Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Use this section to discuss "standard" Baader/Coronado/ Lunt SolarView/ Daystar, etc… filters, cameras and scopes. No mods, just questions/ answers and reviews.
gabrieli
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 2123
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 12:12 am
Location: Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
Been thanked: 212 times
Contact:

Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by gabrieli » Sun Sep 27, 2020 3:34 pm

In the next month or so, I will be ordering a Quantum filter from Daystar. I’m interested in the best choice for prominence imaging (my main interest when I first started solar imaging).

I know that prominences are best imaged with wider bandwidths (these provide high contrast images according to Daystar)

Here’s my question:

What does a wider bandwidth do to detail in the prominence itself?

In other words, does a wider bandwidth produce a brighter prom with a hazy blob appearance?
I would want a filter that can show some prom details as well as a bright image.

If anybody owns a Quantum filter at medium (0.6A) or higher (0.8 A bandwidth) can you give an impression of what you can see in a prom image with your filter?

Or, if someone can refer me to some sample images taken at different bandwidths (Daystar’s examples give word descriptions but don’t really show differences well in their images)

Is double stacking such a filter feasible?



Thanks.

Lou



User avatar
p_zetner
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 1158
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:59 pm
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by p_zetner » Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:38 pm

Hi Lou.
I do all of my H-alpha imaging with a Daystar Quantum PE 0.6A filter.
Here are some recent images (including proms) under conditions of good seeing.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29045&p=265306#p265306
Cheers.
Peter



gabrieli
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 2123
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 12:12 am
Location: Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
Been thanked: 212 times
Contact:

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by gabrieli » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:39 pm

Thanks for the reply, Peter.Your images are very persuasive. They show good detail, both in the proms and chromosphere.

Lou



User avatar
rsfoto
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3371
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: San Luis Potosi, México
Has thanked: 2125 times
Been thanked: 1547 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by rsfoto » Wed Sep 30, 2020 1:17 am

Hi Lou,

I do not want to say anything bad about Daystar but I bought some not long ago, April 2018, a QUARK and a QUANTUM PE 0.4Angström and both were blind. It took me over a Year to solve this problem with Daystar. In this regard the customer service was horrible.

I paid that time US $ 13,700.00 for both and this was not a Peanut. After long discussions i finally got my money back. I will never ever again buy something from DayStar.

OK, this does not have to mean that you will have the same bad luck.

Just make sure by writing that you get a good one as well as if something does not work out for your they solve the problem quickly.

Rainer


regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

Ljungmann
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:26 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Ljungmann » Wed Oct 21, 2020 1:32 pm

I have a Quantum SE 0.6A filter. Its an old ATM filter (Del Woods etalon). It shows prominences in great details. It is still the best h-alpha filter I have seen prominences. You will see many details "inside" the prominences and the dynamics is out of this world. I do have (normal with the PE filters)a high resolution spectrographic scanning of the etalon. The filter is pretty good, but not a PE filter.
I do have a SolarSpectrum 0.3A filter. But the filter is a clear "surface" winner. But the 2 filters works great and complement each other.
My telescope is a Baarder 8" Tristar or 60/80mm Apo's.



User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Thu Oct 22, 2020 2:45 pm

I do not want to say anything bad about Daystar but I bought some not long ago, April 2018, a QUARK and a QUANTUM PE 0.4Angström and both were blind. It took me over a Year to solve this problem with Daystar. In this regard the customer service was horrible.

I paid that time US $ 13,700.00 for both and this was not a Peanut. After long discussions i finally got my money back. I will never ever again buy something from DayStar.

OK, this does not have to mean that you will have the same bad luck.

Just make sure by writing that you get a good one as well as if something does not work out for your they solve the problem quickly.

This is quite disconcerting.

I have been a DayStar filter owner since 1976 when Del Woods introduced these filters to the amateur astronomy community. My ATM 0.7 filter was the equivalent of today's Quantum SE line. My previous experiences with Del and Mark Wagner, who both did subsequent services and blocker replacements, were outstanding - timely and good communication was the norm.

Two years ago I replaced the ATM 0.7 filter with a 0.6 Quantum PE - the ultimate grade of contrast uniformity - which was only a couple of years old, and falls well within the 10 year transferable warranty. However, the filter has since developed a problem and fails to come on-band despite indicating it is on-band. I documented this issue by doing a direct apples-to-apples comparison with a 0.7 Coronado SM90 on two identical scopes stopped down to f30. As can be seen, the Coronado filter (top) is nicely on-band, while the DayStar (bottom) is not.

I returned the filter to DayStar over three months ago with the above documentation. Per DayStar's website the turnaround time for a service check is three weeks. I have called and emailed DayStar 2 or 3 times; so far all I have heard back is that the filter is in the "lab," and that when they provide and "update" I will be informed.

Given the experience described above, I am becoming concerned...
Attachments
DayStar - Coronado caompare images.jpg
DayStar - Coronado caompare images.jpg (241.34 KiB) Viewed 1158 times
DayStar - Coronado compare setup.jpg
DayStar - Coronado compare setup.jpg (237.01 KiB) Viewed 1158 times


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

User avatar
Montana
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 24530
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
Location: Cheshire, UK
Has thanked: 3159 times
Been thanked: 1214 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Montana » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:39 pm

Bob, I hope you marked your filter, as you won't get the same one back otherwise. They have no serial numbers so I wrote my name on my Quark with permanent marker. They went ballistic, sent it back untouched. I wiped it off with ethanol, sent it back and they sent me an even worse filter back. It then took 6 months to get my money back. Just saying, you could get wonderful service as well ;)

Alexandra



Ljungmann
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:26 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Ljungmann » Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:25 pm

Bob - I hope you will get your filter back and fixed.
We did send two 0.5A University filters and my 0.6A ATM to Daystar. They all needed new blockers, trimmere and a Quantum house. Turn around time was 5 weeks. And for sure its still the old Del etalons....
I had tested a lot of new (rear-mounted) h-alpha filters for a dealer and in private. If someone would like info, send a PM



Ljungmann
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:26 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Ljungmann » Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:52 pm

BTW one of the old University 0.5A filters was owned by John Hicks. Del told him it was a great etalon. And I must say that the test sheet shows its out of this world filter. My 0.6A SE filter is close to a PE filter.



User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:23 am

Hi Alexandra,

Yikes! That's a horror story worthy of Halloween. The Quantum SE and PE filters do however come with an adhesive label with a serial number. Of course it could be removed and/or replaced... but I just hope they are really busy and I will eventually get a fully functional filter back to me. My fingers are crossed.

Hi Ljungmann - good to hear about your filters and experiences. But it sort of has me wishing I had kept my ATM 0.7A, which also was very very good... I have a saying about mistakes I made in my youth that I was "young and dumb." Can't use the young part anymore... ;-)

Is double stacking such a filter feasible?
Yes, but it is more difficult. Christian Viladrich has done this using a rare Coronado SMn quartz etalon filter,

viewtopic.php?t=27196

as well as others:

http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astr ... rast-2.htm


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

Ljungmann
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:26 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Ljungmann » Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:15 am

Hi Bob, yes thats why I have kept my old filter. Always thinking its a good ATM etalon when I was thinking about maybe something better. And my mix with a Solar Spectrum0.3A filter and The Baarder Herschel Wedge works brilliant.
I still do stupid things ;) selling a good 0.7A T-scanner and the worst some years ago selling a Vixen 102FL. Stupid.



Highbury Mark
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:53 pm
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 100 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Highbury Mark » Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:24 pm

Lou - I hope you get a great filter. And Bob, I hope the only problem at Daystar Is that they’re busy. For equipment that can cost as much as small car, and that can require ongoing support like a car, we have to be able to trust the manufacturer’s customer service.
Recently a friend ordered a double stack filter set from Solarscope and was disappointed that they didn’t match up to his (excellent) Lunt DS. His money was returned immediately - no quibbles.


TeleVue 85 + Solarscope SF70DS
Tak FC-100DC, Quark Chromosphere, Baader wedge
Zeiss binoviewer, Zeiss OPMI/TV plossl eyepieces

User avatar
DeepSolar64
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3972
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2019 12:19 am
Location: Edneyville North Carolina U.S.A.
Has thanked: 2028 times
Been thanked: 1913 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by DeepSolar64 » Wed Oct 28, 2020 5:04 am

I can't bounce for DayStar but concerning details in single stack ( wider bandpass ) Vs double stack ( lower bandpass ) on average I see more detail in proms in single stack. Many proms tend to be faint and even if double stack reveals them it shows little detail in them. Single stack wins here. Wider bandpass equals brighter image which reveals more detail. BUT if a prominence is really bright to begin with sometimes double stack can give a more detailed image since it may be overly bright in single stack. I base this on what I have seen using my two Coronado SolarMax II scopes but the results should be no different with DayStar or any other manufacturer. Now if the bandpass is too wide the image may get too bright drowning out detail in the prominences.


Lunt 8x32 SUNoculars
Orion 70mm Solar Telescope
Celestron AstroMaster Alt/Az Mount
Meade Coronado SolarMax II 60 DS
Meade Coronado SolarMax II 90 DS
Meade Coronado AZS Alt/Az Mount
Astro-Tech AT72EDII with Altair solar wedge
Celestron NexStar 102GT with Altair solar wedge
Losmandy AZ8 Alt/Az Mount
ZWO ASI178MM monochrome camera
Lunt, Coronado, TeleVue, Orion and Meade eyepieces

Image Visual Observer
" Way more fun to see it! "

User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:29 pm

Recently a friend ordered a double stack filter set from Solarscope and was disappointed that they didn’t match up to his (excellent) Lunt DS. His money was returned immediately - no quibbles.
My experience with the SolarScope DSF100 filters was that they were quite temperature sensitive, and could take over an hour just to come on-band. I did some extensive comparisons and made recommendations to SolarScope. It may be that SolarScope has not improved their IR blocking ERF coating. I found adding a Baader DERF helped tremendously.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/6844 ... try9786308


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:50 pm

Update from DayStar - my filter was returned. A followup email from DayStar stated the etalon was replaced - which likely accounts for the long turnaround period. I'm waiting for some decent weather (could be weeks now in the Pacific Northwest) to determine how well it performs. Fingers (and toes ;-) are crossed.


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

torsinadoc
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by torsinadoc » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:14 pm

Bob Yoesle wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 2:45 pm
I do not want to say anything bad about Daystar but I bought some not long ago, April 2018, a QUARK and a QUANTUM PE 0.4Angström and both were blind. It took me over a Year to solve this problem with Daystar. In this regard the customer service was horrible.

I paid that time US $ 13,700.00 for both and this was not a Peanut. After long discussions i finally got my money back. I will never ever again buy something from DayStar.

OK, this does not have to mean that you will have the same bad luck.

Just make sure by writing that you get a good one as well as if something does not work out for your they solve the problem quickly.

This is quite disconcerting.

I have been a DayStar filter owner since 1976 when Del Woods introduced these filters to the amateur astronomy community. My ATM 0.7 filter was the equivalent of today's Quantum SE line. My previous experiences with Del and Mark Wagner, who both did subsequent services and blocker replacements, were outstanding - timely and good communication was the norm.

Two years ago I replaced the ATM 0.7 filter with a 0.6 Quantum PE - the ultimate grade of contrast uniformity - which was only a couple of years old, and falls well within the 10 year transferable warranty. However, the filter has since developed a problem and fails to come on-band despite indicating it is on-band. I documented this issue by doing a direct apples-to-apples comparison with a 0.7 Coronado SM90 on two identical scopes stopped down to f30. As can be seen, the Coronado filter (top) is nicely on-band, while the DayStar (bottom) is not.

I returned the filter to DayStar over three months ago with the above documentation. Per DayStar's website the turnaround time for a service check is three weeks. I have called and emailed DayStar 2 or 3 times; so far all I have heard back is that the filter is in the "lab," and that when they provide and "update" I will be informed.

Given the experience described above, I am becoming concerned...

I sent my PE.38 to Daystar in May. I started to have issues with it staying on band and stabilizing last winter. I sent it back and they checked it and updated firmware. That took about 1 month. This spring I started to notice issues again and it appears the etalon went bad. They thought it was from getting to hot. They are looking for replacement that meets spec. I’m not as concerned about the amount of time. I just want it in spec and working order.


102 F/11 achromat +Lunt CaK 1800
Lunt 100 DS

https://www.astrobin.com/users/torsinadoc/

torsinadoc
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by torsinadoc » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:14 pm

Bob Yoesle wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 2:45 pm
I do not want to say anything bad about Daystar but I bought some not long ago, April 2018, a QUARK and a QUANTUM PE 0.4Angström and both were blind. It took me over a Year to solve this problem with Daystar. In this regard the customer service was horrible.

I paid that time US $ 13,700.00 for both and this was not a Peanut. After long discussions i finally got my money back. I will never ever again buy something from DayStar.

OK, this does not have to mean that you will have the same bad luck.

Just make sure by writing that you get a good one as well as if something does not work out for your they solve the problem quickly.

This is quite disconcerting.

I have been a DayStar filter owner since 1976 when Del Woods introduced these filters to the amateur astronomy community. My ATM 0.7 filter was the equivalent of today's Quantum SE line. My previous experiences with Del and Mark Wagner, who both did subsequent services and blocker replacements, were outstanding - timely and good communication was the norm.

Two years ago I replaced the ATM 0.7 filter with a 0.6 Quantum PE - the ultimate grade of contrast uniformity - which was only a couple of years old, and falls well within the 10 year transferable warranty. However, the filter has since developed a problem and fails to come on-band despite indicating it is on-band. I documented this issue by doing a direct apples-to-apples comparison with a 0.7 Coronado SM90 on two identical scopes stopped down to f30. As can be seen, the Coronado filter (top) is nicely on-band, while the DayStar (bottom) is not.

I returned the filter to DayStar over three months ago with the above documentation. Per DayStar's website the turnaround time for a service check is three weeks. I have called and emailed DayStar 2 or 3 times; so far all I have heard back is that the filter is in the "lab," and that when they provide and "update" I will be informed.

Given the experience described above, I am becoming concerned...

I sent my PE.38 to Daystar in May. I started to have issues with it staying on band and stabilizing last winter. I sent it back and they checked it and updated firmware. That took about 1 month. This spring I started to notice issues again and it appears the etalon went bad. They thought it was from getting to hot. They are looking for replacement that meets spec. I’m not as concerned about the amount of time. I just want it in spec and working order.


102 F/11 achromat +Lunt CaK 1800
Lunt 100 DS

https://www.astrobin.com/users/torsinadoc/

User avatar
rsfoto
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3371
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: San Luis Potosi, México
Has thanked: 2125 times
Been thanked: 1547 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by rsfoto » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:14 pm

Bob Yoesle wrote:
Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:50 pm
Update from DayStar - my filter was returned. A followup email from DayStar stated the etalon was replaced - which likely accounts for the long turnaround period. I'm waiting for some decent weather (could be weeks now in the Pacific Northwest) to determine how well it performs. Fingers (and toes ;-) are crossed.
Hi Bob,

Great and I will cross fingers too. It is a pity that the customers do have to ask what was wrong instead the producer of the filters do inform more openly the customers what was wrong.

Anyhow the truth will always find it way out of darkness.

When I started my questioning with DayStar about my QUANTUM PE 0.4 Å filter sending them images and so on and finally they told me to send it back it was not only after a few months they admitted my filter was blind but they even send me a test sheet comparing my filters to Fred Bruenjes personal show piece which he uses on every possible occasion for public outreach. During NEAF 2019 we compared visually my blind filter to his showpiece where obviously the difference was like day and night. After that they took my filter with them and a few months later, of course after asking what is going on, I got a test sheet made by them comparing Fred's filter to mine.

I would say such a test sheet should come with every filter when we are spending thousands of dollars ... Even iOptron sends out test sheets of the periodic RMS of their sh.....y mounts :o


regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:07 pm

Thanks for that information Rainer. I'll give DayStar a call and see if I can get the test report that is generated for all PE grade filters:

http://www.daystarfilters.com/QuantumPE.shtml


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

User avatar
rsfoto
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3371
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: San Luis Potosi, México
Has thanked: 2125 times
Been thanked: 1547 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by rsfoto » Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:56 pm

Bob Yoesle wrote:
Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:07 pm
Thanks for that information Rainer. I'll give DayStar a call and see if I can get the test report that is generated for all PE grade filters:

http://www.daystarfilters.com/QuantumPE.shtml
Hi Bob,

Thanks for the link. As I did no have any interest anymore in looking what DayStar is doing after the huge disappointment I did not see that page but that is interesting.

OK, I am now goin back into the past which I normally only do when there is something which really pi555es me off.

They present something which is somthing about the filter quality but it is just a quarter of the truth ...

I did not want to show the test sheet before as I still have some respect towards Daystar and as Forrest Gump said " [poopy] happens ", but now seeing just a part of the truth with which they want to show off about their filters I have to show it.

It is not only what they praise there with " Uniformity " and FWHM Full Width Half Maximum values, as their is another much more important point, IMHO, and you will realize it after looking at my test sheet ... and that is " Transmission " and now I have to ask myself, did they ever test my filter, a QUANTUM PE 0.4Å for a modest price of now of US $ 13,995.00, before sending it out to me ? I guess no as they were convinced they only produce quality. In 2018 I paid US $ 12,500.00 if I remember well. OK, I got my money back that that was not the important thing. I really wanted a QUANTUM PE 0.4Å filter in order to add more close up images to my Sun imaging.

And DayStar, if you read this, you will have to admit that I am right ... Not Everything what Shines is Gold :shock: :shock: :shock:

I just hope I am not banned from this forum because of presenting facts ... and if yes, Moderators please tell me, and I will close my account by myself :mrgreen:

DayStar_XmitCompare_Page_1.jpeg
DayStar_XmitCompare_Page_1.jpeg (311.78 KiB) Viewed 811 times
Daystar_Quantum.JPG
Daystar_Quantum.JPG (163.06 KiB) Viewed 810 times


regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

torsinadoc
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by torsinadoc » Sun Nov 08, 2020 10:31 pm

Bob Yoesle wrote:
Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:07 pm
Thanks for that information Rainer. I'll give DayStar a call and see if I can get the test report that is generated for all PE grade filters:

http://www.daystarfilters.com/QuantumPE.shtml
I will try and ask for the same.


102 F/11 achromat +Lunt CaK 1800
Lunt 100 DS

https://www.astrobin.com/users/torsinadoc/

User avatar
rsfoto
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3371
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: San Luis Potosi, México
Has thanked: 2125 times
Been thanked: 1547 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by rsfoto » Sun Nov 08, 2020 10:48 pm

torsinadoc wrote:
Sun Nov 08, 2020 10:31 pm
Bob Yoesle wrote:
Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:07 pm
Thanks for that information Rainer. I'll give DayStar a call and see if I can get the test report that is generated for all PE grade filters:

http://www.daystarfilters.com/QuantumPE.shtml
I will try and ask for the same.
They will hate me

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

christian viladrich
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 768
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Been thanked: 187 times
Contact:

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by christian viladrich » Mon Nov 09, 2020 12:57 pm

Interesting discussion ;-)

When I am retired (maybe in one year) I am planning to build a spectrohelio in order to measure accurately the FWHM of Ha (and Ca K) filters.

Regarding DayStar, accurate measurements have been made Big Bear Observatory (Ha, some years ago) and others at the solar tower of Paris observatory (Ha and Sodium D1).


Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Planetary Astronomy"
http://planetary-astronomy.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

Ljungmann
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:26 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Ljungmann » Mon Nov 09, 2020 1:14 pm

To be honest, most Daystar filters I have seen visually has been good. I have owned a T-scanner 0.7A and a Quark. Sold both because I really bought them just for fun and you can't look in 4 filters with 2 eyes ;)
The Quark btw has a weird temperature setting, but my friend who has it now can work around the problem. I do test Quark filters when someone ask me for an opinion. This year I did test a filter - and its was too far into the blue...
I have a Quantum 0.6A SE (Woods etalon) and a SolarSpectrum 0.3A filter as reference. I do have a test sheet from Daystar when I got the Quantum House and new blockers and trimmers. I always do my tests visually and frankly its the only way to really test h-alpha filters....
I am so sorry to hear that your 0.4A PE filter did not work. The 0.5A sisters I know are so freaking great filters.
Yes, your test sheet shows the problem. Transmission. I know a 0.4A SE filter with to low contrast. An expert making filters has some times ago told about the mica and that you need to test them out in real life because your lab tests can fool you to believe in false bandwidth. I think it was transmission that could fool you. But I am not an expert and I just hope that all filters would return with flying colours.



User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: Advice requested on Quantum filter purchase

Post by Bob Yoesle » Mon Nov 09, 2020 3:38 pm

I've emailed DayStar to request a test report for my replacement PE etalon.

This whole topic brings up an important issue for consumer narrow band solar filters. At least DayStar produces a report for some of their filters. I note however in both the reports reported above there is no measurement for the filter finesse.

Since a good sum of money is already expended on the better grade filters, a test report is a reasonable thing to expect. I think purchasers of lesser grade filters should also be able to obtain such a report, even if it might cost a bit more - say a $50 + USD to get such a report. This would allow the consumer to better choose what filters they would prefer, and perhaps encourage the manufacturers to adhere to tighter quality assurance standards. This could alsoprevent substandard filters from being sold in the first place:

Compare 2.jpg
Compare 2.jpg (484.91 KiB) Viewed 773 times
On the left is a Coronado SM90ii filter of 2017 Tijuana production, and on the right is a Coronado SM90 of 2003 Tucson production. I would estimate the FWHM of the SM90ii to be no greater than 1.0 Angstrom, and the SM90 appears to be of the specified 0.7 Angstrom - or less:

Closu compare SM.jpg
Closu compare SM.jpg (470.76 KiB) Viewed 773 times


Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Goldendale Observatory

Dark-Sky Defenders

Post Reply