LP filter install

[Mac]

Where would this LP filter be threaded into the light chain going to a DSLR or AP camera on my ES ED-102mm?

The only threads are inside the T-adapter going to my DSLR. Since I have no prior experience I want to make sure I have everything I need to use it.

Optolong L-eNhance Light Pollution Dual-Bandpass Imaging Filter

https://www.highpointscientific.com/opt ... ch-lnh-200


Thanks

[bladekeeper]

Hi Steve! I thread mine onto the nosepiece of my astro-cam. That would be the equivalent of the t-adaptor for your DSLR.

I've got the same filter and have enjoyed it so far.

[Baskevo]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

[Mac]

Thanks James and Bryan.

I am going to order this filter so I can enjoy some better imaging from here at home. I am right on the edge of Bortle 6 skies and I am sure this will help.

[Mac]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

Which flattener are you using?

[Baskevo]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

Which flattener are you using?

I'm still using the ES 2" field flattener, but I need like 85mm of total back focus to achieve around 95% of a flat field with my canon cameras, which is the best I"ve been able to get out of the ES, Hotech, or Orion flatteners.
Jaytee recommends the Astro-tech AT2FF, which I haven't tried, but I'm looking into the Astro-tech reducer/flattener or the Stellarvue reducer/flattener, which might be a good option for you with the 102! There are reports of reducers alone providing a flatter field, so it would make sense to me that a reducer/flattener would do a better job for the ES 80 and 102 scopes.

ES also has a flattener/reducer for the larger scopes, but they sell an adapter to work with the 80 and 102, but it is pretty expensive.

[Mac]

I'm still using the ES 2" field flattener, but I need like 85mm of total back focus to achieve around 95% of a flat field with my canon cameras, which is the best I"ve been able to get out of the ES, Hotech, or Orion flatteners.
Jaytee recommends the Astro-tech AT2FF, which I haven't tried, but I'm looking into the Astro-tech reducer/flattener or the Stellarvue reducer/flattener, which might be a good option for you with the 102! There are reports of reducers alone providing a flatter field, so it would make sense to me that a reducer/flattener would do a better job for the ES 80 and 102 scopes.

ES also has a flattener/reducer for the larger scopes, but they sell an adapter to work with the 80 and 102, but it is pretty expensive.

I've read that the ES FR is not as good as the Stellarvue based on opinions and the price disparity. I haven't measured my back focus except to know I needed 3 extension tubes which puts focus right in the middle of the range.

[JimMinCT]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

Which flattener are you using?

I'm still using the ES 2" field flattener, but I need like 85mm of total back focus to achieve around 95% of a flat field with my canon cameras, which is the best I"ve been able to get out of the ES, Hotech, or Orion flatteners.
Jaytee recommends the Astro-tech AT2FF, which I haven't tried, but I'm looking into the Astro-tech reducer/flattener or the Stellarvue reducer/flattener, which might be a good option for you with the 102! There are reports of reducers alone providing a flatter field, so it would make sense to me that a reducer/flattener would do a better job for the ES 80 and 102 scopes.

ES also has a flattener/reducer for the larger scopes, but they sell an adapter to work with the 80 and 102, but it is pretty expensive.

I use the AstroTech FR/FF on occasion on my 102mm f/6, and it works fine @55mm backfocus. Not sure why your camera needs all the additional BF distance. I have a Canon and it is bang-on 55mm.
Good luck!

[Mac]

Yep, this is what I have.

Normal is 2 extension for the eyepiece and 90 degree.

[Baskevo]

Yep, this is what I have.

Normal is 2 extension for the eyepiece and 90 degree.

73370691_10220254304488877_1537663377902403584_o.jpg

Back focus for a Field Flattener is what I mean, which is the distance between the camera's sensor and the Field Flattener. It is supposed to be 55mm, I have read that that it is almost never accurate, especially if it is not built for a specific telescope like the ES one. It is different for every Field Flattener, but most of them state they are around 55mm, with +/- 2mm slack. Hopefully yours will be plug and go I have also read that filters can have an affect on flattening the field, I do not know how accurate that is. I tried it both with and without a LP filter.

Which flattener are you using?

I'm still using the ES 2" field flattener, but I need like 85mm of total back focus to achieve around 95% of a flat field with my canon cameras, which is the best I"ve been able to get out of the ES, Hotech, or Orion flatteners.
Jaytee recommends the Astro-tech AT2FF, which I haven't tried, but I'm looking into the Astro-tech reducer/flattener or the Stellarvue reducer/flattener, which might be a good option for you with the 102! There are reports of reducers alone providing a flatter field, so it would make sense to me that a reducer/flattener would do a better job for the ES 80 and 102 scopes.

ES also has a flattener/reducer for the larger scopes, but they sell an adapter to work with the 80 and 102, but it is pretty expensive.

I use the AstroTech FR/FF on occasion on my 102mm f/6, and it works fine @55mm backfocus. Not sure why your camera needs all the additional BF distance. I have a Canon and it is bang-on 55mm.
Good luck!

I'm using the ED80 not the 102, and it was the same thing for my regular ES ED80 triplet and for my new ES ED80 FCD100, and I have tried it with my Canon T7i and my canon t3, same results. I have not tried it with my new ZWO though.

I spent a month and a half trying to figure it out, with 4 different flatteners, and 2 replacements of my ES Field Flattener. Then, someone on cloud nights suggested I keep adding spacers, and I started to see a difference when I added 10mm, and then it got better at 15, then 20... between 80 - 90mm of total back focus is the sweet spot to get decent stars, and it is still not 100% a flat field. Same results on all 3 of the ES scopes I have tried. I have not tried with a reducer yet.

I want to try the Astrotech reducer/flattener, because I see that a lot with my scope on astrobin, but they are sold out until after Christmas

[John in SC]

So just for clarity (pun maybe intended) the 2 inch Light Pollution filter will thread into the T adapter (93633-A) for the Celestron NexStar 8se. I have ordered the T adapter and Nikon D 7500 adapter and realize the desirability for the filter. Dimensions for the T adapter are not listed on the Celestron site. Thanks!

[Mac]

So just for clarity (pun maybe intended) the 2 inch Light Pollution filter will thread into the T adapter (93633-A) for the Celestron NexStar 8se. I have ordered the T adapter and Nikon D 7500 adapter and realize the desirability for the filter. Dimensions for the T adapter are not listed on the Celestron site. Thanks!

I have it threaded into T-adapter for the ES ED-102 adapter for my Nikon, just received it on Friday.

HOWEVER - it does not fit into the 93633-A

[John in SC]

Thanks for the reply. What are the options for a filter using the 93633-A and the D7500? I see there is now a clip in option for the Nikon DX format but would appreciate hearing other thoughts. Thanks much.
https://www.cyclopsoptics.com/astronomy ... kon-aps-c/

[Mac]

Thanks for the reply. What are the options for a filter using the 93633-A and the D7500? I see there is now a clip in option for the Nikon DX format but would appreciate hearing other thoughts. Thanks much.
https://www.cyclopsoptics.com/astronomy ... kon-aps-c/

I never got a good answer on that one, from several online companies. The clip-in option may be the easiest way to go. I had not seen that for the 7500.


Someone with a Celestron and more experience might be able to chime in. I have not used mine much.

[WahooMike]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

When you say "Field Flattener", are you referring to something like a 6.3 Corrector/Reducer? I'm about to start AP, and already have the T-ring and adapter for my Canon, as well as the 6.3 Corrector. Aside from getting an Eq Mount, I assume I'm ready (once the skies clear).

Thanks!

[Baskevo]

You can thread it into the T-adapter, that is what I did before I had my Field Flattener, which also has threads

When you say "Field Flattener", are you referring to something like a 6.3 Corrector/Reducer? I'm about to start AP, and already have the T-ring and adapter for my Canon, as well as the 6.3 Corrector. Aside from getting an Eq Mount, I assume I'm ready (once the skies clear).

Thanks!

Hi Mike, Field flatteners are used to fix the field curvature inherent in most telescopes, but especially fast and short refractors. Coma correctors I believe are used in Newtonian scopes to fix coma. Reducers are used to reduce the focal ratio of your telescope.

The 6.3 corrector/reducer I believe are for specific Celestron scopes. So if you are using the Celestron 8se with f/10, I guess it will bring you down to f/6.3 and reduce coma in your images