid for Astrodon filters
      All that aside, and taking Cary’s position at face value, does anyone have an idea of what might cause this behavior other than the filter?  In a perfect world, does anyone live in the Austin, Texas area who would be willing to try my filter one night and see what they get with their equipment?
      The attached link is to the raw, uncalibrated files right off the camera.  I think a simple blink process in PixInsight will show what I’m talking about.
      I’m a little at my wits end, please help!
      https://www.dropbox.com/sh/60mvhzb717hdhnl/AACcAMkQdDsJuk1RU10PXvgja?dl=0
    • By MalVeauX
      Hey all,
      I made an acquisition and processing tutorial a while back (3 years ago? Yikes!) and it is fairly dated in terms of what I'm doing these days. I've been asked for a long time to make a new one showing what I'm doing these days. Specifically how I'm processing a single shot image for both the surface and prominences and how to process them together to show prominences and the surface at once. I've abandoned doing split images and composites and strictly work from one image using layers. Acquisition does not use gamma at all anymore. Nothing terribly fancy, but it's not exactly intuitive so hopefully this new video will illustrate most of the fundamentals to get you started. Instead of an hour, this time it's only 18 minutes. It's real time from start to finish. I'm sorry for the long "waiting periods" where I'm just waiting for the software to finish its routine, it lasts 1.5 minutes and 30 seconds tops typically at first. The first 4 minutes is literally just stacking & alignment in AS!3. I typically will go faster than this, but wanted to slow down enough to try to talk through what I'm doing as I do it. Hopefully you can see each action on the screen. I may have made a few mistakes or said a few incorrect things or terms, forgive me for that, this is not my day job. I really hope it helps folk get more into processing as its not difficult or intimidating when you see a simple process with only a few things that are used. The key is good data to begin with and a good exposure value. Today's data came from a 100mm F10 achromatic refractor and an ASI290MM camera with an HA filter. I used FireCapture to acquire the data with a defocused flat frame. No gamma is used. I target anywhere from 65% to 72% histogram fill. That's it! The processing is fast and simple. I have a few presets that I use, but they are all defaults in Photoshop. A lot of the numbers I use for parameters are based on image scale, so keep that in mind, experiment with your own values. The only preset I use that is not a default is my coloring scheme. I color with levels in Photoshop, and my values are Red: 1.6, Green 0.8, Blue 0.2 (these are mid-point values).
      Processing Tutorial Video (18 minutes):
      https://youtu.be/RJvJEoVS0oU
      RAW (.TIF) files available here to practice on (the same images you will see below as RAW TIFs):
      https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zjeoux7YPZpGjlRGtX6fH7CH2PhB-dzv
      Video for Acquisition, Focus, Flat Calibration and Exposure (20 minutes):
      (Please let me know if any links do not work)
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Results from today using this work flow method.
      Colored:




      B&W:




      SSM data (sampled during 1.5~2 arc-second seeing conditions):

      Equipment for today:
      100mm F10 Frac (Omni XLT 120mm F8.3 masked to 4")
      Baader Red CCD-IR Block Filter (ERF)
      PST etalon + BF10mm
      ASI290MM
      SSM (for fun, no automation)


      Very best,
       
    • By knobby
      Hi all, my second attempt at imaging over multiple nights, captured 60 mins Ha and a couple of 5 mins on Oiii and Sii on Christmas evening, then added more Oii and Sii on the 30th
      Total of 60 mins Ha 25 mins Sii and 30 mins Oiii
      Hubble mapped - SII,Ha,OIII = R,G,B. The Oiii data was very noisy but I'm fairly happy overall, also the ZWO Oiii filter caused a massive ring around Alnitak when stretched !
       
      Comments welcome, I know it needs more data and I will need to learn to be more patient but the year is running out  🙂
       
      Thanks for looking and have a good 2020.
       

    • By B4silio
      I went to my family house in the countryside and was able to take some pictures during xmas eve.

      Total exposure: 6h
      H_Alpha: ~3h (730x15s) --> R, G
      Oxigen III: ~3h (710x15s) --> B, G
      I didn't have a view on Polaris and could not spend too much time drift aligning (it was xmas eve after all :D) hence the short exposures. Moreover I dont have the proper connection rings to put my flattener on my mono camera so all stars off center are a mess :_(.
    • By AstroRuz
      As new condition ultra narrowband 1.25" Baader filter. 3.5nm bandpass for nice small stars.
      Bought and loved it, but using a DSLR again and have no use for this filter.
      £140, can post.







×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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