Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

What’s your favorite moon filter?

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 bradbaker7

bradbaker7

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2020
  • Loc: Circle Pines, MN

Posted 25 September 2020 - 08:35 AM

Not looking to spend a lot of money but also don’t want to ruin my eyeballs. Even a half moon is pretty tough to look at.

I just received an Astromania Yellow No 12 and it doesn’t work as well as I was hoping.

What’s your go-to filter when things get too bright?

Edited by bradbaker7, 25 September 2020 - 08:37 AM.


#2 LDW47

LDW47

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,169
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 25 September 2020 - 08:40 AM

Just buy a variable polarizer filter of any brand, I just bought an 1,25” Svbony to try at an excellent price as a third one to my other 2” & 1.25” ! I just wanted to compare them and use it in my solar PST.


  • spaceoddity, stubeeef and MikeMiller like this

#3 MikeMiller

MikeMiller

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 905
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2014
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Posted 25 September 2020 - 08:43 AM

Just buy a variable polarizer filter of any brand, I just bought an 1,25” Svbony to try at an excellent price as a third one to my other 2” & 1.25” ! I just wanted to compare them and use it in my solar PST.

I agree with this. I like using different filter levels depending on how dark it is and how full the moon is.



#4 LDW47

LDW47

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,169
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 25 September 2020 - 08:51 AM

I agree with this. I like using different filter levels depending on how dark it is and how full the moon is.

Its the name of the game !


  • MikeMiller and The Luckster like this

#5 petert913

petert913

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,345
  • Joined: 27 May 2013
  • Loc: Silverton, OR

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:00 AM

Variable polarizer.



#6 havasman

havasman

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,636
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:24 AM

None. My eye is capable of dealing with extremely high brightness variation if I give it time to accommodate the change, even in 16" aperture. Then I can avoid the aberrations inherent in adding extra, usually suspect, layers of interference into the optical path. And there's nothing special about my eye. Any healthy eye can do the same.


Edited by havasman, 25 September 2020 - 09:25 AM.

  • izar187, Abhat and The Luckster like this

#7 SloMoe

SloMoe

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,198
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2016
  • Loc: Washington State

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:37 AM

Single polarize is usually what I use with half moon or less, if greater than half is showing I start to stack ND filters increasing in light reduction.

 

A variable polarize set up can be done with just two polarize filters stacked and just shift the bottom filter around until the desired light reduction is reached.

 

If you have a Barlow that the lower lens cell unscrews then you can remove the cell and use the Barlow housing to hold one of the polarize filters with the second filter on your eye piece, install and secure the Barlow housing in the eye piece holder of the focuser, now put the eye piece into the top of the Barlow and slowly turn the eye piece untill the desired light reduction is reached.

 

That's one way to do it in a Newt that you're not using a diagonal in, if you're using a diagonal then one filter on the nose of the diagonal and the other on the eye piece, then turn the eye piece until the desired light reduction is reached.

 

Many of the less expensive polarize and ND filters are of poor glass quality so once you've decided on your method of either stacking polarize and ND or two polarize filters you can start looking for quality filters with quality glass and grinds.

 

Most of these poor quality filters are "out of stock" everywhere, so you may get lucky and start out with a quality filter saving yourself some money in the long run.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#8 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,723
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:40 AM

My polarizing filters pair from Omegon is sleeping in the original wrap.

 

After some time spent with the filters experimenting, I take the green narrow passband (10nm) Solar Continuum filter, centered on 540nm, as it offers the highest contrast in the fine features on the Moon surface. Pretty good for the impact ejectas around the craters, and for the rimae. And moreover, most of the telescopes optics and eyepieces achieve the best performance on the green wavelengths.

 

My daylight Moon filter is the wide passband (35nm) H-Alpha, which is otherwise performing also very good on Mars.

 

These both filters penetrate fairly good through the atmospheric turbulence blurr, which reduces the seeing.

 

Best,

JG


  • Starman27 and SloMoe like this

#9 SloMoe

SloMoe

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,198
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2016
  • Loc: Washington State

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:44 AM

Thanks for the tips JG, those are filters I have but never considered for Lunar viewing.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#10 desertstars

desertstars

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 45,473
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Tucson, AZ

Posted 25 September 2020 - 09:49 AM

For general purposes, I've relied on my variable polarizing filter for low power views of the Moon. It's especially handy for outreach, when using the Moon as an object for public viewing. I use the filter less as I increase the magnification. On good nights, when the seeing permits high magnification, I don't need the filter at all.


  • BFaucett likes this

#11 sunnyday

sunnyday

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,111
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2019
  • Loc: the Canadian nebula .

Posted 25 September 2020 - 10:10 AM

Variable polarizer.

+1 



#12 Dave Mitsky

Dave Mitsky

    ISS

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 93,701
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2002
  • Loc: PA, USA, Planet Earth

Posted 25 September 2020 - 10:56 AM

Using high magnification and/or turning on a white light negates the need for lunar filters.


  • izar187, DC869 and gene 4181 like this

#13 DSOGabe

DSOGabe

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2019
  • Loc: El Paso, TX

Posted 25 September 2020 - 11:12 AM

I have a variable polarizing filter from Orion. Cost about $30. Allows one to adjust the amount of light transmission.



#14 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,820
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 25 September 2020 - 01:03 PM

Not looking to spend a lot of money but also don’t want to ruin my eyeballs. Even a half moon is pretty tough to look at.


You're not going to ruin your eyeballs. The Moon can be a bit painful to look at when you catch your first glimpse after staring at the blackness of space, just as it's painful to look at the road when a driver emerges from a tunnel into bright sunlight. But your eyes will adapt soon enough, especially if you use a reasonably high magnification.
 
Even at the lowest possible magnification, the Moon is darker than sunlit asphalt. It is, after all, just a big chunk of exceptionally dark rock hanging in the sunlight 230,000 miles away.

I tried Moon filters for a while, but ended up deciding I prefer the Moon unfiltered.


  • Scott in NC, izar187 and The Luckster like this

#15 LIVE LONG

LIVE LONG

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2020
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 25 September 2020 - 01:55 PM

 +1 for the Orion Variable Polarizing filter.

 

This save's me from getting a headache. Some people do not seem to be affected, how lucky they are !



#16 star drop

star drop

    The Cardinal

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 123,527
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2008
  • Loc: Snow Plop, NY

Posted 25 September 2020 - 03:55 PM

I prefer to view the moon without a filter.


  • izar187 likes this

#17 NorthernlatAK

NorthernlatAK

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2018

Posted 25 September 2020 - 04:28 PM

I bought the Orion variable polarized but do not use it. As stated by others, your eye will get used to it. I find that the filter degrades the image, and is especially noticeable at high powers. If I were to try another polarizer, it would probably be the Baader, and I'd probably use it for Venus rather than the moon. I have two other Baader filters and they work very well with no degradation. I occasionally use the Baader neodymium filter on the moon. It seems to produce a slightly cleaner image than with no filter sometimes.

#18 LDW47

LDW47

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,169
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 25 September 2020 - 06:49 PM

None. My eye is capable of dealing with extremely high brightness variation if I give it time to accommodate the change, even in 16" aperture. Then I can avoid the aberrations inherent in adding extra, usually suspect, layers of interference into the optical path. And there's nothing special about my eye. Any healthy eye can do the same.

You are wrong there, not any, not mine ! I quit being a he man a long time ago when I turned 30 and my eyes loved it !



#19 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,820
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 25 September 2020 - 07:04 PM

You are wrong there, not any, not mine ! I quit being a he man a long time ago when I turned 30 and my eyes loved it !

Your eye does precisely that every morning, when you wake up. But daytime standards, the Moon's brightness is quite modest. See how pale the Moon looks against a bright blue sky. In fact if you view it through a telescope then, you will likely wish it were brighter.


  • izar187 and havasman like this

#20 doolsduck

doolsduck

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Yuggera Country Australia (Brisbane)

Posted 25 September 2020 - 08:57 PM

I prefer unfiltered too.  Helps constrict my pupil, reduces aberration from my astigmatism, improves my view.  Pupils contract to protect the eye, but also to reduce the optical aberrations of the eye when sufficient light is available. 


  • izar187 likes this

#21 havasman

havasman

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,636
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas

Posted 25 September 2020 - 10:04 PM

You are wrong there, not any, not mine ! I quit being a he man a long time ago when I turned 30 and my eyes loved it !

Before this consarned abominable year is out I'll mark my three score and ten years. And despite others' declarations my eyes can very certainly accommodate the brightness shock of any celestial object yet encountered if I'll just remain attentive and patient. Then when that accommodation is complete (we're talking 2 or 3 minutes, outside) the object is perceived. IME filters degrade my perception of detail and variable polarizing filters do so more aggressively because they have more, usually suspect, surfaces.

Others are welcome to use what tools they may prefer. I'll not often tell them they are "wrong" as I am secure in knowing that doing so can make me look a fool. They may actually know what they see.



#22 Sketcher

Sketcher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2017
  • Loc: Under Earth's Sky

Posted 25 September 2020 - 10:26 PM

Well, I've been known to use a blue filter to show Mrs. Sketcher the "Blue Moon".

 

I've used a red filter to show her the "Strawberry Moon".

 

I've used an orange filter on Halloween -- for a "Pumpkin Moon"

 

I've even used a Mars filter (rendering the moon a shade of pink) to show her the "Pink Moon".

 

When, for some reason, I'm driven to look at a quarter moon in the daytime, I'll use a single polarizing filter adjusted to darken the background sky more than it darkens the moon -- thereby enhancing contrast.

 

I might even use a filter (like a 495 longpass yellow) to minimize the undesirable effects of a refractor's chromatic aberrations.

 

But in general, when I go out to make a "serious" moon observation and/or sketch -- when I want to maximize the observed details -- off come the filters -- regardless of the lunar phase.  As a matter of fact, I can't recall a single lunar sketch that I've made while using a filter.  The unfiltered view is simply better.  The eye sees better under brighter lighting.

 

Under particularly good seeing conditions, when particularly high magnifications can be used, I've at times wished the moon were even brighter than its unfiltered intensity.  Really.  Seriously.  I have.

 

My best views of the moon have been those that were made without the use of a filter.


  • izar187 likes this

#23 LDW47

LDW47

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,169
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 25 September 2020 - 10:29 PM

Before this consarned abominable year is out I'll mark my three score and ten years. And despite others' declarations my eyes can very certainly accommodate the brightness shock of any celestial object yet encountered if I'll just remain attentive and patient. Then when that accommodation is complete (we're talking 2 or 3 minutes, outside) the object is perceived. IME filters degrade my perception of detail and variable polarizing filters do so more aggressively because they have more, usually suspect, surfaces.

Others are welcome to use what tools they may prefer. I'll not often tell them they are "wrong" as I am secure in knowing that doing so can make me look a fool. They may actually know what they see.

I meant, if you didn’t know, ‘not any’ in regards to myself, I don’t view the moon with out a polarizer if it is larger than first quarter. Just don’t include me in your word ‘any’ in whatever context because many aren’t ‘any’ when it comes to viewing that blindingly bright orb as it nears / passes full moon. Clear Skize !  PS: Nothing wrong with the word fool, it shows up in many great songs, lol !



#24 havasman

havasman

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,636
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas

Posted 25 September 2020 - 11:43 PM

I meant, if you didn’t know, ‘not any’ in regards to myself, I don’t view the moon with out a polarizer if it is larger than first quarter. Just don’t include me in your word ‘any’ in whatever context because many aren’t ‘any’ when it comes to viewing that blindingly bright orb as it nears / passes full moon. Clear Skize !  PS: Nothing wrong with the word fool, it shows up in many great songs, lol !

Ah, so. Not any more from u. 'Cause there's "manage ignore prefs" available. Adio!



#25 BFaucett

BFaucett

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,876
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2014
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 26 September 2020 - 01:48 AM

I frequently use a 50% Neutral Density filter when viewing the Moon. 

 

Bob F. 




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics