Wanted to follow up with a thank you for this video. I finally received my SVBONY CLS filter and was amazed at the improvement over the ICE LIPO filter. I took 5hrs with of subs the other night and was able to actually see the Wizard Nebula, where as before I couldn’t see anything with twice as much exposure time! Definitely helped me get over a huge hurtle.
Really impressive method and delivery, Nico! Recently found your channel by referral from a photography friend and I've been so refreshed by your atypical, scientific approach to photography. Also Boston-based, so it's nice to know there's hope for me to get some good shots one day. Cheers!
GREAT Review! I appreciate the non-bias comparison and then your thoughts at the end with your personal selections. Hope to see more in the future - especially liked your LAB setup to compare the published specs. I would like to see what this comparison looks like with LED light pollution, Incandescent, Low-pressure sodium, and high-pressure sodium to round out the comparison because my Bortel 8 may not be the same as someone else's Bortel 8.
This is a great, well researched review. I live near Seattle, under a bortle 7 sky. Just bought the Svbony CLS as it's the cheapest I could find and I'm still figuring out if this is a hobby I can get into. The filter arrived 5 days after I ordered it and right on the night I got it it started raining. We've had 2 semi clear nights in the month that I've had it and I don't think it'll get better soon. I guess I will have to wait till spring given that traveling is still not such a good idea. Bummer!
www.seattleastro.org/activities/2 Ask around about dark sites at the Seattle Astronomical Society Astrophotography Special Interest Group. As long as we all stay 6 ft apart and mask up, I don't see why we can't do astrophotography safely as it is all outside which is a lot safer than inside. The rain/cloud problem I can't help with. I know Seattle is particularly bad for that aspect. Best of luck!!
Sounds like this might have been a challenging video to put together, but it turned out fantastic! Excellent comparison! Everything I would want to make the best decision.
Great review! I have a couple of technical comments for you to consider. Since these are all thin film interference filters (thin film stacks of high and low index), their design is probably established with normal incident light. It was unclear if the stand you developed included a collimated light source. If not, you could have a large portion of the light at substantially non-normal angles. In that case, the optical thickness of each layer will be different and each filter design will behave differently (less transmission and wavelength isolation shifted). This could be a key contributor to your "as measured" results varying from the manufacturer's specification. You might want to attempt to collimate the light a bit (could even emulate the focal length of the lens you intend to use) and then see how the filters perform on your spectrometer.
Yes, that is what added substantially to the cost of building the device. I bought my collimated tungsten lamp from Thor Labs. I could try to emulate my focal length by adding more lenses, but I don't think that should be necessary. From what I understand talking to others is that it's pretty normal for these filters to be not completely 'in spec'. The transmission charts they send are not that particular filter measured, but rather an ideal filter. Most filter manufacturers don't state how much variance is acceptable. All that said, I didn't see really anything out of the ordinary in the real world imaging tests which is what really matters more to me.
@@NebulaPhotos If you could draw a "idealized" filter spectrum showing transmission by wavelength, what would it look like? Which specific wavelengths would you want to block? There are a few companies out there making more advanced optical thin film products for fluorescence microscopy, telecom applications, etc. Like the filters you reviewed, these can be bandpass, multi band pass in nature or even designed for specific slope shapes over the entire visible spectrum. They typically have ion beam or magnetron sputtering systems with advanced optical endpoint control to deliver higher transmission >95% and very steep and deep optical isolation OD5 or even OD6 performance. It would be an interesting design challenge to see if a manufacturable design solution could be created for your "ideal" spectral response.
Thanks for that exactly what I was looking for. I'm Bortle 6 using a ASI183MC, so look torn between the Neodymium and the L-Pro... but this has helped a lot. Probably start with the Neo at nearly half the price of the other!
Around 13:17, if you compare Baader Neodymium and Astronomik CLS, the stars from Astronomik CLS is larger. I think it may be due to thin cloud which can also cause lower contrast in the image.
the baader Neodymium moon and sky glow works well on jupiter and mars as well for detail and the GRS.. its a good all rounder but i own a dedicated astro cam .. cheap-ish as well .... good unbiased review cheers james D
Thanks for carrying out such a thorough series of tests and image captures! One major issue I have with your results however is that you actually combined two filters in some of the tests. I would have preferred you not to have confused the results with the pairings with the Astronomik L-2 in each case. The headline 'Light Pollution Filter SHOOTOUT' should be just that or else modified to include 'in combination sometimes with an Astronomik L-2'! And what about combinations with the Astronomik L-1 or L-3?
Hi Ed, There seems to be a misunderstanding here. To be clear: I didn't double up filters in any of these image captures. In the QHY tests, I only used the L-2 as the control filter for comparison to the other filters. I used an L-2 rather than a bare sensor because in real-life shooting I would never suggest someone shoots deep sky with the QHY168C without some kind of IR-block. Again, all the tests were single filter tests. Sorry for the confusion, Nico
great review. do you think the Optolong L-Pro and the Skytech L-Pro Max are very similar ? someone said that the Optolong L-Pro produces a litte bit more starhalos.
Hi Nils, I haven't tested the Altair Skytech L Pro so I can't say for sure, but my guess is they are literally identical and Optolong is the supplier for Altair, as they are for ZWO. Cheers, Nico
I’m just about to send my DSLR out to be for spectrum modified. From what I’m gathering, the benefit of doing this is to get the IR light that is normally cut out on a stock camera. Wouldn’t a filter like the L2 also do the same as the built-in DSLR IR filter and block out the IR? I thought IR passing through was what I want for nebula. Thanks and great video!
Hi Christopher, Stock DSLRs often have a very aggressive IR-Cut filter that actually cuts well in to "the visible spectrum" making red nebulae less bright (e.g. pass the Ha line at 35% transmission). Now what is a bit confusing is what we normally call "the visible spectrum" is 400-700nm, but humans can't really see much past 650nm. Ha is at 656nm and SII is at 672nm. These are the main spectral emission lines we want for nebulae, especially the Ha. They are both deep red. We are typically not interested in picking up the infrared (IR) in amateur astrophotography, and due to the way optics work passing the infrared will actually result in star bloat typically because most lenses can't focus on the infrared and the visible light spectrum at the same time. So the reason to use an "Astronomik L2" or other UV/IR cut filter with a full spectrum camera is to block the IR, but it still passes the Ha and SII (nebula emission lines). If you do go "full spectrum" with your mod, you will want to use a UV/IR cut filter too. Really the only reason to go "full spectrum" over an "ha mod" is if you want to shoot IR photography with an IR pass filter either during the day or for planets with a telescope. More on these topics in my intro to filters video: th-cam.com/video/ys-28z4qTYw/w-d-xo.html Clear skies, Nico
Hi Nico, thanks for the great review and explainations! Awesome as always, the Bob Ross of Astrophotography :D Beside that, would you recommend getting a duo narrowband filter for a modded dslr/mirrorless? or even SHO narrowband filters? Thanks :)
The duo narrowband filters are more expensive, but will be more effective at blocking light pollution and bringing out emission nebulae by increasing contrast. The downside is you won't get accurate star color with those. I probably wound't go as far as recommending SHO narrowband filters for DSLR/mirrorless because at that point I think the money would be better spent on an upgrade to a dedicated astronomy camera, but there are pros/cons there too (laptop needed, power considerations, etc.) So, all I can say in the end is "it's complicated" and really depends on your goals/desires/budget.
@@NebulaPhotos Ok, I guess I'll stay with no filters at the moment and just go to dark places :) thanks for taking the time to answer to my question :)
This is a great review! I have a stock Canon 5D Mark III and I’ve been trying to find a good filter for it. It’s a great coincidence that you have one too. Also what exposure and ISO did you take the bortle 4 photos at? Thank you!
Hi Nico, stunning review, this is what people needs and not just a bunch of theoretical explanations. Between Baader filter and Optolong filter, which one would you choose? I'm going to modify my Canon to get full spectrum. Besides, between the three Optolong options (pro, extreme, enhance), which one do you prefer? Thanks, man!
For natural, colorful stars and a small contrast boost (LP reduction): Baader Neodymium For ultimate contrast to bring out emission nebulae: Optolong L-eXtreme
This is an amazing and informative review! I’m a high school student just getting into astrophotography, and am just wondering what are some adequate exposure times for, say, the North America Nebula under Bortle 6 skies with a stock DSLR and no light-pollution filter? I’ve tried something like 80x20s at 70mm, f/2.8 and ISO 800 but I'm, barely able to see the outline of my subject? Thanks Nico, and I love your videos!
More total exposure time is always better! NA Nebula is a tough object with a stock DSLR due to it being a dim, diffuse object that mostly shines in Ha (656nm) where many stock DSLRs are not particularly sensitive. To know if 20s, f/2.8, ISO800 is the right sub-exposure time, use the 1/4 histogram rule: take a test exposure, go to playback and hit the INFO button until you see a histogram, the peak of that histogram should be hitting about 1/4 over from the left. Adjust ISO or shutter speed until it is.
I would have been interested to know how difficult each one is to colour correct. I have a CLS that is very hard to get rid of the blue, particularly on star colour - and I’ve heard the L pro is green…
Nice. Would've been nice to see what can be done to each file in post. It's cool that the filters work well for straight out of cam pictures, but who does astro SOOC? Looking into what the raw files can be edited into is more interesting imho
Using a 5D Mark IV on Canon EF Lenses. I have looked all over for a clip in filter but it seems that they are only available for the APS-C equipment. Have I missed something?
It looks like it is being billed as a visual filter, so I'm skeptical it would be good for astrophotography. Even if the transmission is good, visual filters often don't have the right coatings to prevent halos when used for long exposure. I'd probably advise going for the Svbony minimum for a light pollution filter for astrophotography.
Don't know the brand. But if you search '3W Flicker flame' bulb it should show up. Looks like Westinghouse and Phillips have both made it. Should have an e12 'candelabra' base, and you can get an e12 lamp base for a few dollars on amazon. You can also calibrate off a compact fluorescent bulb, but the lines in neon are a bit easier.
Any of these will help with moonlight, but the ultimate for defeating moonlight is a Hydrogen Alpha (Ha) filter. Ha filters are best with mono cameras. For a DSLR or OSC camera, I'd suggest a multi bandpass filter like the Optolong L-eNhance for imaging nebulae under moonlight.
@@NebulaPhotos Thank you Niko for your spot on answer to my imaging under moon light question. Since I am a DSLR’er I’ll go with the eNhancer instead of the H alpha filter. Warren
I agree they are beautiful, but light pollution filters are the wrong tool for full spectrum targets. Better to shoot unfiltered (color camera) or LRGB (mono) from the darkest site you can find.
@@NebulaPhotos I disagree. I was hoping to see your take on the L-Pro’s performance on non-nebular objects. I have used the Orion sky glow filter on all types of objects for EAA with good success from suburban locations.. It is marketed as a light pollution filter. And, for example, if you look at Optolong’s page on the L-Pro, they position it as an LP filter as opposed to a nebula filter. www.optolong.com/cms/document/detail/id/13.html The idea is to reduce sky glow and light pollution from high pressure sodium and mercury vapour street lighting as well as suppressing blue in LED lighting. The L-Enhance and L-Extreme, on the other hand, are intended as nebula filters.
@@Mike__G Maybe this is an EAA vs. my style of astrophotography thing. I've tried LP filters on full spectrum objects like star clusters, reflection nebula, and galaxies, and never liked the results compared to shooting equal integration time without filter. If you look at the final set of crops here (QHY168c, Bortle 9): www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/ you can see compared to no filter the L-Pro is really killing the blue channel. The Baader does better because it doesn't have that blue notch. There is no filter truly effective against modern LED streetlamps because they are broad spectrum like daylight, at least the ones I've measured in my neighborhood. I know a few cities have petitioned to get special 3200K LEDs put in. Wish that was the case where I live.
@@NebulaPhotos Yep. Full spectrum objects are very difficult to deal with in light pollution. Nevertheless, Optolong markets the L-Pro as doing well with galaxies, reflection nebulae and globulars. I was hoping to understand how well it actually performs on these objects. I guess I’ll find out anyway - I’ve ordered both the L-Pro and L-Enhance and should get them next week. Lot’s of cloud around here for the next several days, though. Still waiting for someone to invent a cloud filter.☹️
If it were me, I'd go L-eXtreme. To go from a 20nm bandpass to a 7nm bandpass on the OIII line for only about $80 more should be well worth it for targets like the Veil with well-defined OIII structure. Clear skies, Nico
@@matthilton8959 I'd say many, but not most. Some others that have strong OIII emission: North America Nebula, Crescent Nebula, Dumbbell Nebula, Helix Nebula, Ring Nebula, Rosette Nebula. Many Planetary Nebula (PNe) are strong in OIII, but most PNe are very small. The Dumbbell and Helix are outliers in how big they are.
Unfortunately more and more LEDs are used and the number and inefficiency of streetlights is increasing, even though we should optimise our street lights first instead of just adding more...
Just curious... Are there any filters just for moon light? I can find a bortle 3 or less, but the moonlight is basically limiting me to 3-5 nights a month, and that's assuming the weather was cooperating. If I could get a filter that only blocks moonlight, that would at least get me more nights outside to image. I appreciate your response, in advance.
Not really. Moonlight is a broadband source that is particularly strong in blue. Best thing is just to use narrowband filters (or dual narrowband filters) and pick a target that is as far away from the moon as possible.
Use the results from the QHY168C under Bortle 4 skies to make your decision. I'd probably go no added filter (equivalent to the UV/IR cut filter on the QHY), but it's really a personal choice.
hi nico, another great vid. I use canon's 18-55mm kit lens. is it possible to photograph distant galaxies (like the pinwheel galaxy) with a lens like mine? is my lens good or do i have to buy a better lens. unfortunately, i live in sri lanka and we don't have Rokinon lenses or even filters here. :( thanks.
I'd start with the biggest galaxy (Andromeda), but yes the brighter galaxies can be captured at 55mm they will just be very small compared it your entire field of view. So I'd say not an ideal lens for galaxies, but with proper technique, dark skies, and processing you can resolve a little detail and color. It can also be interesting to see the galaxies in a large star field, it gives you a sense of their place in our night skies.
@@NebulaPhotos Hi Nico thank you for the reply. How about a 200mm one? We have tons of them here. Will it be good enough? Btw you said that the galaxies will look smaller compared to the field of view, but how small? Will it look too small or will it have enough detail like the spiral arms and stuff? And also i took a picture of jupiter and saturn and once i processed it, there were blue halos around the stars. How do i fix it? I use GIMP ONLY.
@@devikanilangani9590 Yes, 200mm is perfect for untracked astrophotography. Check out my Andromeda video, that was untracked, and you can get a sense of how much detail you can capture. Blue/magenta halos: it is called chromatic aberation and you can fix it by selecting it, and bringing down saturation + brightness on that part of the picture
There are two major options for using filters with lenses. The best option if one is made for your camera is a clip-in filter. This clips in to the body of the camera and then you can attach any lens. The other option is to use a standard 2" filter like I show in the video and use step up or step down filter rings to go from the front diameter of your lens to the filter thread of the 2" filter (48mm).This is less desirable because if the front diameter of your lens is wider then 48mm so you are using a series of step down rings that cause vignetting that you will probably need to crop out from the final picture making only the center of the frame usable.
Best: don't get a 2" filter. Get a clip-in. If no clip-in available for your camera: Use step-up (or step-down) rings to go from the 48mm thread to whatever your lens uses. You can buy sets of these from Amazon or B&H for pretty cheap. The downside to this is you will have to deal with more extreme vignetting, but if you plan to crop in anyways it can work.
Brother I am from India Kolkata...Just got a 130eq celestron I know it's a beginner Scoop..But many people say me that I can do astrophotography...Got a 2x Barlow, Nikon D5200...plzzz help...
@@NebulaPhotos I have so many questions....Is there any place I can send u what I capture...Andromeda,Dumbell nebula and many other DOS's is in my view I use SKYVIEW app no matter how many times I try its either so small I doubt them with a star or I don't get them only...This is my dream I want to see them before I fade....plzzzz Guide brother
@@rageofyouth569 Do you have a camera lens for your Nikon D5200? For starting out finding things in the night sky, I suggest starting with a lens, not a telescope. Feel free to send me images at: nicocarver at gmail dot com
Hi Nico, i just received my Canon T5 from removing IR Filter. Now that i madre some tests i realized i have problems with Focusing. But if i use my UHC or CLS clip filters i see the focus improve but i’m not sure if i should use this filters because ii’m not sure if i would capture enough data and It wasn’t necessary to remove the Ir Filter. Do you have any recomendation ?
@@NebulaPhotos looking forward to see the video. I tried to shot rho ophiuchi with 50 mm f/1.8 but can’t get those yellow and blue colors and don’t know if i use the CLS Filter (bortle 3) could help with that. Also I don’t know if the Focusing problem affects to obtain those colors. Thank you Nico
@@mariovm1243 No, the yellow and blue are reflection nebulae and CLS won't help, it will probably only hurt. Focus issue could hinder. Really the best thing for those is just many tracked exposures. They won't show up well in single exposure, but come out in processing after stacking.
I'm only 30 seconds in, and Nico said "exhaustive." I thought, "Oh dear," it being Nico. But hey - its just 20 minutes. I don't need to set aside a whole evening. (Not a complaint!! Nico's stuff is worth spending the evenings.)
Idk about useless, I'm in bortle 6 and the SVBONY (cheapest one) has literally been the difference between nebulosity being there and not, as in completely invisible to visible, seems pretty significant to me.
@@coleisman - That depends what camera you use. I am at Bortle 5-6 and I get nebulosity without any filters with osc cmos camera Except my stars are bloated due to the filter I got has no UV/IR cut capability.
@@Cuntymccuntface123 There are so many variables and, despite Nico has made such amazing job, his excelent work didn't cover all of them. For example: differente ISOs, total exposure time vs apparent magnitude, telescope aperture and so on. You should test the limits of your gear bf buying a filter and this video can give you some directions.
Awesome review. I got the SVBony CLS clip-in for my unmodified Canon T2i + 70-200mm lens to shoot under my bortle 8-9 skies (with my Skyguider Pro) and it seems to do a very nice job. I also have the 2" version of the Optolong L-eNhance, but I can't really use it with a camera lens, so I'll wait with it until I upgrade to a small refractor.
I have the svbony cls filter, one thing ive noticed is it seems to reduce star size a bit, which is always a good thing in astrophotography. but I would only suggest these in heavy light pollution as It seems I've been picking up less faint detail with it in comparison to shooting without it, and I'm in a bortle 4/5.
@@NebulaPhotos Great in depth video btw. I just started this hobby in may of this year, and your videos have been a big help. thanks for your contribution to astrophotography. Clear skies from here in eastern long island.
WOW Nico!!!! What a GREAT review...But please next time start to measure the filters glass thickness, why? Because depending on what the filter thickness is that effects back focus, so let's say a 2mm think filter changes your back focus about 30% + or -, and what's very important is if all of your filters are all the same thickness like 1.85mm thick then they should be parfocal, that is the focus is about the same, so once you set your focus it may not need to be changed unless the temps change. 1 reason to purchase the same brand of filter is when you change a filter like LRGB your focus is very much are the same. What you did here is the best I have ever seen and I hope you will continue to do this kind of testing / reviews? I would get the Optolong L-eXtreme & the Optolong L-eNhance 2 of the best filters for the money.
Thanks Christopher! I did plan to measure filter thickness, but I couldn't figure out how to get the mounting off the Baader or Astronomik. Now that I'm thinking more clearly, I can use a measured shim and still use my digital calipers without removing the filter mount. I will do that soon, and add filter thickness to the website. I do plan to continue reviewing astrophotography products including many more filters. The L-eXtreme and L-eNhance are on my list. I won't give any estimate of when such reviews will be done, but I tend to be slow. This review took six months from concept to completion. Clear skies, Nico
Hey Nico great job on this comparison - I missed it when it first came out. I own the Astronimik CLS and the Baader Neodynium and found very similar results to you in my bortle 5 region in Monroe, CT. I purchased the CLS first but was unhappy with the colors and more apparent noise that I got with it so I went with the Baader. I really don't use either much since I do most imaging with a monochrome camera, however, I now have an ASI 294MC Pro to be used with a new setup (once it arrives) so I will be using the Baader a lot more. I also purchased the IDAS NBZ for Ha and OIII imaging as well. - Cheers Kurt
Thanks Kurt. Yeah the Baader gives nice colors, and is very similar to the Optolong L-Pro. If I was doing much OSC work with moderate light pollution that is what I'd use too.
Man this is a great review. Really breaks it down in detail. Personally I thought the Optolong L-Pro was the best optically. And the SVBONY was close enough to the others that it’s price makes it the best if you’re on a budget.
Fantastic job Nico! Thank you for going above and beyond. This combined with your new website will prove to be extremely valuable for the community. I hope you have opportunities to continue adding to the list in the future. I'm sure people would love to see what you could do with the L-Extreme!
Answers almost all the questions one can have.....with detailed scientific and objective explanations! Thank you!
4 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Awesome and reassuring that the filter that I have already ordered (optolong cls) and is hopefully somewhere in the mail was the right choice (bortle 8 in Reykjavík)
OMG i am so excited to see this. You mentioned you were going to make it a while back and I have been eagerly waiting for it to drop. Thank you for all you do to bring us the best information we can use to become better at our craft.
Very scientific, nice job. Although I probably like the filters in the opposite order but that's probably why there are so many opinions on this because it is subjective pretty much especially if you are not an expert in it.
Yep, I'd say in the end, when considering purchasing a LP filter, it really just comes down to: do you like how it affects the image? Which is mostly a subjective assessment
I appreciate the work you put in. I know that must have been exhausting. I got the l-pro but have not had a chance to play with it. My camera just got modified and I’m waiting to get it back. I’m under bortle 6-7 so I’m eagerly waiting clear skies. Thanks for your efforts.
This is the best comparison video I've seen of these filters, and one I wish existed a few months ago before I made my LP filter purchase! I love the extensive knowledge and information that your videos provide. Thank you, Nico!
What a GREAT review. We love that it is to the point, and let's the photos speak, and love your opinions at the end.....please do more of these....IDAS 1 is what i have , and pleased so far...would like to see how it stack up to your scrutiny.
In a lot of cases, the differences were very small. Easier to see differences here on the website I set up: www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/
Great review, very nice! Keep it up! A small feedback for your website: It would be awesome if you could add a slider to compare the before (without) and after (with) picture using the filter, because you already have all the data. Also at the first moment I found it a little bit confusing, that in the description of the pictures there is no note that a filter is used. Especially because in the Video you compared the picture taken with a filter to the picture without.
Thanks for the feedback. I don't know how to do the slider thing, but I can look in to it. I did make this page for directly comparing the filters in the review against no filter: www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/
Great review! I shoot under bortle 8 skies with an unmodified Canon 80D, I use the Astronomik CLS. Really like that filter, so it was nice to see your results with it and all the other. Keep up the good work and clear skies.
Great review. Made me feel better about my astronomik cls. Was thinking about getting the l-pro for broadband, but do you think it would be all that different? From this review i wouldn't think so. I'm using a Ha modified t5i. I can't really ask for a better sky comparison, I'm in medford! Are you in somerville or were just visiting?
This is by far the most informative and direct review. I really appreciate you taking the time to do this, and really look forward to checking out your website. Thank you
The Svbony CLS is only $35 and my sky is bright at night from the city and money is important so I use that. The others are beyond my budget. So great reviews
@@NebulaPhotos waiting anxiously for that one! Please include single band as well as dual-narrowband ones like L-eNhance and L-eXtreme as well. That would rock!!! :-)
No IDAS D1 or newer D2 or the old favorite P2 which is insane I use the IDAS D2 which is made for LED light pollution which none of these cheaper filters use Still very good review
Hope to review many other filters eventually. This was just a first batch based on feedback from viewers/patrons. I do like IDAS filters and am very interested to try the D2. Thanks for the suggestions!
Finally, jk Nico! Great lesson!! I recently acquired a dedicated color camera and I use optolong-iv-ir for non nebule and l-enhance for nebula, I can see a big difference between this camera and dslr. I do not have any CLS filters and I am in bortle 6, do you think am good or do I need one? Oh am not planning on using dslr anymore only for like milky way or wide field when I can get to a better sky. Cheers Nico!!👍🤝
Nope, you are all set with a UV-IR cut + an L-eNhance. Those are a perfect pair for dedicated astro camera. For DSLR milky way, no filter is always best in my opinion.
Excellent presentation, the best I have seen on this topic. Having just watched this for the second time, I absorbed a little more information. Greetings from Tasmania Australia 🇦🇺🦘👍
Excellent review and thoroughly done. I look forward to seeing further tests of more extreme dual band filters in the class of the Optolong L-Enhance, Astronomik UHC or Radian filters which OPT should be able to supply you, if they haven’t already. And keep in mind that it isn’t necessary to shoot only through a filter. Under darker skies shooting unfiltered and filtered images and blending them later gives you the best of both worlds: the natural star colours and more subtle tones of some nebulas along with the richest and greatest extent of faint red nebulosity. It isn’t either/or. Unless you are shooting under light polluted skies, then a filter and modified camera is essential. And in that case an even more extreme filter than what you tested here would likely be better. Clear skies!
Personally, I thought there was a subtle improvement under Bortle 4 skies using the Lpro (best) and the Neodymium. Contrast was improved a little, but the stars were definitely tightened up and I didn't really notice any loss of star colour. The CLS filters were horrible. Really in the Bortle 9 you would be better with something like the L extreme. Anyway, good video, always good to see real life comparisons without hours of post processing.
Great video! Really useful! What type of adapter do you use to attach a 2” filter to a dslr? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks again… great content :).
Excellent review Nico! It works out great for me I only bought the Astronomik cls for my Canon 80D. Going to look into the IR cut filter now. Thanks for the review!
Almost 4 years later, the work you did still has tremendous value, keep it up Nico!
Thanks!
This is how all reviews should be like. Amazing job Nico!
Nico, perfect presentation for my current state and growth in astro-photograpy. Nice to see the various comparison.
Thanks for the excellent information.
Given the price of the Svbony filter I'm just going to buy one and see how it works for me.
Wanted to follow up with a thank you for this video. I finally received my SVBONY CLS filter and was amazed at the improvement over the ICE LIPO filter. I took 5hrs with of subs the other night and was able to actually see the Wizard Nebula, where as before I couldn’t see anything with twice as much exposure time! Definitely helped me get over a huge hurtle.
TY for the In Depth review. I purchased the Baader because I mainly shoot at 360mm in my backyard and our hospital use Na-Lamp ...
Thank you for the thorough review and great information!
Really impressive method and delivery, Nico! Recently found your channel by referral from a photography friend and I've been so refreshed by your atypical, scientific approach to photography. Also Boston-based, so it's nice to know there's hope for me to get some good shots one day. Cheers!
As usual a great and useful video Nico!
Excellent video nico. Just what i was looking for.
GREAT Review! I appreciate the non-bias comparison and then your thoughts at the end with your personal selections. Hope to see more in the future - especially liked your LAB setup to compare the published specs. I would like to see what this comparison looks like with LED light pollution, Incandescent, Low-pressure sodium, and high-pressure sodium to round out the comparison because my Bortel 8 may not be the same as someone else's Bortel 8.
This is a great, well researched review. I live near Seattle, under a bortle 7 sky. Just bought the Svbony CLS as it's the cheapest I could find and I'm still figuring out if this is a hobby I can get into. The filter arrived 5 days after I ordered it and right on the night I got it it started raining. We've had 2 semi clear nights in the month that I've had it and I don't think it'll get better soon. I guess I will have to wait till spring given that traveling is still not such a good idea. Bummer!
www.seattleastro.org/activities/2
Ask around about dark sites at the Seattle Astronomical Society Astrophotography Special Interest Group. As long as we all stay 6 ft apart and mask up, I don't see why we can't do astrophotography safely as it is all outside which is a lot safer than inside. The rain/cloud problem I can't help with. I know Seattle is particularly bad for that aspect. Best of luck!!
Thank you so much for the quality demo.
Thx Nico! All very helpful info. And congrats on new site.
Sounds like this might have been a challenging video to put together, but it turned out fantastic! Excellent comparison! Everything I would want to make the best decision.
Great review! I have a couple of technical comments for you to consider. Since these are all thin film interference filters (thin film stacks of high and low index), their design is probably established with normal incident light. It was unclear if the stand you developed included a collimated light source. If not, you could have a large portion of the light at substantially non-normal angles. In that case, the optical thickness of each layer will be different and each filter design will behave differently (less transmission and wavelength isolation shifted). This could be a key contributor to your "as measured" results varying from the manufacturer's specification. You might want to attempt to collimate the light a bit (could even emulate the focal length of the lens you intend to use) and then see how the filters perform on your spectrometer.
Yes, that is what added substantially to the cost of building the device. I bought my collimated tungsten lamp from Thor Labs. I could try to emulate my focal length by adding more lenses, but I don't think that should be necessary. From what I understand talking to others is that it's pretty normal for these filters to be not completely 'in spec'. The transmission charts they send are not that particular filter measured, but rather an ideal filter. Most filter manufacturers don't state how much variance is acceptable. All that said, I didn't see really anything out of the ordinary in the real world imaging tests which is what really matters more to me.
@@NebulaPhotos If you could draw a "idealized" filter spectrum showing transmission by wavelength, what would it look like? Which specific wavelengths would you want to block? There are a few companies out there making more advanced optical thin film products for fluorescence microscopy, telecom applications, etc. Like the filters you reviewed, these can be bandpass, multi band pass in nature or even designed for specific slope shapes over the entire visible spectrum. They typically have ion beam or magnetron sputtering systems with advanced optical endpoint control to deliver higher transmission >95% and very steep and deep optical isolation OD5 or even OD6 performance. It would be an interesting design challenge to see if a manufacturable design solution could be created for your "ideal" spectral response.
Great vid just what people really like to know about the astro filters.👏👏👍
Thanks for that exactly what I was looking for. I'm Bortle 6 using a ASI183MC, so look torn between the Neodymium and the L-Pro... but this has helped a lot. Probably start with the Neo at nearly half the price of the other!
Around 13:17, if you compare Baader Neodymium and Astronomik CLS, the stars from Astronomik CLS is larger. I think it may be due to thin cloud which can also cause lower contrast in the image.
Good review and helpful!
Outstanding review Nico
And to my very amateur eye I say no filter.
Great! I'm all about saving money on this hobby, as it can be very expensive. Clear skies, Nico
@@NebulaPhotos OMG saving money is a must I am just starting out in astro and have smashed nearly £2k already.
the baader Neodymium moon and sky glow works well on jupiter and mars as well for detail and the GRS.. its a good all rounder but i own a dedicated astro cam .. cheap-ish as well .... good unbiased review
cheers
james D
Great job man
LAB REVIEW! :-) THANK YOU!
Thanks for carrying out such a thorough series of tests and image captures! One major issue I have with your results however is that you actually combined two filters in some of the tests. I would have preferred you not to have confused the results with the pairings with the Astronomik L-2 in each case. The headline 'Light Pollution Filter SHOOTOUT' should be just that or else modified to include 'in combination sometimes with an Astronomik L-2'! And what about combinations with the Astronomik L-1 or L-3?
Hi Ed, There seems to be a misunderstanding here. To be clear: I didn't double up filters in any of these image captures.
In the QHY tests, I only used the L-2 as the control filter for comparison to the other filters. I used an L-2 rather than a bare sensor because in real-life shooting I would never suggest someone shoots deep sky with the QHY168C without some kind of IR-block. Again, all the tests were single filter tests. Sorry for the confusion, Nico
Thanks for the clarification - I’ll watch again with that better understanding!
Excellent!
great review.
do you think the Optolong L-Pro and the Skytech L-Pro Max are very similar ?
someone said that the Optolong L-Pro produces a litte bit more starhalos.
Hi Nils, I haven't tested the Altair Skytech L Pro so I can't say for sure, but my guess is they are literally identical and Optolong is the supplier for Altair, as they are for ZWO. Cheers, Nico
I’m just about to send my DSLR out to be for spectrum modified. From what I’m gathering, the benefit of doing this is to get the IR light that is normally cut out on a stock camera.
Wouldn’t a filter like the L2 also do the same as the built-in DSLR IR filter and block out the IR? I thought IR passing through was what I want for nebula.
Thanks and great video!
Hi Christopher,
Stock DSLRs often have a very aggressive IR-Cut filter that actually cuts well in to "the visible spectrum" making red nebulae less bright (e.g. pass the Ha line at 35% transmission). Now what is a bit confusing is what we normally call "the visible spectrum" is 400-700nm, but humans can't really see much past 650nm. Ha is at 656nm and SII is at 672nm. These are the main spectral emission lines we want for nebulae, especially the Ha. They are both deep red. We are typically not interested in picking up the infrared (IR) in amateur astrophotography, and due to the way optics work passing the infrared will actually result in star bloat typically because most lenses can't focus on the infrared and the visible light spectrum at the same time. So the reason to use an "Astronomik L2" or other UV/IR cut filter with a full spectrum camera is to block the IR, but it still passes the Ha and SII (nebula emission lines). If you do go "full spectrum" with your mod, you will want to use a UV/IR cut filter too. Really the only reason to go "full spectrum" over an "ha mod" is if you want to shoot IR photography with an IR pass filter either during the day or for planets with a telescope. More on these topics in my intro to filters video: th-cam.com/video/ys-28z4qTYw/w-d-xo.html
Clear skies, Nico
Fantastic explanation! Thank you for the information
Hi Nico, thanks for the great review and explainations! Awesome as always, the Bob Ross of Astrophotography :D
Beside that, would you recommend getting a duo narrowband filter for a modded dslr/mirrorless? or even SHO narrowband filters? Thanks :)
The duo narrowband filters are more expensive, but will be more effective at blocking light pollution and bringing out emission nebulae by increasing contrast. The downside is you won't get accurate star color with those. I probably wound't go as far as recommending SHO narrowband filters for DSLR/mirrorless because at that point I think the money would be better spent on an upgrade to a dedicated astronomy camera, but there are pros/cons there too (laptop needed, power considerations, etc.) So, all I can say in the end is "it's complicated" and really depends on your goals/desires/budget.
@@NebulaPhotos Ok, I guess I'll stay with no filters at the moment and just go to dark places :) thanks for taking the time to answer to my question :)
This is a great review! I have a stock Canon 5D Mark III and I’ve been trying to find a good filter for it. It’s a great coincidence that you have one too. Also what exposure and ISO did you take the bortle 4 photos at? Thank you!
Hi Nico, stunning review, this is what people needs and not just a bunch of theoretical explanations. Between Baader filter and Optolong filter, which one would you choose? I'm going to modify my Canon to get full spectrum. Besides, between the three Optolong options (pro, extreme, enhance), which one do you prefer? Thanks, man!
For natural, colorful stars and a small contrast boost (LP reduction): Baader Neodymium
For ultimate contrast to bring out emission nebulae: Optolong L-eXtreme
Thanks
This is an amazing and informative review! I’m a high school student just getting into astrophotography, and am just wondering what are some adequate exposure times for, say, the North America Nebula under Bortle 6 skies with a stock DSLR and no light-pollution filter? I’ve tried something like 80x20s at 70mm, f/2.8 and ISO 800 but I'm, barely able to see the outline of my subject? Thanks Nico, and I love your videos!
More total exposure time is always better! NA Nebula is a tough object with a stock DSLR due to it being a dim, diffuse object that mostly shines in Ha (656nm) where many stock DSLRs are not particularly sensitive. To know if 20s, f/2.8, ISO800 is the right sub-exposure time, use the 1/4 histogram rule: take a test exposure, go to playback and hit the INFO button until you see a histogram, the peak of that histogram should be hitting about 1/4 over from the left. Adjust ISO or shutter speed until it is.
@@NebulaPhotos thank you so much! I’ll be sure to keep that in mind the next time we have a clear night!
I would have been interested to know how difficult each one is to colour correct. I have a CLS that is very hard to get rid of the blue, particularly on star colour - and I’ve heard the L pro is green…
Hello, very interesting video! Did you had chance to test filter SkyTech L-PRO MAX, which seems is analog of Optolong L-Pro?
Nice. Would've been nice to see what can be done to each file in post. It's cool that the filters work well for straight out of cam pictures, but who does astro SOOC? Looking into what the raw files can be edited into is more interesting imho
Using a 5D Mark IV on Canon EF Lenses. I have looked all over for a clip in filter but it seems that they are only available for the APS-C equipment. Have I missed something?
4:40 are you sure it's the the spectrometer detector efficency .. most (non specilised) Silicon sensor QE will end around 400nm
Can you review the Gosky/OVL light pollution filter? It's really cheap and I'm wondering if it is any good.
It looks like it is being billed as a visual filter, so I'm skeptical it would be good for astrophotography. Even if the transmission is good, visual filters often don't have the right coatings to prevent halos when used for long exposure. I'd probably advise going for the Svbony minimum for a light pollution filter for astrophotography.
Where did you get the Neon bulb from that you used for callibration? What brand / model number is it?
Don't know the brand. But if you search '3W Flicker flame' bulb it should show up. Looks like Westinghouse and Phillips have both made it. Should have an e12 'candelabra' base, and you can get an e12 lamp base for a few dollars on amazon. You can also calibrate off a compact fluorescent bulb, but the lines in neon are a bit easier.
Can you recommend a filter that would allow imaging under a full moon? What is your imaging plan to image in the face of moonlight?
Any of these will help with moonlight, but the ultimate for defeating moonlight is a Hydrogen Alpha (Ha) filter. Ha filters are best with mono cameras. For a DSLR or OSC camera, I'd suggest a multi bandpass filter like the Optolong L-eNhance for imaging nebulae under moonlight.
@@NebulaPhotos Thank you Niko for your spot on answer to my imaging under moon light question. Since I am a DSLR’er I’ll go with the eNhancer instead of the H alpha filter. Warren
Just found your channel. Brilliant review, thank you!!
I am interested in full-spectrum targets. Emission nebulae don’t give a complete picture, emitting primarily in the red end of the spectrum.
I agree they are beautiful, but light pollution filters are the wrong tool for full spectrum targets. Better to shoot unfiltered (color camera) or LRGB (mono) from the darkest site you can find.
@@NebulaPhotos I disagree. I was hoping to see your take on the L-Pro’s performance on non-nebular objects. I have used the Orion sky glow filter on all types of objects for EAA with good success from suburban locations.. It is marketed as a light pollution filter. And, for example, if you look at Optolong’s page on the L-Pro, they position it as an LP filter as opposed to a nebula filter. www.optolong.com/cms/document/detail/id/13.html The idea is to reduce sky glow and light pollution from high pressure sodium and mercury vapour street lighting as well as suppressing blue in LED lighting. The L-Enhance and L-Extreme, on the other hand, are intended as nebula filters.
@@Mike__G Maybe this is an EAA vs. my style of astrophotography thing. I've tried LP filters on full spectrum objects like star clusters, reflection nebula, and galaxies, and never liked the results compared to shooting equal integration time without filter. If you look at the final set of crops here (QHY168c, Bortle 9): www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/ you can see compared to no filter the L-Pro is really killing the blue channel. The Baader does better because it doesn't have that blue notch. There is no filter truly effective against modern LED streetlamps because they are broad spectrum like daylight, at least the ones I've measured in my neighborhood. I know a few cities have petitioned to get special 3200K LEDs put in. Wish that was the case where I live.
@@NebulaPhotos Yep. Full spectrum objects are very difficult to deal with in light pollution. Nevertheless, Optolong markets the L-Pro as doing well with galaxies, reflection nebulae and globulars. I was hoping to understand how well it actually performs on these objects. I guess I’ll find out anyway - I’ve ordered both the L-Pro and L-Enhance and should get them next week. Lot’s of cloud around here for the next several days, though. Still waiting for someone to invent a cloud filter.☹️
I'm currently debating. L enhance or L extreme for my Altsir 269c OSC. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. I'm in bortle 5. Great video by the way.
If it were me, I'd go L-eXtreme. To go from a 20nm bandpass to a 7nm bandpass on the OIII line for only about $80 more should be well worth it for targets like the Veil with well-defined OIII structure. Clear skies, Nico
@@NebulaPhotos would it be good for most nebula or just the one you mention?
@@matthilton8959 I'd say many, but not most. Some others that have strong OIII emission: North America Nebula, Crescent Nebula, Dumbbell Nebula, Helix Nebula, Ring Nebula, Rosette Nebula. Many Planetary Nebula (PNe) are strong in OIII, but most PNe are very small. The Dumbbell and Helix are outliers in how big they are.
Unfortunately more and more LEDs are used and the number and inefficiency of streetlights is increasing, even though we should optimise our street lights first instead of just adding more...
Just curious... Are there any filters just for moon light? I can find a bortle 3 or less, but the moonlight is basically limiting me to 3-5 nights a month, and that's assuming the weather was cooperating. If I could get a filter that only blocks moonlight, that would at least get me more nights outside to image. I appreciate your response, in advance.
Not really. Moonlight is a broadband source that is particularly strong in blue. Best thing is just to use narrowband filters (or dual narrowband filters) and pick a target that is as far away from the moon as possible.
what about my modified DSLR EOS 2000Da under Bortle 5 (Sky Quality Magnitude 19.8 according to "Clear Outside")?
Use the results from the QHY168C under Bortle 4 skies to make your decision. I'd probably go no added filter (equivalent to the UV/IR cut filter on the QHY), but it's really a personal choice.
hi nico, another great vid. I use canon's 18-55mm kit lens. is it possible to photograph distant galaxies (like the pinwheel galaxy) with a lens like mine? is my lens good or do i have to buy a better lens. unfortunately, i live in sri lanka and we don't have Rokinon lenses or even filters here. :(
thanks.
I'd start with the biggest galaxy (Andromeda), but yes the brighter galaxies can be captured at 55mm they will just be very small compared it your entire field of view. So I'd say not an ideal lens for galaxies, but with proper technique, dark skies, and processing you can resolve a little detail and color. It can also be interesting to see the galaxies in a large star field, it gives you a sense of their place in our night skies.
@@NebulaPhotos Hi Nico thank you for the reply. How about a 200mm one? We have tons of them here. Will it be good enough? Btw you said that the galaxies will look smaller compared to the field of view, but how small? Will it look too small or will it have enough detail like the spiral arms and stuff? And also i took a picture of jupiter and saturn and once i processed it, there were blue halos around the stars. How do i fix it? I use GIMP ONLY.
@@devikanilangani9590 Yes, 200mm is perfect for untracked astrophotography. Check out my Andromeda video, that was untracked, and you can get a sense of how much detail you can capture. Blue/magenta halos: it is called chromatic aberation and you can fix it by selecting it, and bringing down saturation + brightness on that part of the picture
Hey guys - is it possible to mount the filters on the camera lens? Or is it assumed the camera is mounted on a telescope?
There are two major options for using filters with lenses. The best option if one is made for your camera is a clip-in filter. This clips in to the body of the camera and then you can attach any lens. The other option is to use a standard 2" filter like I show in the video and use step up or step down filter rings to go from the front diameter of your lens to the filter thread of the 2" filter (48mm).This is less desirable because if the front diameter of your lens is wider then 48mm so you are using a series of step down rings that cause vignetting that you will probably need to crop out from the final picture making only the center of the frame usable.
How would I mount or use a 2 inch filter onto a stock dslr without a telescope?
Best: don't get a 2" filter. Get a clip-in.
If no clip-in available for your camera: Use step-up (or step-down) rings to go from the 48mm thread to whatever your lens uses. You can buy sets of these from Amazon or B&H for pretty cheap. The downside to this is you will have to deal with more extreme vignetting, but if you plan to crop in anyways it can work.
Brother I am from India Kolkata...Just got a 130eq celestron I know it's a beginner Scoop..But many people say me that I can do astrophotography...Got a 2x Barlow, Nikon D5200...plzzz help...
Go for it! Let me know if you have any questions
@@NebulaPhotos I have so many questions....Is there any place I can send u what I capture...Andromeda,Dumbell nebula and many other DOS's is in my view I use SKYVIEW app no matter how many times I try its either so small I doubt them with a star or I don't get them only...This is my dream I want to see them before I fade....plzzzz Guide brother
@@rageofyouth569 Do you have a camera lens for your Nikon D5200? For starting out finding things in the night sky, I suggest starting with a lens, not a telescope. Feel free to send me images at: nicocarver at gmail dot com
Hi Nico, i just received my Canon T5 from removing IR Filter. Now that i madre some tests i realized i have problems with Focusing. But if i use my UHC or CLS clip filters i see the focus improve but i’m not sure if i should use this filters because ii’m not sure if i would capture enough data and It wasn’t necessary to remove the Ir Filter. Do you have any recomendation ?
Usually I modify the lens, if it's just a particular lens that is causing issues. I have a video about this coming out tomorrow morning actually
@@NebulaPhotos looking forward to see the video. I tried to shot rho ophiuchi with 50 mm f/1.8 but can’t get those yellow and blue colors and don’t know if i use the CLS Filter (bortle 3) could help with that. Also I don’t know if the Focusing problem affects to obtain those colors. Thank you Nico
@@mariovm1243 No, the yellow and blue are reflection nebulae and CLS won't help, it will probably only hurt. Focus issue could hinder. Really the best thing for those is just many tracked exposures. They won't show up well in single exposure, but come out in processing after stacking.
Great Non-Biased Technical analysis of 4 popular filters, best i've seen so far on youtube. Thanks for putting in the work Nico.
Glad it was helpful!
I'm only 30 seconds in, and Nico said "exhaustive." I thought, "Oh dear," it being Nico. But hey - its just 20 minutes. I don't need to set aside a whole evening. (Not a complaint!! Nico's stuff is worth spending the evenings.)
1.5x :-)
This is probably the best filter review I have ever seen on TH-cam. Really clear and helpful. Thanks!
Glad it was helpful! Clear skies, Nico
The results are not what I wanted to hear, but they prevented me from buying useless filters. Thanks for the review.
Glad it was helpful Alex. Clear skies, Nico
So they don't work? Thanks for saving me 20 minutes! 🍻
Idk about useless, I'm in bortle 6 and the SVBONY (cheapest one) has literally been the difference between nebulosity being there and not, as in completely invisible to visible, seems pretty significant to me.
@@coleisman - That depends what camera you use. I am at Bortle 5-6 and I get nebulosity without any filters with osc cmos camera Except my stars are bloated due to the filter I got has no UV/IR cut capability.
@@Cuntymccuntface123 There are so many variables and, despite Nico has made such amazing job, his excelent work didn't cover all of them. For example: differente ISOs, total exposure time vs apparent magnitude, telescope aperture and so on. You should test the limits of your gear bf buying a filter and this video can give you some directions.
How I am only now watching this?? This was a titanic effort Nico, thank you so much for doing all of this! Absolutely amazing!
Great job. In bortel 9 or 4 on a Astro camera, what would you recommend galaxies?
Awesome review. I got the SVBony CLS clip-in for my unmodified Canon T2i + 70-200mm lens to shoot under my bortle 8-9 skies (with my Skyguider Pro) and it seems to do a very nice job.
I also have the 2" version of the Optolong L-eNhance, but I can't really use it with a camera lens, so I'll wait with it until I upgrade to a small refractor.
Most underrated YT channel. you should get more subscribers
I have the svbony cls filter, one thing ive noticed is it seems to reduce star size a bit, which is always a good thing in astrophotography. but I would only suggest these in heavy light pollution as It seems I've been picking up less faint detail with it in comparison to shooting without it, and I'm in a bortle 4/5.
Yep, we are on the same page there! Clear skies, Nico
@@NebulaPhotos Great in depth video btw. I just started this hobby in may of this year, and your videos have been a big help. thanks for your contribution to astrophotography. Clear skies from here in eastern long island.
WOW Nico!!!! What a GREAT review...But please next time start to measure the filters glass thickness, why? Because depending on what the filter thickness is that effects back focus, so let's say a 2mm think filter changes your back focus about 30% + or -, and what's very important is if all of your filters are all the same thickness like 1.85mm thick then they should be parfocal, that is the focus is about the same, so once you set your focus it may not need to be changed unless the temps change. 1 reason to purchase the same brand of filter is when you change a filter like LRGB your focus is very much are the same. What you did here is the best I have ever seen and I hope you will continue to do this kind of testing / reviews? I would get the Optolong L-eXtreme & the Optolong L-eNhance 2 of the best filters for the money.
Thanks Christopher! I did plan to measure filter thickness, but I couldn't figure out how to get the mounting off the Baader or Astronomik. Now that I'm thinking more clearly, I can use a measured shim and still use my digital calipers without removing the filter mount. I will do that soon, and add filter thickness to the website. I do plan to continue reviewing astrophotography products including many more filters. The L-eXtreme and L-eNhance are on my list. I won't give any estimate of when such reviews will be done, but I tend to be slow. This review took six months from concept to completion. Clear skies, Nico
The quality of your videos is off the charts! Thanks for putting in all this hard work!
Hey Nico great job on this comparison - I missed it when it first came out. I own the Astronimik CLS and the Baader Neodynium and found very similar results to you in my bortle 5 region in Monroe, CT. I purchased the CLS first but was unhappy with the colors and more apparent noise that I got with it so I went with the Baader. I really don't use either much since I do most imaging with a monochrome camera, however, I now have an ASI 294MC Pro to be used with a new setup (once it arrives) so I will be using the Baader a lot more. I also purchased the IDAS NBZ for Ha and OIII imaging as well. - Cheers Kurt
Thanks Kurt. Yeah the Baader gives nice colors, and is very similar to the Optolong L-Pro. If I was doing much OSC work with moderate light pollution that is what I'd use too.
Man this is a great review. Really breaks it down in detail. Personally I thought the Optolong L-Pro was the best optically. And the SVBONY was close enough to the others that it’s price makes it the best if you’re on a budget.
I would have liked to see some galaxy comparisons. Thanks for the reviews.....I know it wasn't cheap.
Fantastic job Nico! Thank you for going above and beyond. This combined with your new website will prove to be extremely valuable for the community. I hope you have opportunities to continue adding to the list in the future. I'm sure people would love to see what you could do with the L-Extreme!
This was an excellent review and was very helpful. Thank you.
Thanks Nico, that was very helpful. Keep up the good work, you've won a new subscriber :-)
Answers almost all the questions one can have.....with detailed scientific and objective explanations! Thank you!
Awesome and reassuring that the filter that I have already ordered (optolong cls) and is hopefully somewhere in the mail was the right choice (bortle 8 in Reykjavík)
OMG i am so excited to see this. You mentioned you were going to make it a while back and I have been eagerly waiting for it to drop. Thank you for all you do to bring us the best information we can use to become better at our craft.
Thanks Miguel! Hope it helps 👍Clear skies, Nico
Why do the images with filters look more graini or is it just my eyes
Very scientific, nice job. Although I probably like the filters in the opposite order but that's probably why there are so many opinions on this because it is subjective pretty much especially if you are not an expert in it.
Yep, I'd say in the end, when considering purchasing a LP filter, it really just comes down to: do you like how it affects the image? Which is mostly a subjective assessment
I appreciate the work you put in. I know that must have been exhausting. I got the l-pro but have not had a chance to play with it. My camera just got modified and I’m waiting to get it back. I’m under bortle 6-7 so I’m eagerly waiting clear skies. Thanks for your efforts.
The L-Pro is great for a modified camera. Clear skies! Nico
@@NebulaPhotos Is it better to custom white balance the camera before or after placing a LP filter?
@@GrowingAnswers After
Thanks Nico! Makes me feel good I went for the SVBONY CLS filter instead of splurging a bit more and getting the Astronomik filter
Loved the spectrophotometry part. From my work to hobby, it continues 😊.
This is the best comparison video I've seen of these filters, and one I wish existed a few months ago before I made my LP filter purchase! I love the extensive knowledge and information that your videos provide. Thank you, Nico!
Amazing job! Thank you for this very in-depth review!
What a GREAT review. We love that it is to the point, and let's the photos speak, and love your opinions at the end.....please do more of these....IDAS 1 is what i have , and pleased so far...would like to see how it stack up to your scrutiny.
A great comprehensive review which was easy to understand. I hope you will be reviewing other types of filters, for modded dslr etc.
Thanks Nico.
Thank you for a great test, I could see very little difference. I guess being 75 effects my eyes
In a lot of cases, the differences were very small. Easier to see differences here on the website I set up: www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/
Great review, very nice! Keep it up!
A small feedback for your website: It would be awesome if you could add a slider to compare the before (without) and after (with) picture using the filter, because you already have all the data. Also at the first moment I found it a little bit confusing, that in the description of the pictures there is no note that a filter is used. Especially because in the Video you compared the picture taken with a filter to the picture without.
Thanks for the feedback. I don't know how to do the slider thing, but I can look in to it. I did make this page for directly comparing the filters in the review against no filter: www.astrofilters.com/2020/10/15/light-pollution-filter-shootout/
Great review! I shoot under bortle 8 skies with an unmodified Canon 80D, I use the Astronomik CLS. Really like that filter, so it was nice to see your results with it and all the other. Keep up the good work and clear skies.
Great review. Made me feel better about my astronomik cls. Was thinking about getting the l-pro for broadband, but do you think it would be all that different? From this review i wouldn't think so. I'm using a Ha modified t5i. I can't really ask for a better sky comparison, I'm in medford! Are you in somerville or were just visiting?
This is by far the most informative and direct review. I really appreciate you taking the time to do this, and really look forward to checking out your website.
Thank you
The Svbony CLS is only $35 and my sky is bright at night from the city and money is important so I use that. The others are beyond my budget. So great reviews
Top shelf review - thanks
Thank you for this review. I have Optolong L-pro and Bortle 9 skies, so I do not think I did a bad purchase given you analysis. Thank you again.
Yes, with a dedicated astro camera (or modded dslr) the L-Pro was good in all conditions
That was an awesome review. In depth with spectrographs and pictures. Please do a review of narrowband filters too!!!
Thanks, Glad you liked it! Narrowband filters reviews will come eventually
@@NebulaPhotos waiting anxiously for that one! Please include single band as well as dual-narrowband ones like L-eNhance and L-eXtreme as well. That would rock!!! :-)
No IDAS D1 or newer D2 or the old favorite P2 which is insane I use the IDAS D2 which is made for LED light pollution which none of these cheaper filters use
Still very good review
Hope to review many other filters eventually. This was just a first batch based on feedback from viewers/patrons. I do like IDAS filters and am very interested to try the D2. Thanks for the suggestions!
Finally, jk Nico!
Great lesson!! I recently acquired a dedicated color camera and I use optolong-iv-ir for non nebule and l-enhance for nebula, I can see a big difference between this camera and dslr. I do not have any CLS filters and I am in bortle 6, do you think am good or do I need one? Oh am not planning on using dslr anymore only for like milky way or wide field when I can get to a better sky.
Cheers Nico!!👍🤝
Nope, you are all set with a UV-IR cut + an L-eNhance. Those are a perfect pair for dedicated astro camera. For DSLR milky way, no filter is always best in my opinion.
Excellent presentation, the best I have seen on this topic. Having just watched this for the second time, I absorbed a little more information. Greetings from Tasmania Australia 🇦🇺🦘👍
Complimenti, fai dei video esaustivi e completi con molti esempi pratici.
Excellent review and thoroughly done. I look forward to seeing further tests of more extreme dual band filters in the class of the Optolong L-Enhance, Astronomik UHC or Radian filters which OPT should be able to supply you, if they haven’t already.
And keep in mind that it isn’t necessary to shoot only through a filter. Under darker skies shooting unfiltered and filtered images and blending them later gives you the best of both worlds: the natural star colours and more subtle tones of some nebulas along with the richest and greatest extent of faint red nebulosity. It isn’t either/or. Unless you are shooting under light polluted skies, then a filter and modified camera is essential. And in that case an even more extreme filter than what you tested here would likely be better. Clear skies!
Personally, I thought there was a subtle improvement under Bortle 4 skies using the Lpro (best) and the Neodymium. Contrast was improved a little, but the stars were definitely tightened up and I didn't really notice any loss of star colour. The CLS filters were horrible. Really in the Bortle 9 you would be better with something like the L extreme. Anyway, good video, always good to see real life comparisons without hours of post processing.
Great review!
Thank you very much!
Great video! Really useful! What type of adapter do you use to attach a 2” filter to a dslr? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks again… great content :).
Excellent review Nico! It works out great for me I only bought the Astronomik cls for my Canon 80D. Going to look into the IR cut filter now. Thanks for the review!
Great review buddy, Thank you so much :)