light pollution filters

[Ger]

hi there

I'm sure this question has been asked a million times, can somebody please recommend a good light pollution filter for a sky watcher 1145p. just looking to get one to try and improve my view in my garden 

 

thank you

ger 

[DavidJM]

I'm in same boat, haven't took the plunge yet ,(cash strapped) but been reliably informed that Astronomik UHC is a safe bet at a reasonable price, more about nebulas I think though

Updated

Def not a LP filter, see John's post!

 

[Ger]

thanks David, I will look into this brand to see what I can come up with 

[John]

The Astronomik UHC is a really excellent narrowband filter but not really an LP filter. I've tried a few LP filters and don't find that they make much difference in all honesty. With todays LP sources changing, the traditional LP type filters don't seem to really be able to cope and broadband filters, eg: the Orion Skyglow, don't make much difference either.

UHC and O-III filters will make a noticable difference to the views of nebulae. For galaxies and clusters the solution is to get as far from the LP as possible. Dark skies are the best "filter" for those

You might want to "test the water" with a less expensive but still decent UHC filter such as the Explore Scientific UHC and see how you get on with that ?

The 1st such filter that I owned was the Baader UHC-S. This a narrowband filter but has a relatively generous band pass width and is aimed at smaller aperture scopes. With a 100mm refractor this filter showed me the Veil Nebula for the 1st time which I was rather chuffed about. I've since owned an used filters such as the Telescope Services UHC, the Orion Ultrablock (another UHC type) and quite a few others and find them great tools for enhancing the views of nebulae.

[LightBucket]

The Astronomik CLS light pollution filter is excellent, and so is the IDAS P2, both are quite pricey.

The UHC is not a LP filter but just ups the contrast of images so gives a bit more detail, does not really cut LP

 

[Ger]

1 hour ago, John said:

The Astronomik UHC is a really excellent narrowband filter but not really an LP filter. I've tried a few LP filters and don't find that they make much difference in all honesty. With todays LP sources changing, the traditional LP type filters don't seem to really be able to cope and broadband filters, eg: the Orion Skyglow, don't make much difference either.

UHC and O-III filters will make a noticable difference to the views of nebulae. For galaxies and clusters the solution is to get as far from the LP as possible. Dark skies are the best "filter" for those

You might want to "test the water" with a less expensive but still decent UHC filter such as the Explore Scientific UHC and see how you get on with that ?

The 1st such filter that I owned was the Baader UHC-S. This a narrowband filter but has a relatively generous band pass width and is aimed at smaller aperture scopes. With a 100mm refractor this filter showed me the Veil Nebula for the 1st time which I was rather chuffed about. I've since owned an used filters such as the Telescope Services UHC, the Orion Ultrablock (another UHC type) and quite a few others and find them great tools for enhancing the views of nebulae.

John

thank you for your detailed response, much appreciated

 

ger 

 

[Ger]

1 hour ago, LightBucket said:

The Astronomik CLS light pollution filter is excellent, and so is the IDAS P2, both are quite pricey.

The UHC is not a LP filter but just ups the contrast of images so gives a bit more detail, does not really cut LP

 

thank you lightbucket, I will take a look at this option too,

regards 

ger 

[John]

14 minutes ago, Ger said:

John

thank you for your detailed response, much appreciated

 

ger 

 

No problem. Do some research though before committing. Some of the filters mentioned do quite different things and at very different prices. The IDAS P2 is an excellent imaging filter as I understand it but £179 for the 1.25" version - probably more than your scope cost !

None of them are magic bullets though - getting the scope somewhere darker will help more !

 

 

 

[alan potts]

Hi, I do have a LP filter by Lumicon however they called it a deepsky filter and I had read an article on using them to bring out the finer detail in galaxies which I personally feels works to some degree. As an LP filter I was of the opinion that they work best on the orange type (sodium) of lighting that was once all over, now things have changed I am not sure that they would work very well, I could be wrong though.

[25585]

1 hour ago, LightBucket said:

The Astronomik CLS light pollution filter is excellent, and so is the IDAS P2, both are quite pricey.

The UHC is not a LP filter but just ups the contrast of images so gives a bit more detail, does not really cut LP

 

What do the first 2 do please, and are they specialised for certain types of emissions. 

I have a Lumicon UHC and OIII, using only the latter. The UHC appears to be a "lite" version to OIII. 

As 2 inch eps in my collection now, are the Baaders actually better than ES, or just brand up-priced?

LP where I live has changed from the gentle deep amber low pressure sodium to bright white glaring LED. Makes night driving unpleasant. 

[sloz1664]

Although I am an imager and use the IDAS LP filters on my set ups I have found the transition from sodium to led lighting has been very good the skies are darker and my images are a lot easier to process. I remember a while back Steve Richards (steppenwolf) penned a review on varoius LP filters and the cheaper S/W LP filter faired very well against the IDAS filters.

Steve

[LightBucket]

13 minutes ago, 25585 said:

What do the first 2 do please, and are they specialised for certain types of emissions. 

I have a Lumicon UHC and OIII, using only the latter. The UHC appears to be a "lite" version to OIII. 

As 2 inch eps in my collection now, are the Baaders actually better than ES, or just brand up-priced?

LP where I live has changed from the gentle deep amber low pressure sodium to bright white glaring LED. Makes night driving unpleasant. 

Here is the chart for the Astronomik CLS filter, they cut out all the emissions for most street lighting plus other light pollution, but not sure how they fare against the newer LED streetlights...

 

[LightBucket]

And the IDAS LP filter 

[LightBucket]

This is also quite interesting showing comparisons of blocked colour..

[DavidJM]

2 hours ago, John said:

The Astronomik UHC is a really excellent narrowband filter but not really an LP filter. I've tried a few LP filters and don't find that they make much difference in all honesty. With todays LP sources changing, the traditional LP type filters don't seem to really be able to cope and broadband filters, eg: the Orion Skyglow, don't make much difference either.

UHC and O-III filters will make a noticable difference to the views of nebulae. For galaxies and clusters the solution is to get as far from the LP as possible. Dark skies are the best "filter" for those

You might want to "test the water" with a less expensive but still decent UHC filter such as the Explore Scientific UHC and see how you get on with that ?

The 1st such filter that I owned was the Baader UHC-S. This a narrowband filter but has a relatively generous band pass width and is aimed at smaller aperture scopes. With a 100mm refractor this filter showed me the Veil Nebula for the 1st time which I was rather chuffed about. I've since owned an used filters such as the Telescope Services UHC, the Orion Ultrablock (another UHC type) and quite a few others and find them great tools for enhancing the views of nebulae.

Thanks John, knew it was more about nebulae, as always great advice!

[alanjgreen]

When I lived in the "town", I used a Baader Neodymium Filter with some success. It was effective on "moon glow" and certain older streetlights. I ended up having it permanently mounted to the inside of my 2" diagonal as I was so pleased with it.

I also found it a useful filter to bring out finer details on "planets", I had good results with both Mars & Jupiter using this filter.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/light-pollution-reduction/baader-neodymium-filter.html

Alan

 

[Louis D]

If funds are limited, you can give them a try for cheap with an ebay light pollution filter from China.  I have the 1.25" and 2" Zhumell Moon & Skyglow versions I bought for about $20 each when they were on clearance.  They work to cut light pollution enough for me to detect comets low in my western sky above a nearby city which would be completely invisible otherwise.  I don't use them for much else, though.  The do work as contrast enhancing planetary filters as well.  Not great, but not bad, either.

[Ger]

12 hours ago, alan potts said:

Hi, I do have a LP filter by Lumicon however they called it a deepsky filter and I had read an article on using them to bring out the finer detail in galaxies which I personally feels works to some degree. As an LP filter I was of the opinion that they work best on the orange type (sodium) of lighting that was once all over, now things have changed I am not sure that they would work very well, I could be wrong though.

thank you Alan 

[Ger]

4 hours ago, alanjgreen said:

When I lived in the "town", I used a Baader Neodymium Filter with some success. It was effective on "moon glow" and certain older streetlights. I ended up having it permanently mounted to the inside of my 2" diagonal as I was so pleased with it.

I also found it a useful filter to bring out finer details on "planets", I had good results with both Mars & Jupiter using this filter.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/light-pollution-reduction/baader-neodymium-filter.html

Alan

 

thanks Alan for that info 

[Ger]

3 hours ago, Louis D said:

If funds are limited, you can give them a try for cheap with an ebay light pollution filter from China.  I have the 1.25" and 2" Zhumell Moon & Skyglow versions I bought for about $20 each when they were on clearance.  They work to cut light pollution enough for me to detect comets low in my western sky above a nearby city which would be completely invisible otherwise.  I don't use them for much else, though.  The do work as contrast enhancing planetary filters as well.  Not great, but not bad, either.

thanks Louis for the tip