Homemade filters

[Beano]

Is it possible to make them? Having just spent 40 quid on EP's it's going to be a while before I buy anything else.

I would like an LP one and a moon one (look at me getting all posh with the acronym's ).

Is it going to be a case of just saving some money up or has somebody done this before?

[Moonshane]

personally, I don't like filters and even prefer to view the moon with my 12" dob unfiltered. there's no danger, although this does not apply to the sun obviously, it's just that your eye needs a second or two to adjust. once you have observed for a little while your pupil shrinks to a pinhole and then it's fine. personally, I feel I see more detail like this as I suspect that with a smaller aperture pupil you get a wider depth of field?? might be talking rubbish there.

the exception to this is narrowband filters which allow you to see objects which are invisible without them.

In other words, I'd save your money for now. light pollution can be combated to some extent by increasing magnification where seeing allows as this has the effect of darkening the skies.

I'd not bother trying to make filters, just either don't buy them or buy them when funds allow if you feel the need for them. you might find the parts are more expensive than the purchase!

[Beano]

Oh ok. I just assumed with people using them all the time that they would make quite a difference. I've never actually seen anything through any kind of filter apart from images on this site so assumed they would add to the experience.

I'll stick to what I know for now then.

Thanks!

[Moonshane]

no worries.

don't get me wrong, the Oiii and UHC filters make things visible which you could not see before and improve some of the things which you could. these are not cheap though. there's always a tendency to buy lots of shiny gear but we've all done that regretted some of it and if I were you I'd enjoy what you have for a bit and then buy things will fill gaps that you have noticed as you go along.

[Beano]

Yeah, that's what I plan to do. I've had my scope for years and only bought the EP's because the ones I have are SR4mm. I thought they was all right till I joined this forum. I now know why i cant get Jupiter in view. 400x magnification doesn't help lol.

Thanks for your advice.

[Moonshane]

the main thing is that advice is advice and although well intentioned you can often be convinced to changed to something that's not much better than what you had. I think you have made the right decision on the eyepieces though. are they better?

[Beano]

I'm not sure yet. I ordered them from FLO last night. I have to wait for them to arrive then get my old man to make a ring to downsize the focuser from 1.5" to 1.25". It originally had an adaptor in it to make it 0.965. It's quite old and budget so it doesn't take 1.25 yet.

I wanted him to just make the ring now then I could use them the day they arrive but he's a perfectionist and wants to get exact measurements from the new EP's.

I understand too about the advice. It's the same with most things isn't it. You need to do quite abit of reading and make an informed decision rather than do what everybody else is doing.

[Moonshane]

he sounds like a useful dad to have! he's probably right too as they do vary very very slightly and the chances are he'd make it a fraction too big!

spot on re advice but it's always good to get an opinion

what scope do you have by the way, sounds interesting.

[Beano]

It won't be interesting to you guys. It's a Tasco.

It's a 4.5" 900mm reflector.

Tasco 302012:

Not my picture.

It is around 12 years old. I've had it since i was around 9 but I've only recently had the brains to use it.

As for my dad, he is useful when you can get him to do things, it's just getting him to do it that is the hard part. Luckily he's slightly into astronomy so he seems to be a bit more willing to help me with this stuff. When it comes to making things for my R/C cars etc it takes abit more lol. He has a lathe so can make most things.

[Moonshane]

great stuff - they are all interesting! at the time this would have been a fine scope - things seem to have really moved on in the last 12 years.

I bet the tripod is a lot better than the original one.

for lunar, planetary and doubles, this would be a good scope I think?

[Beano]

Back then I think it cost around 400 quid. Funnily enough, that tripod in the pic is the standard one. That seems to be the best thing about it. From reading on the net, people are saying if you see one of these for sale, buy it just for the tripod.

As for what it's good at, the lunar views are unbelievable, even with the SR4mm so I can't wait to see through the new EP's. Jupiter etc looked good through it from what I remember but that was a few years ago, I haven't been able to see joop through it since then as it was just luck last time. Through the 4mm it's hard to find anything that isn't the size of the moon. It's magnified by about 400 times through them.

[Moonshane]

wow! surprised re the tripod - excellent.

yes, the 4mm will give a high mag and not a lot of view. eventually a Telrad would be a good buy. this makes pointing the scope miles easier.

[kentronix]

thats the exact same scope and tripod I started with, I only got rid of it because of the hassle lugging it around, the route to my garden isnt simple. And the cast parts cracked and ended up held together with jubilee clips.

If you set it up correctly it really can give surprisingly good views/images and with the addition of some washers I found the tripod excellent. If I had a permanent setup I would still have it.

All these images/vids were taken with it.

Prime focus webcam - Guide to cheap astrophotography

[Beano]

Yeah it is quite hard to get the t-pod around, legs opening up and banging into things on the way down the stairs etc but luckily, it's quite easy to get to my garden so I don't mind. The 5 mins it takes to set up is well worth the time in the garden for me.

I'm surprised how good the views are from the SR4mm (a little shakey though) after how much the internet calls them so I'm looking forward to the Plossl's.

[kentronix]

Although technically not good I found the eyepieces to give good views considering. The eyepieces and focuser on mine were 0.996 rather than 1.25 inch. Bear this in mind if your upgrading. They may not all be the same but measure yours before buying new.

[Beano]

The bit that makes it 0.965 is an adaptor inside the focuser. The real size of the 'hole' is 1.5" so I'm getting a ring made to make it 1.25".

[MG1]

i'm just going to sit back and wait for AstroBaby to find this thread....Home made filters...she'll love it..!

[kentronix]

The bit that makes it 0.965 is an adaptor inside the focuser. The real size of the 'hole' is 1.5" so I'm getting a ring made to make it 1.25".

yep, just checking you were aware

[johnnychaos]

I've never seen the moon using a moon filter. I agree with Moonshane, you get used to the brightness.

I did think about using Quality Street wrappers, old red/blue 3D glasses or sunglasses though. lol.

[johnnychaos]

oops double post

[riklaunim]

I used some industry Schott/Hoya filters from uqgoptics.com for planetary/lunary astrophotography. Some of them are available also as color astronomy filters, but only some of them 25 mm dia fits in the plastic housing of 1,25" cheap moon filters. You can use some Schott orange/red longpass filters for visual use that will limit bad seeing a bit, or some UV/blue shortpass hoya, schott filters for Venus clouds etc. It's not something common to use, but they are an option.