Jump to content

1912116577_Solarchallenge2022banner.jpg.913a200cf105ddeae9f37765cb1d0c73.jpg

Astronomik UHC or CLS filter for astrophotography


Acika
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone .I have a canon 450D and im buying 130PDS this week,I recently sold my 150P because I couldn’t achieve prime focus with it.I want to buy 1 of those astronomik filters(CLS or UHC-E) and im not planning to modify my DSLR,so what filter would be best for astrophotography?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you got a sturdy mount? What bortle zone are you imaging from? I ask because using a filter will require longer exposures due to their nature of blocking out light.

What are you planning on imaging as filters usually only help with certain targets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would be much better off modding the camera. The CLS filter will block out light pollution and pass broadband and emission spectrum and the UHC will block out most broadband and pass emission but the IR filter in the camera will then block most Ha emission signal. Not a problem if your shooting a galaxy or Pleiades etc. Modded 450D's come up for sale quite often for not much more than a clip filter itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elp said:

Have you got a sturdy mount? What bortle zone are you imaging from? I ask because using a filter will require longer exposures due to their nature of blocking out light.

What are you planning on imaging as filters usually only help with certain targets?

I own a Star Discovery GoTo mount(Alt-Az) and im imaging from bortle 5 and i can barely see the milky way when i look  up.Im planning to image targets that filters will help and targets that wont need a filter,and im not planning to image galaxies except M81 and M33

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can see the milky way I don't know whether a filter will offer much benefit to you unless you have heavy sky glow from local light pollution. If they're from LED lights no filter will help you as LED light is broadband (pretty much covers the majority of the visible spectrum).

I've used a CLS-CCD filter which works quite well in blocking out the orange type of light pollution though it turns into a blue green sky glow gradient in any photos I've taken, so technically it's still in the photo. The exposure time also had to be increased.

Optolongs L-Enhance and L-Extreme also come recommended for emission targets rich in h alpha and o3 like the Veil Nebula but haven't got around to trying them myself. Optolongs LPro also helps with light pollution.

You will need a motorised equatorial mount if you're planning on imaging anything other than planetary, solar (with filters) or lunar as the stars and the subject will blur. I've managed to image the Orion Nebula which is a bright DSO target with an alt az but exposures had to be very short sub second exposures and the result was quite dim due to minimal signal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Elp said:

If you can see the milky way I don't know whether a filter will offer much benefit to you unless you have heavy sky glow from local light pollution. If they're from LED lights no filter will help you as LED light is broadband (pretty much covers the majority of the visible spectrum).

I've used a CLS-CCD filter which works quite well in blocking out the orange type of light pollution though it turns into a blue green sky glow gradient in any photos I've taken, so technically it's still in the photo. The exposure time also had to be increased.

Optolongs L-Enhance and L-Extreme also come recommended for emission targets rich in h alpha and o3 like the Veil Nebula but haven't got around to trying them myself. Optolongs LPro also helps with light pollution.

You will need a motorised equatorial mount if you're planning on imaging anything other than planetary, solar (with filters) or lunar as the stars and the subject will blur. I've managed to image the Orion Nebula which is a bright DSO target with an alt az but exposures had to be very short sub second exposures and the result was quite dim due to minimal signal.

I can barely see it,and south is very light polluted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not have a read of this thread before deciding on a filter. Bortle 5 is not that bad to work with. The thread is all images using an altaz mount and imagining within the capabilities of the mount, knowing the limitations helps. firsthttps://stargazerslounge.com/topic/228101-the-no-eq-dso-challenge

From memory user rotalux used similar to you re 130pds and the user posting at the end of the thread very recently uses a 130p heritage flavour. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happy-kat said:

With your mount imaging facing East and West are better as star trails would be stronger to the South and North.

I can see North and NE,and i can barely see south because of some trees and west is also light polluted but not as much as south,and i have read that thread before and i have done some astrophotography with a phone and it was bad so I decided to buy a DSLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Acika said:

So guys what filter would be the best between those 2?

Did you not see my response above? You will struggle to image emission nebula with a non modded camera. Filters don't enhance signal, they isolate and either reject or pass specific wavelengths. So while both filters in question will reject light pollution and pass emission wavelengths, your stock camera internal IR filter will reject Ha emission wavelength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, david_taurus83 said:

Did you not see my response above? You will struggle to image emission nebula with a non modded camera. Filters don't enhance signal, they isolate and either reject or pass specific wavelengths. So while both filters in question will reject light pollution and pass emission wavelengths, your stock camera internal IR filter will reject Ha emission wavelength.

So should i buy 1 of those filters or should i use my telescope without them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Acika said:

So should i buy 1 of those filters or should i use my telescope without them?

Personally, I think you should spend the money on modifying your camera, or buy one already modded, and try that first as the rewards will be greater. Its your decision though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, david_taurus83 said:

Personally, I think you should spend the money on modifying your camera, or buy one already modded, and try that first as the rewards will be greater. Its your decision though.

I don’t want to modify my camera beacuse i also use it for normal photography,so should i buy CLS or UHC?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Acika said:

should i buy CLS or UHC?

IMHO, neither. If you have only a standard camera, all you're going to achieve with filters is longer exposure times and false colour. All a filter does is remove light. It makes the camera less sensitive.

Stick to galaxies, star fields and clusters and you'll get some nice shots  Modern apps make the effects of any light pollution you may have easy to remove.

HTH

Edited by alacant
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.