Canon 550d & Optolong L-Extreme?

[Rich1980]

Hi, 

I've seen many references to such filters aren't suited to a dslr but have recently seen one or two people using them. 

What are the general opinions here? Anyone using them together? 

If I were to get one, the filter would be an addition to my setup too for when I move to a dedicated camera. 

[Crispy5573]

Hi Rich, 

I've been looking into it myself and I'm certainly no expert but I watched this video today (Astrobackyard) where he explains all about it and shows some results. Hope it helps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHGcQ0HKRlU

 

[rnobleeddy]

On 25/01/2021 at 19:50, Rich1980 said:

Hi, 

I've seen many references to such filters aren't suited to a dslr but have recently seen one or two people using them. 

What are the general opinions here? Anyone using them together? 

If I were to get one, the filter would be an addition to my setup too for when I move to a dedicated camera. 

Where does it say that? In fact, I'd suggest these filters are perfect for DSLRs!

[Thorney]

I use a optolong l extreme with my 600D. Only issue I have is it’s a bit tricky to focus as it’s hard to see the stars. I just take a couple second exposures instead of the live view, other than that one it’s fine. 

[AstroExploring]

These filters are perfect for a DSLR. I use the similar L-eNhance with my DSLR and intend to upgrade to the L-eXtreme at some point 

[alacant]

Hi

You would need to modify your 550d to see any useful effect. I tried a l-enhance with my modified 700d and it seems to do much the same job as a -more reasonably priced- UHC. 

I think that to see any effect, your choice of the l-extreme is the way to go.

Cheers.

Edited February 2, 2021 by alacant

[Rich1980]

18 hours ago, rnobleeddy said:

Where does it say that? In fact, I'd suggest these filters are perfect for DSLRs!

Can't remember exactly where, I've read and watched so much but mainly see it used with a dedicated camera. What I recall was a dslr would struggle focusing and framing with the filter. Hence my wanting to hear from people who have actually used the combination out in the field. Good to know it's workable. 

[Rich1980]

Good to see many working with the combination, I'll get one ordered. Thanks for your replies. 

[david_taurus83]

I would imagine it should work fine but may need very long exposures to get a good SNR. The Enhance filter may be better for a DSLR.

[smr]

I have an l enhance filter which I use with my 600D. Good combo which I am happy with.

[Rustang]

On 28/01/2021 at 22:09, Crispy5573 said:

Hi Rich, 

I've been looking into it myself and I'm certainly no expert but I watched this video today (Astrobackyard) where he explains all about it and shows some results. Hope it helps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHGcQ0HKRlU

 

He does state that the older Canon's may struggle with this filter which is why I'm hesitant to spend out for it to use with my 600D. I've recently seen it used with an older canon camera on the Rosette Neb and it didn't appear to add anything! It might just be a case of seeing how it goes for you but its an expensive filter to do so if its not certain to make a great difference. The L- enhance however, has made a decent difference to my images combined with my 600D.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Rustang

[Pryce]

I use the L-eNhance with my 600D and that works perfectly fine. Even when focusing or framing.

I have read that using the L-eXtreme with modified DSLR may have some issues with focus or framing.  Though its probably a good filter if you can overcome those issues.

 

[smr]

I was a bit worried when I first got my L-eNhance Filter, in that I couldn't see diffraction spikes with my bahitnov mask in live view mode, but you just get around this by taking an image, say 5 seconds, and then checking focus, if it's a little out, adjust focus slightly one way or the other, take another image, and see how far out you are and adjust accordingly repeating the same process. 

Doesn't take me long to focus now I've got into the habit of it, although I'll be buying an electronic focuser soon anyway.

[Rustang]

I've had no issues what so ever with focusing with the L-enhance, I've not had to adjust my routine to do so. Its definitely a great little filter, even more so if you can pick one up a little cheaper second hand. I would be interested to see some good examples with the L-extreme and an older Canon but to be honest, with the cost of one and my plans to move onto a dedicated camera later this year, I probably won't be getting one. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Rustang

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have taken images with my modded 550D and L-eXtreme filter. it is hard to spot the stars, but then with Alnitak in the FOV that is not a great problem. The background becomes so dark that you have to be more careful about walking noise. A slight noise pattern can be seen in the HH image. In the image of the California Nebula, it is less prevalent, despite being only half an hour of data from a Bortle 4-5 site. In the latter case I did more (manual) dithering

I also did just 3 minutes on M42, but didn't like how the Running Man and other reflection components were all but completely removed.

[Rustang]

Lovely images but I definitely can't see anything extra over what the L enhance has produced with my 600d. 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

33 minutes ago, Rustang said:

Lovely images but I definitely can't see anything extra over what the L enhance has produced with my 600d. 

I also have an L-eNhance (1.25" rather than 2") which clearly creates a brighter background and brighter stars. Note that the California Nebula was imaged with a 85% moon quite close by. 

[Rustang]

16 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I also have an L-eNhance (1.25" rather than 2") which clearly creates a brighter background and brighter stars. Note that the California Nebula was imaged with a 85% moon quite close by. 

The main thing is that if your happy with the results then it's all good, they are nice images. I just personally can't see any difference for the cost over the L - enhance  and I think that's because of our age and type of camera 👍

 

[Gerr]

I use the Optolong L-enHance as part of my imaging train and Canon 650D modded DSLR. I have no problems focusing on stars and get nice diffraction spikes with Bahtinov mask. I think its a good filter that allows for nebula imaging no matter the state of the moon. Below is the horse head taken with the moon waxed at 90% and poor atmospheric seeing conditions (I live in Bortle 5/6 skies too). About 1 hr of 2minute subs (ISO 1600). The other image is Pacman under better seeing conditions and 40% waxing moon - 2hrs worth  of 3-4 minute subs (ISO 1600).

Gerr.

 

[Rustang]

12 minutes ago, Gerr said:

I use the Optolong L-enHance as part of my imaging train and Canon 650D modded DSLR. I have no problems focusing on stars and get nice diffraction spikes with Bahtinov mask. I think its a good filter that allows for nebula imaging no matter the state of the moon. Below is the horse head taken with the moon waxed at 90% and poor atmospheric seeing conditions (I live in Bortle 5/6 skies too). About 1 hr of 2minute subs (ISO 1600). The other image is Pacman under better seeing conditions and 40% waxing moon - 2hrs worth  of 3-4 minute subs (ISO 1600).

Gerr.

 

I'm surprised you didn't get some more details out of the Horsehead Neb even with the conditions. This is one of mine using the L enhance with my 600d in bortel 6 skies

Edited February 2, 2021 by Rustang

[Gerr]

Yes I like that one. Lovely refractor wide field. Like I said - my viewing conditions were poor (even high cloud to get through). I enclose a sub for you to look at. I had 30 of this to stack and make something of - quite a challenge. This is one nebula I have yet to do proper justice on but better an attempt than no attempt at all.

Gerr.

[Rustang]

1 minute ago, Gerr said:

Yes I like that one. Lovely refractor wide field. Like I said - my viewing conditions were poor (even high cloud to get through). I enclose a sub for you to look at. I had 30 of this to stack and make something of - quite a challenge. This is one nebula I have yet to do proper justice on but better an attempt than no attempt at all.

Gerr.

It's lots of trial and error in this game, maybe your seeing was just to hard on the target at the time. Keep at it 👍

[rnobleeddy]

2 hours ago, Rustang said:

The main thing is that if your happy with the results then it's all good, they are nice images. I just personally can't see any difference for the cost over the L - enhance  and I think that's because of our age and type of camera 👍

 

I'd guess the differences are more likely to be felt in skies with worse light pollution. The pass bands on the extreme are much smaller so that must make a difference somewhere!

[Stuf1978]

I use an clip in L-eNhance with a modded 450D and I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting and don't have any issues focussing etc.  and I'll hopefully be moving to  cooled OSC and L-eXtreme later in the year. I was considering buying the 2" L-eXtreme before the OSC as it'll fit quite happily in both my V1.5 Redcat and ED72 with OVL Flattener. The only gripe I have with these filters is that they make most nebulae just look red and kill a lot of the subtle colours often seen. Star colour is also ruined as well as reflective parts of certain nebula like M42 as @michael.h.f.wilkinson pointed out above. However these issues are easily sorted by throwing some broadband data into the mix

 

[Rustang]

1 hour ago, Stuf1978 said:

I use an clip in L-eNhance with a modded 450D and I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting and don't have any issues focussing etc.  and I'll hopefully be moving to  cooled OSC and L-eXtreme later in the year. I was considering buying the 2" L-eXtreme before the OSC as it'll fit quite happily in both my V1.5 Redcat and ED72 with OVL Flattener. The only gripe I have with these filters is that they make most nebulae just look red and kill a lot of the subtle colours often seen. Star colour is also ruined as well as reflective parts of certain nebula like M42 as @michael.h.f.wilkinson pointed out above. However these issues are easily sorted by throwing some broadband data into the mix

 

Your definitely right, they certainly have their draw backs in terms of colour. I think there's always a compromise with every aspect of this hobby