New Askar Colourmagic filters D1 & D2 (Ha/OIII and OIII/SII)

[AstroGS]

Having had several filters over the past couple of years, I have now started using Askar's new Colourmagic duo band filters.

 

A little of background and just my humble opinion follows:

I am a proud owner of an Optolong L-Pro and ZWO UV/IR filters and I used to have an L-Extreme for almost 2 years, an L-Ultimate for a couple off weeks and the Antlia ALT-P filter, which I absolutely love but, I will be parting with it.  I do love the Antlia but, because I wanted to try the new Askar filters and I could not afford both the Askar and Antlia. There is not issue whatsoever with it and it is actually very very good.

 

The L-Extreme is a great filter but, the issue with the bloated stars and halos, was something that I did not like and although this is a situation that can be managed in post processing, I did not like it. The L-ultimate on the other hand did not work for me. For some unidentified reason, the stars looked elongated or distorted and in some cases appeared as over-exposed (?). I tried for a few sessions but, on either my OTAs and with both the cameras (ASI2600MC and ASI533MC Pro) I had more or less the same issues. It was a definite no for me and thus I returned it.

 

Th Antlia as I said was an absolute gem - fantastic! The level of detail that it reveals is really good, it does a really good job with the Ha and relatively well with OIII as well. But, I was missing that bit of SII which the Antlia cannot provide.

 

This is the reason, I am trialing Askar's new 2" filters. I will not go to too much detail right now but, I will be sharing 2 images taken with the 2 filters for your info, feedback and possible discussion. Both images processed in PI: DBE, Blur/Star/NoiseXTerminator, Curves only to darken a bit the background and quick Morphological Transformation to reduce stars.

Askar D1 Ha & OIII:

Single 600 sec frame

Final image (please ignore the lines, these were from the antenna on the roof of the house, I did not even seen that before processing the image) 9 x 600secs. 

 

Askar D2 OIII & SII:

Single 600 sec frame

Final image: 30 x 600 sec

 

ASKAR.xisf

Edited January 22, 2023 by George Sinanis

[Lee_P]

Thanks for pointing me toward this thread. Just tagging @powerlord too as I know they're interested in D2 images. 

It's a shame to hear you had a bad experience with the L-Ultimate. Maybe you had a dodgy one? Mine is good.

Regarding your Spaghetti Nebula image above, that was D2 only, yes? Is the red the SII?

FYI I've written a review of the Askar D1 D2 filters here, and have so far made a Heart Nebula photo with the D1 and D2; and a Soul Nebula photo with an L-Ultimate and D2.

 

[AstroGS]

14 minutes ago, Lee_P said:

Thanks for pointing me toward this thread. Just tagging @powerlord too as I know they're interested in D2 images. 

It's a shame to hear you had a bad experience with the L-Ultimate. Maybe you had a dodgy one? Mine is good.

Regarding your Spaghetti Nebula image above, that was D2 only, yes? Is the red the SII?

FYI I've written a review of the Askar D1 D2 filters here, and have so far made a Heart Nebula photo with the D1 and D2; and a Soul Nebula photo with an L-Ultimate and D2.

 

I will make sure I read the review over the next days. Thank you for sharing. 
 

the above image is indeed only D2 SII/OIII. So I would assume that the SII is the red part of the Nebula. 

[900SL]

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/853955-askar-colourmagic-2-6nm-d-filter-packagefeedbacks/

 

Read the spectrometer tests.  The posts follow after all the introductory hype.

Edited January 22, 2023 by 900SL

[rnobleeddy]

Are there opinions on these in general? 

I've just got a 2600MC and I'm using a L-extreme. I like the thought of the H/O & S/O filter as it makes collection very efficient with a OSC - for example, I'd considered just getting an S filter to add S to the occasional target .

But given the price, I do wonder if there's any advantage left over using a mono camera & FW.  I realise this opinion is contentious, but for me is mainly around simplicity, but it's also cheaper. The downside of OSC + dual band is that without processing wizardry, the images produced by the dual band filters are not as good as SHO images from a mono camera.

[Lee_P]

55 minutes ago, rnobleeddy said:

Are there opinions on these in general? 

I've just got a 2600MC and I'm using a L-extreme. I like the thought of the H/O & S/O filter as it makes collection very efficient with a OSC - for example, I'd considered just getting an S filter to add S to the occasional target .

But given the price, I do wonder if there's any advantage left over using a mono camera & FW.  I realise this opinion is contentious, but for me is mainly around simplicity, but it's also cheaper. The downside of OSC + dual band is that without processing wizardry, the images produced by the dual band filters are not as good as SHO images from a mono camera.

Not sure about consensus, but I’m happy to share my opinions about the Askar D1 D2 filters. I reviewed them here, and now have even more experience with them. Important caveat: as has been flagged earlier, it appears that not all of these filters are made equal, so there may be an element of “equipment lottery” to be aware of.

I think it’s best to split my opinion about the filters separately. I think that the Askar D1 (Ha/OIII) is fine, but a bit expensive for a 6nm filter. It’s not that much more to buy an Optolong L-Ultimate, which is a decent step up but still, as I’ve discovered, plays nicely with the Askar D2.

The Askar D2 (SII/OIII) works really well to add extra data to your dualband images, and I’ve been having a lot of fun using it. Here are the three images I’ve produced so far incorporating the Askar D2. More details here and  here and here. They’ve got better colours, and I think are just more interesting and nicer to look at, than my attempts using Ha/OIII data alone.

 

 

“But given the price, I do wonder if there's any advantage left over using a mono camera & FW.”
I think this depends on whether you will do purely SHO imaging, or want RGB as well. If you’re only ever going to do SHO then my advice would likely sway toward going mono. But if you want RGB as well; either to image broadband targets, or to add RGB stars to narrowband data, then data acquisition is still much simpler with OSC plus Ha/OII and SII/OIII filters (considering that no filters gives you RGB). This is my approach and I’m just using a filter holder, rather than an electronic filter wheel.

“The downside of OSC + dual band is that without processing wizardry, the images produced by the dual band filters are not as good as SHO images from a mono camera”
You need good processing wizardry to produce decent images regardless of what your setup is, so I don’t personally consider this to be a downside. Processing with Ha/OIII plus SII/OIII filters is a bit trickier than just regular dualband, but it’s OK really. I plan on writing a processing guide when I’ve time.

Finally, without wanting to rehash all the usual mono vs OSC arguments, my viewpoint is that which option is best is dependent on the individual astrophotographer and what they’d find most fun to use. I’ve used mono before, but currently have more fun with OSC. Maybe in the future I’ll switch back to mono. It’s often said that mono produces better quality images, but I honestly can’t tell the difference when looking at final, completed pictures. I rarely look at a completed picture of mine and think “drat, I wish I had a mono camera as that would have produced a better image”; but I regularly think “I’m glad it was straightforward to collect that data.”

[rnobleeddy]

5 hours ago, Lee_P said:

 

“The downside of OSC + dual band is that without processing wizardry, the images produced by the dual band filters are not as good as SHO images from a mono camera”
You need good processing wizardry to produce decent images regardless of what your setup is, so I don’t personally consider this to be a downside. Processing with Ha/OIII plus SII/OIII filters is a bit trickier than just regular dualband, but it’s OK really. I plan on writing a processing guide when I’ve time.

Whether it's a downside or not is a personal thing but from my experience of doing both, getting interesting colour from 12 hours or SHO data is much easier than getting interesting colours from 12 hours of dual band data. And therefore I can knock out a decent SHO image in 30 minutes, whereas I'm still working on massaging the dual band data I collected earlier in January. 

I do use Startools, which may make a difference - it's a got an extremely easy workflow for pure SHO or LRGB data, but it get's a lot harder to add RGB stars, or to use starnet++, and I've had little success in salvaging stars from highly stretched dual band data.

 

5 hours ago, Lee_P said:

Finally, without wanting to rehash all the usual mono vs OSC arguments, my viewpoint is that which option is best is dependent on the individual astrophotographer and what they’d find most fun to use. I’ve used mono before, but currently have more fun with OSC. Maybe in the future I’ll switch back to mono. It’s often said that mono produces better quality images, but I honestly can’t tell the difference when looking at final, completed pictures. I rarely look at a completed picture of mine and think “drat, I wish I had a mono camera as that would have produced a better image”; but I regularly think “I’m glad it was straightforward to collect that data.”

I agree. Your images above are much better than anything I managed with my SHO filters + mono camera!

 

Edited February 5, 2023 by rnobleeddy

[900SL]

On 01/02/2023 at 15:04, Antlia_filter said:

Antlia also currently has dualband 5nm Ha&OIII and SII&Hb kits.

Please make a Oiii-Sii dual band to go with the ALP-T for imaging. I can't see the use for a Sii-Hb dualband but I would buy a Oiii-Sii

I've just bought an ALP-T as I trust Antlia more than Askar for QC   

[StuartT]

On 05/02/2023 at 09:38, rnobleeddy said:

Are there opinions on these in general? 

I've just got a 2600MC and I'm using a L-extreme. I like the thought of the H/O & S/O filter as it makes collection very efficient with a OSC - for example, I'd considered just getting an S filter to add S to the occasional target .

But given the price, I do wonder if there's any advantage left over using a mono camera & FW.  I realise this opinion is contentious, but for me is mainly around simplicity, but it's also cheaper. The downside of OSC + dual band is that without processing wizardry, the images produced by the dual band filters are not as good as SHO images from a mono camera.

 

On 05/02/2023 at 10:37, Lee_P said:

“But given the price, I do wonder if there's any advantage left over using a mono camera & FW.”
I think this depends on whether you will do purely SHO imaging, or want RGB as well. If you’re only ever going to do SHO then my advice would likely sway toward going mono. But if you want RGB as well; either to image broadband targets, or to add RGB stars to narrowband data, then data acquisition is still much simpler with OSC plus Ha/OII and SII/OIII filters (considering that no filters gives you RGB). This is my approach and I’m just using a filter holder, rather than an electronic filter wheel.

Interesting discussion.

I recently bought an Askar D2 to add in some Sii signal to my L Extreme images. I like the L Extreme very much (despite the halos) as I live in town and it's great at cutting out the bright sky or the full moon. So I was keen to try the D2 as well, but I am very alarmed to see the spectroscopy reports - clearly the Askar QC is pretty abysmal. So far, I've only managed two images combining both filters to make SHO the Rosette and the California. They're ok, but I am not yet convinced I prefer them to the plain old HOO ones I get with the L Extreme (here and here for comparison).

As to the question of mono+FW, I have been thinking about this too. Spending more and more on OSC, duobands etc is probably a bit wasted when I could just take the plunge and do mono (where you have far more control, higher definition etc). I'm still cogitating, so useful to have this thread. Thanks!

Does anyone know where I can get a spectroscopy report on my filter, by the way?

Edited February 8, 2023 by StuartT

[900SL]

4 hours ago, StuartT said:

 

Interesting discussion.

I recently bought an Askar D2 to add in some Sii signal to my L Extreme images. I like the L Extreme very much (despite the halos) as I live in town and it's great at cutting out the bright sky or the full moon. So I was keen to try the D2 as well, but I am very alarmed to see the spectroscopy reports - clearly the Askar QC is pretty abysmal. So far, I've only managed two images combining both filters to make SHO the Rosette and the California. They're ok, but I am not yet convinced I prefer them to the plain old HOO ones I get with the L Extreme (here and here for comparison).

As to the question of mono+FW, I have been thinking about this too. Spending more and more on OSC, duobands etc is probably a bit wasted when I could just take the plunge and do mono (where you have far more control, higher definition etc). I'm still cogitating, so useful to have this thread. Thanks!

Does anyone know where I can get a spectroscopy report on my filter, by the way?

A wider band Oiii like the D2 will allow more LP (and moon) through if these are actually around 9 nm in Oiii. I'm surprised they can get away with this, the package clearly states 6nm

Further reading:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/837142-askar-color-magic-3nm-deep-sky-narrowband-filterduo-narrowband-filter-is-coming！/

I was thinking of getting the Oiii Sii but I refuse to support shysters. I'll do HOO with the ALP-T

 

 

[The Admiral]

I'd be interested to know how FLO views the issue of filters not meeting the stated specification, and the practicability of testing those it sells.

Ian

[StuartT]

43 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

I'd be interested to know how FLO views the issue of filters not meeting the stated specification, and the practicability of testing those it sells.

Ian

excellent question! I'll ask them

[The Admiral]

2 hours ago, StuartT said:

I'll ask them

I tried using @FLO in my post. Ah, it worked this time!

Ian

[DaveS]

I would like to see a Hydrogen Balmer filter passing the H-alpha, beta, and possibly, the Gamma line as well. This would enable OSC imagers to add the HII regions of galaxies in something like their true colours, which isn't bright red. It would also give mono imagers more signal to play with.

[Adam J]

13 minutes ago, DaveS said:

I would like to see a Hydrogen Balmer filter passing the H-alpha, beta, and possibly, the Gamma line as well. This would enable OSC imagers to add the HII regions of galaxies in something like their true colours, which isn't bright red. It would also give mono imagers more signal to play with.

Honestly just mix some blue and green into the Ha data it will give an IDE tical result. All the lines come from the same hydrogen and tend to be found in exactly the same place as the Ha emission just dimmer. 

[FLO]

19 hours ago, The Admiral said:

I'd be interested to know how FLO views the issue of filters not meeting the stated specification, and the practicability of testing those it sells.

The Askar ColourMagic 6nm OIII/SII Duo Band D2 is a popular filter.

Until today, none of our customers has expressed concern of any kind. And, so far, nobody has returned one. So, speaking as a retailer, all looks good. 

Currently, we don't feel it is necessary for us to check a manufacturer's specification using a spectrometer. If that changes, then we will 🙂 

We will follow this discussion with interest.

HTH, 

Steve 

[The Admiral]

FLO, thanks for that, though may be users aren't aware whether their filter is working well. If it is a bit off wavelength the output might be a bit down, or if the pass band is also wider than it should be, the output might seem good, but at the expense of lower contrast. It's very difficult to tell whether the 400 quid is well spent. And if the manufacturers don't supply bone fide test reports, how are we to know that we are getting what we pay for? I speak as someone who has just one NB filter, and that's dual band. I assume it's up to snuff, but I've no idea whether it should be better.

Perhaps I should add that this applies to all brands, not just ASKAR.

Ian

Edited February 9, 2023 by The Admiral

[900SL]

Strictly speaking this is something Askar should be doing, not Flo. And users seem pretty happy it must be said.

 

I vote with my wallet though. So ALP T on the way from FLO

 

[powerlord]

Just my 2c - I use a D2 along with my L-ultimate. I've been very happy with the D2 so far - using the Sii, and stacking up the Oiii into my L-ultimate Oii.

With the L-ultimate you get sharp stars, no halos, and 3nm ha and oiii, and with with D2 I get decent Sii and the Oiii adds into the L-ultimate oiii nicely. It seems a pretty good combination so far.

I've tried it so far with my redcat and 80ED only, but plan to use them with all the OTAs eventually (see sig)

stu

[Adam J]

The trouble with filters is that 1) it's really hard to achieve fine tolerances. 2) most amateurs customers would never know if the specification of their copy was off. For those reasons I think it's good that consumers are starting to question performance claims, it can only lead to good things. 

[powerlord]

yup, good points, I suppose once you've had experience with other filters then you know if what you are seeing is good or bad, but otherwise you might just assume it is - and of course you SHOULD for 350 quid to be able to reply on the quality of something like a filter. They should all be tested spectrographically imho at manufacture for that price.

[Adam J]

38 minutes ago, powerlord said:

yup, good points, I suppose once you've had experience with other filters then you know if what you are seeing is good or bad, but otherwise you might just assume it is - and of course you SHOULD for 350 quid to be able to reply on the quality of something like a filter. They should all be tested spectrographically imho at manufacture for that price.

Yep not like it would take long. Problem is that the manufacturer needs a reason to start turning stones over and looking for expensive issues. 

[Lee_P]

I agree that manufacturers should be tighter on quality control. As the situation currently stands however, and speaking as a customer, I'd be interested in FLO testing filters prior to selling them, like how they bench test some telescopes (example here). I don't know how expensive / time consuming it is to test filters, but it might make commercial sense. If you want to buy a filter that all the major suppliers have in stock for the same price, but one has tested the filter beforehand, no prizes for guessing who you'd buy from.

Edited February 9, 2023 by Lee_P

[The Admiral]

It's worth noting that Altair do this on their expensive filters.

https://www.altairastro.com/altair-dualband-ultra-4nm-certified-cmos-filter-2-w-test-report-11468-p.asp

You get a wide spectral print-out apparently. Anyone got one and care to comment?

Ian 

[StuartT]

On 09/02/2023 at 13:17, FLO said:

The Askar ColourMagic 6nm OIII/SII Duo Band D2 is a popular filter.

Until today, none of our customers has expressed concern of any kind. And, so far, nobody has returned one. So, speaking as a retailer, all looks good. 

Currently, we don't feel it is necessary for us to check a manufacturer's specification using a spectrometer. If that changes, then we will 🙂 

We will follow this discussion with interest.

HTH, 

Steve 

Steve (I'm the person who emailed you about this), while the primary responsibility clearly lies with the manufacturer, I am rather disappointed in the seemingly relaxed attitude FLO seems to have about this. After all, as someone on Cloudy Nights pointed out (in a very similar discussion to this one) "If I paid for a 750mm scope, but got a 600mm scope instead, I'd be pretty angry about it no matter how good the images look." In general, I think FLO provide an excellent service and I have always been extremely happy with the considerable amount of gear I have bought with them. So I am inclined to agree with @Lee_P that FLO should consider bench testing the more expensive filters (as they do with scopes).

I have also written to Askar to ask them if they are prepared to test my filter. It is perfectly possible mine is as advertised (and I very much hope it is), but clearly some examples are not, so I think it's a reasonable enough question to ask.