| Which filter do you think is better for an OSC camera like the ASI 2600 MC Pro? | |
|---|---|
| IDAS LPS D3 | |
| Optolong L-Pro | |
| Login to vote and view results. |
1.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi, I'm considering to by a filter for an OSC camera (that I'll by shortly too), the ASI 2600 MC Pro. I'm shooting in a Bortle 5 sky and I wanted something less restrictive than L-enhance or L-extreme. I'm comparing the IDAS LPS D3 and the Optolong L-Pro but I'm not able to understant the differences between both. Any of you can help me to consider one better than the other?. I share the graphics here with the information of both.    It seems that the IDAS LPS D3 can avoid blue LED lights and L-Pro can't but what about the rest? Thanks a lot! |
11.14
#...
·
·
10
likes
|
|---|
|
Hello Daniel and welcome! Your poll needs a third option: None  For Bortle 5 I wouldn't bother using an LP filter. I am under Bortle 5 myself, using a tracker and a fast 135mm prime, and I don't find the need of a filter. Obtaining good flat frames and avoid imaging objects when are low in the sky or near the pesky lights suffices for the moment. And PixInsight is great on removing light pollution gradients. |
|
1.43
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Die Launische Diva: Hi @Die Launische Diva I agree with you and the PixInsight potential but, what about contrast the data you obtained? And I'm not referring to using software's image processors but to get better signal / noise. Wouldn't a broadband filter on a Sky Bortle 5 improve that signal? |
15.85
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Hello Daniel, I’m following this thread as I have been considering the same IDAS filter, however I’ve read the D2 is more contrasty in general. I know know this just read this a while back somewhere. I have the L-Pro and love it. I’m in bortle 4 skies and with some of the newest developments I may even be closer to 4.5 now. My NE-NW skies are dark and I always use the L-Pro to help with contrast! Depending on what I’m shooting in that part of the sky Ill do the UV/IR Cut especially if its very faint. I use the IDAS NBZ for dual Narrowband data and I can’t praise this filter enough! For me the only reason I’d consider the D2 or D3 is IDAS’s glass filters are 1/10th wave while Optolong I believe are only 1/4 wave. That said I don’t really know that I can tell the difference. I shoot with 2 rigs in my observatory and as I upgrade my main rig the “hand me downs” get moved to the secondary (wide field) rig. If your interested here are a few of links for examples of shooting with the L-Pro. https://www.astrobin.com/j36mom/ https://www.astrobin.com/f4twls/C/ https://www.astrobin.com/s4fa40/C/ Personally in my location, I always like to use my L-Pro filter for the simple reason it helps with any gradiant that may become present for me especially in longer exposures. At some point I’ll be getting a 2nd L-Pro or something as good or better for my second rig depending on what I learn on this subject. Hope this helps! Dale |
|
11.14
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Daniel Arenas:Die Launische Diva: It depends on the spectrum of the target; for an object with a broadband spectrum (e.g., a galaxy) the filter will also cut signal from the object of interest. Gradients are difficult to model for longer exposures, since our telescopes have to sweep a large portion of the light pollution dome. In such cases I assume a LP filter will be useful just because it may result in an integrated image with a simpler/smoother gradient. |
|
1.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Dale Penkala: So you put more doubts in the equation... IDAS LPS D2 or D3 or Optolong L-Pro. I think that L-Pro is cheaper than de IDAS LPS D2.... Doubts, doubts, and more doubts! ;) 1/10th wafe in fornt of 1/4th wave... Thanks for let me know and for the links! |
7.50
#...
·
|
|---|
Daniel Arenas: Just to make it clear. Whether is 1/10th (really?) or (a more honest) 1/4th it matters zilch/zero/nada. |
|
1.43
#...
·
|
|---|
andrea tasselli:Daniel Arenas: Thanks Andrea, I have no knowledge enough to understant those differences. So, you recommend better an L-Pro and save money? Do you mean that in the image we’ll no notice differences? |
|
7.50
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi Daniel, I'll see absolutely no difference whatsoever because of the surface finish of the filters (incidentally a more important parameter would be the parallelism of the filter faces), at all. I'd suggest the L-Pro would serve you better and give a better broadband response, given that your LP situation is rather good compared to many others here (including me). |
|
1.43
#...
·
|
|---|
| Many thanks, Andrea! |
|
15.85
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
andrea tasselli:Daniel Arenas: I disagree with this totally, however it more then likely will come down to seeing before you would see or tell any difference as far as wavelength in the filters goes. As stated above the L-Pro is an excellent broadband filter. I own one and love it! That said I’ll continue to look for a better filter with a better wavelength spec and buy it if I should find one. I’m continuing to use my L-Pro its a great filter! Dale |
3.01
#...
·
·
4
likes
|
|---|
Daniel Arenas: I have used both of those filters extensively with the QHY268C, which uses the same sensor as your ZWO 2600MC. The IDAS LPS D3 does a better job for me on broadband targets going through the heavy light pollution that I live in, bortle 7+, just a few miles from bortle 8. I also have a lot of LED street lighting to contend with near me & the IDAS definitely does better against that than the L-Pro. The difference is noticeable to me. Any discussion of LP filters always brings out a lot of "don't use any LP filter" responses. I am not in this camp, but granted I am in extremely heavy light pollution. If I lived just in a bortle 5 area, I would have to really consider whether or not to use a LP filter at all. Either the L-Pro or the IDAS LPS-D3 will leave some color cast, but I have found that this is quite easy to correct in post processing. The photometric color calibration tool in pixinsight fixes that quite easily. Just my 2 cents. I recommend the IDAS. All that said, from my point of view bortle 5 is not that bad at all in terms of light pollution. I have access to a bortle 4 dark site & I never use a LP filter when imaging from bortle 4. However, there are no lights to speak of in the immediate surroundings of that dark site. If you have a bunch of LED street lighting immediately surrounding your house, the IDAS could make a big difference for you. |
|
1.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
If you have a bunch of LED street lighting immediately surrounding your house, the IDAS could make a big difference for you. Thank you @astrodawg , that's the point! Well I don't have the ASI 2600 MC Pro yet. I have to wait for some months. So maybe the most intelligent decision is to wait and experiment with it in my Bortle 5 without filters and if then if I believe that the results don't like me would be the moment to buy a filter. |
|
1.43
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Finally I’ve bought the IDAS LPS D3  And I also let you hnow that I’ve been thinking a lot and I will change my intentioms with de dedicated OSC. Instead of the ASI2600MC Pro I will start with a ASI533 MC Pro as my every first dedicated camera. Cheaper and maybe better adjusted to a beginner like me. With more experience, in future years, I will be always in time to renew it with a better one if I’ll be able to use all its potential. |
2.39
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I've been using the Optolong L-Pro on both my EdgeHD and RASA, however on a recent session with the RASA on the Pleiades I found significant halos with L-Pro. So I picked up the IDAS LPS-D3 and redid the target, halos are mostly gone, they are still there but very faint, likely only visible to me becuase I was looking for them. I'm still using the L-Pro on my EdgeHD but for the RASA the LPS-D3 is a better choice. Using the ASI2600MC Pro on both telescopes. |
|
3.01
#...
·
|
|---|
Jason Coon: Your experience makes complete sense. As you probably already know, with a RASA at F2 or close, the angle of incidence of light through the filter is pretty steep. The L-Pro will struggle at that focal ratio. The IDAS has “flat top” cutoffs at the curve lines of that filter, which is more conducive to the angle of incidence an F2 ratio will create. im guessing that may be why you had halos with the L-Pro, but I get significant & bad halos with my L-Extreme filter at F4 & at F7. I do also own the L-Pro & have used it as F4 without halos, but generally I think the quality of the coatings is better with IDAS, or that’s my theory. do you get the same halos with your L-Pro when using it with your edgeHD? I own an 8” edgeHD myself, but have never used the L-Pro with it. |
|
2.39
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Indeed, I've been learning more about my RASA after I started using it ;-) I've used the L-Pro a lot more with my EdgeHD 8' and have never seen a halo. However halos were such a problem with the L-eXtreme that I've stopped using it and switched to the IDAS NBZ instead. Despite that being a "step backward" from a 7nm filter to a 12nm one, the halos on the L-eXtreme were just a deal breaker for me. I was tempted by the L-Ultimate with it's 3nm band pass, but then saw a review that pointed out halos. So I think I'm done with Optolong. I've got an Antlia ALP-T with 5nm band pass that I've used on my RedCat, thinking I'll try it on the EdgeHD as well to see how it compares to the NBZ. I use the UHS version the NBZ for my RASA. I've seen that Antlia has a highspeed version of the ALP-T but they say it's optimized for f-ratios down to f/2.2 so I'll probably stick with the UHS NBZ for the RASA until something better comes along. |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi Daniel, I am using a Idas lps d1 filter with a zwo 2600mc pro. From a very lightpoluted area. See my latest image. https://astrob.in/i5lrr1/C/ |
1.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Jason Coon: I had an L-Pro on F5 Newt briefly. Obvious halo's which was not acceptable to me for the price of that filter so went back to the Baader Semi-APO. |
|
3.01
#...
·
|
|---|
Jason Coon: I share your view on the L-Extreme. I actually just got in the Antlia 5nm duo-band filter the other as a replacement to my L-Extreme. I haven’t had a clear night yet since I got the new filter (naturally), but may get a chance to try it tonight & compare. I normally do a blending of narrowband & broadband images taken with different filters so that I get natural stars in my nebula images, which is how I’ve worked around the terrible L-extreme halo issues. I simply do a full star removal from the l-extreme version, but there are still some bad artifacts left by the halos around the brightest stars & it obscures some detail in that area. I think quality is hit or miss with optolong, and like you, I probably will never buy another optolong filter. There are just too many better filter manufacturers I can give my business too & we all know this hobby isn’t cheap. For the cost of their filters, optolong needs to have better QC. A number of their competitors do have better QC & sell similar filters in similar price ranges. |
|
7.50
#...
·
|
|---|
| Weird all these people complaining about the L-Extreme causing these "terrible" halos (what are they and what would be a "terrible" halo look like, btw?) with me not seening any in the 2 f/4 system I have. Again, go figure... |
|
2.39
#...
·
|
|---|
Recent example with the L-Pro |
|
3.01
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
andrea tasselli: There’s a guy on YouTube who’s done videos testing multiple of the same model optolong filters with a calibrated spectrometer & has illustrated how inconsistent their quality is with the same filter. The L-extreme is one he’s focused on particularly. You might have just lucked out & got a one from a good batch. Mine is not one of those & I think my experience is kind of typical. |
|
2.39
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
andrea tasselli: That's Cuiv the lazy geek. This is his most recent video on the topic, from only 12-days ago. I spectro-analyzed my SUBSCRIBER'S FILTER... and it wasn't good  - YouTubeI own the L-Pro, the L-eNhance, and the L-eXtreme, all purchased based on recommendations from various Astrophotography "influencers". I've been fairly disappointed with all them. I've since replaced the L-Pro with an IDAS LPS-D3, and the L-eXtreme (which itself was a replacement the L-eNhance) with an IDAS NBZ in my EdgeHD, the IDAS USH NBZ in my RASA, and the Antlia ALP-T in my RedCat 51. |
|
7.50
#...
·
|
|---|
| I have 1 L-Pro, 2 L-eNhance and 1 L-Extreme and none of them produces those halos. I cannot suffer YT reviews so I'll pass it but from the few frames it seems complaining about the bandpass shift which might or might not an issue (and certainly isn't for both L-Pro and L-Enhance since they have a very wide bandpass). So either I'm lucky 4 times over or is it that I'm average and you the unlucky ones? With a proper statistic nothing can be said with any certainity, is it not? |
