Which filters to get for a modded DSLR?

[AnonymousAnimosity]

Hello, I am considering the purchase of a full-spectrum modded canon DSLR (I'm not set on a specific model, I found the 1200D for a good price) for deep sky astrophotography. Because of artificial and lunar light pollution I don't get to shoot as often as I'd like, and it seems that filters of some sort would allow me to collect data much more often. However, I am not sure whether it would be best to buy a hydrogen-alpha filter (and eventually add OIII and SII later on) or something like the IDAS D1.

I understand the downsides of narrowband imaging (processing the different channels, longer times), so it seems that a light pollution filter would be much easier to operate, but how would the results compare?

Another concern I have is that narrowband may be unsuited to my  mount (star adventurer) due to the lack of GoTo. Is that so or is the difficulty in finding objects manageable?

Thank you for your help

Edited August 23, 2020 by AnonymousAnimosity

[david_taurus83]

Will you be using a telescope or camera lens? The IDAS filters are very good and give a good colour balance but they are the most expensive. The D2 version is supposed to block out some LED light pollution so might be worth looking at that if you have LED street lights in the area. You could use narrowband filters like an Ha but it would mean longer exposures. The more popular choice these days is to use a duo band or tri band filter that pass mainly the traditional narrowband wavelengths of Ha and OIII. This will give you a colour image of emission nebula with the added benefit of blocking out light pollution. Again, it does mean longer exposures. Your chosen focal length will determine how long you can do on your Star Adventurer.

[AnonymousAnimosity]

3 minutes ago, david_taurus83 said:

Will you be using a telescope or camera lens? The IDAS filters are very good and give a good colour balance but they are the most expensive. The D2 version is supposed to block out some LED light pollution so might be worth looking at that if you have LED street lights in the area. You could use narrowband filters like an Ha but it would mean longer exposures. The more popular choice these days is to use a duo band or tri band filter that pass mainly the traditional narrowband wavelengths of Ha and OIII. This will give you a colour image of emission nebula with the added benefit of blocking out light pollution. Again, it does mean longer exposures. Your chosen focal length will determine how long you can do on your Star Adventurer.

Thank you for the reply, I plan to use a camera lens (on my current setup I use a 70-200, I will borrow something similar for the canon) and eventually upgrade to a small telescope when I find a good deal. I aim for widefield views of deep sky objects. With a good polar alignment I have managed to shoot past 3 minutes at 200mm with about 40% discarded due to periodic error.

I will do some research on the different filters, it seems that a light pollution filter or duo/tri band woud be more efficient than single bands as it would all the pixels, right?

[david_taurus83]

If you can shoot 3 minutes then your LP can't be that bad? Why do you think you would benefit from a filter?

[AnonymousAnimosity]

45 minutes ago, david_taurus83 said:

If you can shoot 3 minutes then your LP can't be that bad? Why do you think you would benefit from a filter?

In my hometown I have fairly dark skies (granted the 3 minute shots were on a new moon and at f6.3), but I only visit about once a month and generally either the weather is bad or the moon is too full. The city where I study and live most of the time is much more light polluted, I have made some attempts but they turned out unsatisfactory.

[AnonymousAnimosity]

I have done some more research on filters but I have yet to make up my mind on which one to buy.

Is a UHC filter narrow enough to allow for acceptable results with a full moon?

If I understand correctly the advantages of clip-in filters are blocking dust from entering the sensor and not needing adapters to use with camera lenses,  is there something else? I noticed that sometimes 2" versions are cheaper.

I have seen the optolong l-enhance mentioned frequently as a good filter for DSLR shooting, but the price is a bit steep, would the difference be significant compared to a cheaper UHC?

Concerning UHC filters, I have found an Optolong for about 60€, while the Astronomik model is almost double the price (used). I know that the latter has a narrower band and thus cuts out more light pollution, but is it worth it the higher cost?

 

I am open to suggestions of products I might have missed.

[david_taurus83]

Heres a good idea of the difference between a broadband LP filter like the L-Pro and a UHC.

 

https://www.peterzelinka.com/blog/2019/8/light-pollution-filters-for-astrophotography

[AnonymousAnimosity]

Thank you for the input, I think I will buy either the optolong UHC or the l-enhance if I feel like spending more.