Baader CoolWedge v2

[Stu]

I saw reference to this when reading in @IB20‘s thread about the new 7.5nm Baader Continuum filter.

Question is, does anyone know what improvements it is likely to have? Specs etc?

Thanks

[globular]

Some info here....

https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/baader-cool-ceramic-safety-herschel-prism-markii.html

 

[BGazing]

Is photographic version really necessary for photography...seeing that h-alpha works fine in photography and is not nearly as bright?

[Stu]

2 hours ago, globular said:

Some info here....

https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/baader-cool-ceramic-safety-herschel-prism-markii.html

 

Interesting, thank you for that. Seems the rotating brightness control and 7.5nm Continuum filter are the key improvements. Knowing my inability to resist temptation and my love of solar observing I will likely give one a go at some point.

[Stu]

1 hour ago, BGazing said:

Is photographic version really necessary for photography...seeing that h-alpha works fine in photography and is not nearly as bright?

Probably not totally needed, but I guess it means you can get the required brightness for very high frame rate cameras by using filtering that would not be suitable for visual?

[BGazing]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Probably not totally needed, but I guess it means you can get the required brightness for very high frame rate cameras by using filtering that would not be suitable for visual?

Yes, I get the point, never did WL photography so have no idea how exposure translates...

[globular]

I may have read it wrong, but this:  "Short overall length: shortening the overall length by 30 mm for the use of DSLR or Binoviewers"  may be useful for those with back focus issues.

[Stu]

2 hours ago, globular said:

I may have read it wrong, but this:  "Short overall length: shortening the overall length by 30 mm for the use of DSLR or Binoviewers"  may be useful for those with back focus issues.

Yes, I did see that too, could be useful.

[Highburymark]

Apart from the shorter length, I’m not convinced this new Baader wedge is offering anything new. The general feeling among the solar intelligentsia is that the 7.5nm continuum filter’s only benefit might be to reduce CA with achromatic refractors. A couple of imagers have reported slightly more contrast, but as a visual tool it’s not supposed to have any advantages over the previous 10nm, unless your scope shows a lot of false colour.
Prices of solar wedges have shot up in the past couple of years - the Lunt is now £565!! Yet they are not offering anything more than a few years ago, when wedges were considered something of a bargain.

[Stu]

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

Apart from the shorter length, I’m not convinced this new Baader wedge is offering anything new. The general feeling among the solar intelligentsia is that the 7.5nm continuum filter’s only benefit might be to reduce CA with achromatic refractors. A couple of imagers have reported slightly more contrast, but as a visual tool it’s not supposed to have any advantages over the previous 10nm, unless your scope shows a lot of false colour.
Prices of solar wedges have shot up in the past couple of years - the Lunt is now £565!! Yet they are not offering anything more than a few years ago, when wedges were considered something of a bargain.

Thanks Mark, useful and grounding input 😉. Depending on how the rotating brightness control works, it may be useful. I often would like to do this with variable polarisers but it’s tricky when binoviewing.

I think @IB20has one of the 7.5nm filters and has seen some improvement over the 10nm.

[Littleguy80]

Possibly the wrong thread for this question but how much difference does the wedge itself actually make? I only have a TS Optics 1.25” one which works well for me. Are there significant gains to be had from the more expensive options? I realise it’s probably a bit of a subjective question but just made me wonder on seeing the cost of the new Baader. 

[IB20]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Thanks Mark, useful and grounding input 😉. Depending on how the rotating brightness control works, it may be useful. I often would like to do this with variable polarisers but it’s tricky when binoviewing.

I think @IB20has one of the 7.5nm filters and has seen some improvement over the 10nm.

I’m fairly sure the 7.5nm filter increased contrast particularly on the faculae, they seemed to “pop” more both visually but perhaps even more so when imaged and processing. Unfortunately since purchase I just haven’t had chance for any more solar time so I haven’t been able to give it a thorough testing. 

[Highburymark]

4 minutes ago, IB20 said:

I’m fairly sure the 7.5nm filter increased contrast particularly on the faculae, they seemed to “pop” more both visually but perhaps even more so when imaged and processing. Unfortunately since purchase I just haven’t had chance for any more solar time so I haven’t been able to give it a thorough testing. 

Which scope are you using, out of interest? I’d be first in the queue if I thought there was a visual benefit to the 7.5nm filter through an apo. Or even ‘double stacked’ with the 10nm. 

[Stu]

52 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

Possibly the wrong thread for this question but how much difference does the wedge itself actually make? I only have a TS Optics 1.25” one which works well for me. Are there significant gains to be had from the more expensive options? I realise it’s probably a bit of a subjective question but just made me wonder on seeing the cost of the new Baader. 

I think it’s a very pertinent question Neil.

Personally I did one comparison, side by side on the same day between a Lunt 1.25” and a Baader CoolWedge. There was enough of an improvement in contrast and fine detail (granulation) to convince me of the benefits.

I’ve heard that the Lacerta wedge is ‘as good as the Baader’ though I’ve no personal experience of this. What I will say is if you stick either (Lunt, Lacerta or CoolWedge) into a fast achro, let’s say, an ST102, then you may well not see the benefit as the system just won’t show the fine detail due to CA and SA. However, in an optimised setup eg 4” apo or well corrected, long focal length achro with a decent eyepiece and good seeing, then I believe you will see differences.

As for differences between any of the rebranded 2” Wedges and the CoolWedge, I’ve no information on whether you would see any. They could well be just as good as technologies and coatings etc have progressed. It would be great to see an objective review, but unless it was with decent scope and accessories and on a day of good to excellent seeing I would take little from it. I’m a bit of a ‘buy the best and stop worrying sort’…..

[IB20]

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

Which scope are you using, out of interest? I’d be first in the queue if I thought there was a visual benefit to the 7.5nm filter through an apo. Or even ‘double stacked’ with the 10nm. 

So pretty unscientific but two images attached were taken with the Tak FC-76Q and 10nm and 7.5nm continuum filters. These were different days though but seeing and conditions were relatively similar as it was the prolonged sunny cold spell we had recently. Processing has been kept the same with false colour added. The large sunspot towards the solar limb is the 7.5nm filter.

As ever with most kit upgrades, we are talking marginal improvements.

Edited February 14, 2023 by IB20

[Highburymark]

1 hour ago, Littleguy80 said:

Possibly the wrong thread for this question but how much difference does the wedge itself actually make? I only have a TS Optics 1.25” one which works well for me. Are there significant gains to be had from the more expensive options? I realise it’s probably a bit of a subjective question but just made me wonder on seeing the cost of the new Baader. 

I don’t think you’d see much of a difference Neil. I’ve had the Lacerta (1.25”) and Baader (2”) wedges, and both provide sharp images. But I didn’t take the Lacerta up to the magnifications I use today with my 120mm refractor - between 150x and 250x with the Baader. As Stu has reported several times on SGL, it’s these high powers that deliver the really jaw dropping views in WL.
Two nice features of the Baader are a clicklock eyepiece holder (useful for my Powermate 4x), and the nifty ‘finder’ on the back screen. The Baader Continuum filter also comes as standard. So it’s a nice package with lots of features - better value than the Lunt. But Herschel wedges have been around in almost the same guise since the Victorian era. They are pretty basic technology - and yet today the Lunt (and Baader - let’s see how much the new model will be) 2” wedges are the same price as a nice secondhand PST or Lunt 35 scope, with an immensely complex hydrogen alpha etalon incorporated. How these two different technologies are in the same price ballpark is amazing really. 
Let’s not forget there are some other more affordable options if you want a 2” wedge. APM, Meade, Lacerta and Altair - among others. 

[Highburymark]

18 minutes ago, IB20 said:

So pretty unscientific but two images attached were taken with the Tak FC-76Q and 10nm and 7.5nm continuum filters. These were different days though but seeing and conditions were relatively similar as it was the prolonged sunny cold spell we had recently. Processing has been kept the same with false colour added. The large sunspot towards the solar limb is the 7.5nm filter.

As ever with most kit upgrades, we are talking marginal improvements.

Thanks - images look lovely - though I’m on my phone at the moment so can’t see close detail. Certainly interesting if there’s a benefit using the new filter through such a fine apo. 

[Littleguy80]

Thanks @Stu and @Highburymark. Much appreciated! As I’m thinking of going to a 4” APO to improve my white light views, it just made me wonder whether my TS Optics wedge would become the weak link in my setup. Sounds like there maybe some small gains to be had but nothing mind blowing.

[IB20]

5 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

Thanks - images look lovely - though I’m on my phone at the moment so can’t see close detail. Certainly interesting if there’s a benefit using the new filter through such a fine apo. 

I don’t actually think the cost in upgrade between the 1.25” 10nm and 7.5nm standalone filter is actually that bad; around £25-30. Although the 10nm was £56 when I bought it, it now retails about £75. Prices have gone berserk frankly! When it comes to wedges and 2” accessories it all gets a bit silly in terms of price.

[Stu]

24 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

Thanks @Stu and @Highburymark. Much appreciated! As I’m thinking of going to a 4” APO to improve my white light views, it just made me wonder whether my TS Optics wedge would become the weak link in my setup. Sounds like there maybe some small gains to be had but nothing mind blowing.

Of those two changes, I’m sure that moving to the 4” apo would make by far the biggest difference.

[Stu]

49 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

I don’t think you’d see much of a difference Neil. I’ve had the Lacerta (1.25”) and Baader (2”) wedges, and both provide sharp images. But I didn’t take the Lacerta up to the magnifications I use today with my 120mm refractor - between 150x and 250x with the Baader. As Stu has reported several times on SGL, it’s these high powers that deliver the really jaw dropping views in WL.
Two nice features of the Baader are a clicklock eyepiece holder (useful for my Powermate 4x), and the nifty ‘finder’ on the back screen. The Baader Continuum filter also comes as standard. So it’s a nice package with lots of features - better value than the Lunt. But Herschel wedges have been around in almost the same guise since the Victorian era. They are pretty basic technology - and yet today the Lunt (and Baader - let’s see how much the new model will be) 2” wedges are the same price as a nice secondhand PST or Lunt 35 scope, with an immensely complex hydrogen alpha etalon incorporated. How these two different technologies are in the same price ballpark is amazing really. 
Let’s not forget there are some other more affordable options if you want a 2” wedge. APM, Meade, Lacerta and Altair - among others. 

That’s the point I think Mark. Without doing those high power comparisons on days of great seeing, you just can’t identify the differences.

I agree that the technology needed for Ha observing/imaging is much more complex than a Herschel Wedge, but there must still be high standards of flatness, polish, coatings, assembly alignment, baffling etc which do justify some of the cost; after all we are happy to pay for Zeiss prisms or BBHS mirrors to ensure the best views, so gaining all possible detail in a Wedge will require the best too.

That’s not to say inflation hasn’t gone crazy, I agree….