ngc1805 uhc

[alacant]

Hi everyone

A friend brought this along. It seems to do much like the new duo filters, rendering colourless stars and far fewer of them, but unlike the latter, doesn't cost €silly.

I'm not a fan of/don't understand the latest false colour stuff, but this gives an interesting effect and enhances the hydrogen glow detail well.

 

 

I can't find a graph of a false colour filter, but here's the spectrum for this one.

 

Thanks for looking and do post if you've had a go with one of these.

 

 

eos700d. ~3 hours @ ISO800

 

 

Edited December 16, 2020 by alacant

[alan potts]

2 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi everyone

A friend brought this along. It seems to do much like the new duo filters, but doesn't cost €silly (it says here).

I'm not a fan of/don't understand the latest false colour stuff, but this gives an interesting effect and seems to enhance the detail.

 

 

I can't find a graph of the false colour filter, but here's the spectrum for this one.

 

Thanks for looking and do post if you've had a go with one of these.

 

 

 

It is a very nice capture and has come out well. I bought a L enHance from Optolong and hated it, I actually sold it on before my card had been paid, just did not like the colours it gave at all. On reflection I should maybe have done a mixed stack to see if it improved.

Alan

[happy-kat]

That chart looks similar to an astronomik UHC filter, if it is I had considered that fitter it's on my procrastination list.

[alacant]

14 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

similar to an astronomik UHC filter,

A google image search gives this:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Svbony-Telescope-Filter-Contrast-Cameras/dp/B07FQD5D8R

Which is available via AliExpress for around €30.

HTH

[alacant]

3 hours ago, alan potts said:

Optolong

Maybe you had a different filter (?) as that one has the same graph. Maybe they're just re-marketed...

Cheers

Edited December 16, 2020 by alacant

[alan potts]

13 hours ago, alacant said:

Maybe you had a different filter (?) as that one has the same graph. Maybe they're just re-marketed...

Cheers

I do remember it had a much tighter graph than you showed for the one you used, it is on FLO's sight if you wish to look. Gone now, the good thing is the guy that bought it was very pleased.

Alan

[alacant]

2 hours ago, alan potts said:

much tighter graph

Sorry Alan

My bad. I didn't read your post properly. You had the l-enhance. This is the UHC. Both made in the same factory. It's the former I deemed overpriced.

Reading a little about them, they were designed for light polluted skies but IMHO they'd be better marketed sold as get-more-detail-in-nebula filters.

Be warned though, they need a helluva load more exposure time than unfiltered. 

I'm still not convinced; the stars look just as bad as with mono cameras and false colour. 

Cheers and clear skies.

[alan potts]

2 hours ago, alacant said:

Sorry Alan

My bad. I didn't read your post properly. You had the l-enhance. This is the UHC. Both made in the same factory. It's the former I deemed overpriced.

Reading a little about them, they were designed for light polluted skies but IMHO they'd be better marketed sold as get-more-detail-in-nebula filters.

Be warned though, they need a helluva load more exposure time than unfiltered. 

I'm still not convinced; the stars look just as bad as with mono cameras and false colour. 

Cheers and clear skies.

Yes that was the one I had and was not impressed, yes they are pricey too, there is an extreme version now and that is about 230 quid.

When I had the Lenhance I just did the normal 4 minutes that I do, not very adventurous with time on the shutter, with my site I dare say I go double that exposure on a moonless night, must try some different lengths.

Alan