Best quality LP filter for visual

[Beardy30]

Hi all -  any recommendations for  quality LP filter for visual use - I’m considering going back to visual and giving up on EAA after several attempts now to get any kind of on screen image from using the asi224mc camera 

also looking to get a regel finder to replace the red dot finder - is a RACI required or recommended? 

[Louis D]

I picked up a Svbony UHC which has passbands similar to a traditional LP filter.  It works nearly as well as my Lumicon UHC filter from the 90s, so I can't complain for the less than $20 I spent on it.

Being in the US with more lenient laser pointer laws, I mostly use a green laser sight to aim my telescopes because I can't contort my neck and back around anymore to use a QuikFinder or Telrad all that much anymore.  I also have a RACI, but it doesn't help all that much either aiming or finding targets.  It's mostly useful on long focal length scopes like Maks and SCTs to provide a wide angle view for centering purposes.  DSCs or planetarium software like SkEye or StarSense are really helpful in light polluted skies.

[Beardy30]

I have a refractor and a Mak so thinking the Regel should be a good bet.

any advice on LP filters for visual would be welcome 

[Ricochet]

9x50 RACI plus some sort of red dot / Rigel / Telrad is pretty much standard on any large scope. On your Mak you probably want to save weight if possible so the Rigel or the Explore Scientific mini Telrad would be good choices. I would probably still go for a 9x50 over a 6x30 as there is a fair difference between the light gathering capabilities of the two finders.

For your refractor it depends on what you've got and how wide a field you can get from an eyepiece. If you can get over 3° then you can probably get away without the RACI. 

As for light pollution filters, the Astronomik CLS used to be a good one, but with the increase in LED lighting it is hard to recommend any light pollution filter these days. 

[Beardy30]

Is the Astronomik CLS not intended for cameras? 

[bosun21]

It's actually designed for both visual and AP. I bought the Baader Neodymium filter but haven't used it in years.

[Beardy30]

I was thinking the Baader - how come you’ve never used it ? 

[Beardy30]

8 hours ago, Ricochet said:

9x50 RACI plus some sort of red dot / Rigel / Telrad is pretty much standard on any large scope. On your Mak you probably want to save weight if possible so the Rigel or the Explore Scientific mini Telrad would be good choices. I would probably still go for a 9x50 over a 6x30 as there is a fair difference between the light gathering capabilities of the two finders.

For your refractor it depends on what you've got and how wide a field you can get from an eyepiece. If you can get over 3° then you can probably get away without the RACI. 

As for light pollution filters, the Astronomik CLS used to be a good one, but with the increase in LED lighting it is hard to recommend any light pollution filter these days. 

A 9x50 finder scope plus a regel. - can I ask why both are needed ? 

[Stu]

1 hour ago, Beardy30 said:

A 9x50 finder scope plus a regel. - can I ask why both are needed ? 

Because you are not looking along the scope with a RACI, getting it near enough the target star/object can be tricky. A Rigel or TelRad easily gets you in the right area, then you switch to the RACI to refine the position or star hop etc.

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, Beardy30 said:

I was thinking the Baader - how come you’ve never used it ? 

It's just a personal preference of mine. I actually prefer an unfiltered view.

[Stephenstargazer]

For star hopping with a manual mount I personally prefer a 6x30 RACI over 9x50, and have both. The wider view shows brighter stars only - which matches well with a pocket sky atlas. However if you have some form of goto or pushto then the 9x50 is more likely to show a deepsky target.

If you only need a finder to align an accurate go to mount then most red dots are sufficient, but the Rigel is more user friendly.

Edited January 14 by Stephenstargazer

[Beardy30]

So would you recommend the 9x50 scope (I have the azi GTI) and a release/rigel or will the 9x50 work well with the RDF ? 

[Stephenstargazer]

If that mount only gets close to targets (my brief experience was not good) then a 9x50 finder will help getting them in view*  but does not have to be RACI unless you find that format easier. As others have said red dots mainly help with initial alignment.  Spending money on one change at a time is a good plan ?

*as will a low power eyepiece!

[Zermelo]

2 hours ago, Beardy30 said:

So would you recommend the 9x50 scope (I have the azi GTI) and a release/rigel or will the 9x50 work well with the RDF ? 

So you will be using goto. As already mentioned, you may find a red dot finder useful during alignment - sometimes the first star can be outside of a reticle eyepiece field, depending on how accurate your setup was. In my case, if that happens, I swap in a 30mm plossl and roughly centre it with that, before switching back to the reticle.
I used to use a Telrad as the first stage in target acquisition, but now I find that goto will easily put the scope within the field of an optical finder. I switched from 8x30 to 9x50 to get the extra depth.

[Beardy30]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

Because you are not looking along the scope with a RACI, getting it near enough the target star/object can be tricky. A Rigel or TelRad easily gets you in the right area, then you switch to the RACI to refine the position or star hop etc.

That makes sense - which 9x50 scope would you recommend 

[Ricochet]

Black stalked 9x50 RACI

White stalked 9x50 RACI

Same finder, different  colour scheme. Pick the one that matches your telescope best if you're bothered about that or whichever is cheapest. The Astro Essentials version is available bundled with a foot if you need an additional foot for a multi-finder setup - assuming you can fit it to the telescope.

On the filter front, I consider the Baader Neodymium a good planetary filter but I cannot recollect a single DSO that has been improved by using the filter.

[RT65CB-SWL]

I use either the Baader Planetarium Neodymium or an Explore Scientific UHC. If they attenuate to much, then I swap for the Baader Planetarium Contrast Booster or an Explore Scientific CLS. That said, I sometimes find a variable polarising filter is a reasonable compromise.