Lunt Calcium filter

Use this section to discuss "standard" Baader/Coronado/ Lunt SolarView/ Daystar, etc… filters, cameras and scopes. No mods, just questions/ answers and reviews.
Post Reply
User avatar
hopskipson
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:27 pm
Location: Queens, NY
Has thanked: 404 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Lunt Calcium filter

Post by hopskipson »

Hi All

I'm looking to add Calcium K line to my set up. I will be using it on a C-8 and a f/8, 6" refractor with an Aries Tri-band DERF. I will be imaging with an ASI174 or possibly an ASI290.

Will I need to use the blocking filter with the Calcium filter and if so which one would you recommend? Of course I don't want to spend money needlessly so the smallest one that will give good results is my preference.

Sorry if this has been discussed before :oops: , but thanks for the help!

James


James
These pretzels are making me thirsty! (C.C.)
The Quark introduced me to this wonderful side of the hobby and the sun hasn’t disappointed yet.
Solar Equipment: Solar Spectrum RG-18 0.3A, Coronado Solarmax 90mm etalon Isle of Man SN-001, Tuscon SN-380 and Meade SM2, Lunt LS80 DS, Quark Chromosphere, Lunt 2" wedge, 2-Lunt CaK II 1200, Baader 3.8 and 5.0 solar film in 208mm cells, and 3D printed Sol'Ex SHG, Lunt 40mm
Coming Soon: Solar Spectrum CaK II <1A filter
User avatar
Montana
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 34527
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
Location: Cheshire, UK
Has thanked: 17526 times
Been thanked: 8763 times

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by Montana »

Yes you do need to use the complete unit. There is a guide from Lunt here at the bottom of this page to tell you which size blocking filter to get for your telescope https://luntsolarsystems.com/shop/solar ... k-modules/

My B1800 is absolutely fine on my C11 with the ASI174 chip.

Alexandra


User avatar
MalVeauX
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 1853
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 7:58 pm
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 1142 times
Been thanked: 1329 times

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by MalVeauX »

Hey James,

I'll be doing the B1200 module myself. The IMX174 sensor is 11.3mm at it's widest dimension, so the 12mm aperture of the blocking filter will not vignette too badly (don't care about a few pixels around the edge, they will be artifact with stacking anyways). The ERF part of the module is not needed since you will be using a full aperture D-ERF already.

Very best,


george9
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 355
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:28 am
Has thanked: 175 times
Been thanked: 426 times

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by george9 »

I suspect this is in another thread, but have people confirmed that the Lunt ERF doesn't cover a frequency otherwise missed by the main components? Lunt tends to double cover frequencies for eye safety (these are rated for visual), so I would guess it is all covered. I wasn't going to remove the Lunt ERF, but I guess removing it gets rid of one more opportunity for reflections, attenuation, and optical imperfection.

George


bart1805
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 636
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:04 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by bart1805 »

george9 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:32 pm I suspect this is in another thread, but have people confirmed that the Lunt ERF doesn't cover a frequency otherwise missed by the main components? Lunt tends to double cover frequencies for eye safety (these are rated for visual), so I would guess it is all covered. I wasn't going to remove the Lunt ERF, but I guess removing it gets rid of one more opportunity for reflections, attenuation, and optical imperfection.

George
Hi George, when visual: safety first. So I would never use my home constructed CaK filter with the Baader Blue and the K-line as blocker for visual. Better safe than sorry so it is just imaging CaK for me. My advise would be (when using visual!) to not remove the 2 inch Lunt nosepiece with the two filters and change it for something else.


george9
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 355
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:28 am
Has thanked: 175 times
Been thanked: 426 times

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by george9 »

Oops. Thanks for pointing that out, Bart. I meant for imaging. I cannot see CaK. I just meant that they designed it for visual and they usually double cover everything. So if I use it for imaging, the camera will be fine without the Lunt ERF behind the bigger ERF.

Yes, for visual, my own rule is always use a full commercial setup, optionally adding filters but never subtracting.

George


User avatar
Valery
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 4059
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:13 pm
Has thanked: 156 times
Been thanked: 893 times

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by Valery »

George and all,

Do not remove Lunt pre-filter unless your image is too dark.


As for camera use for CaK imaging. To realize full resolution at 393nm with IMX174 chip one need to get F/40.
With IMX290 one need to get F/20-25.

I bought 290MM camera for CaK imaging - it has better sensitivity, lower noise and somewhat faster at full size frame. For H-a imaging I still use my Basler ASA1920-155 camera with IMX174 chip.

Hope this helps.


Valery


"Solar H alpha activity is the most dynamic and compelling thing you can see in a telescope, so spend accordingly." (c) Bob Yoesle.

Largest full size 185 - 356mm Dielectric Energy Rejection Filters (D-ERF) by ARIES Instruments.
User avatar
marktownley
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 42131
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
Location: Brierley Hills, UK
Has thanked: 20240 times
Been thanked: 10115 times
Contact:

Re: Lunt Calcium filter

Post by marktownley »

I'm tempted by a 290 for the same reasons Valery.


Image
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
Post Reply