Solar (eclipse) Photography

I thought I would just add a point about hydrogen alpha (Ha) filters.

If you're contemplating a glass DSO Ha filter that costs about £100-400 for solar observing then don't. These are for night time astronomy use not for solar and here's why:

1. The Ha filter is not designed for solar heat. It will crack quickly followed by the smell of burning - either eyeball or your equipment. You MUST have a blocking filter (normally called an Energy Rejection Filter, ERF for short) - that's what the white light foil does.. solar scope blocking filters used for Ha normally retail for about £3-400 then you have the cost of the actual tunable Ha filter.. so you can see.. there's no cheap short cut..

2. Ha filters for DSOs are anything from the range of 35nm bandwidth to 3nm bandwidth - the width of light passed around the magic 656.3nm light wavelength spectral line. This will not return any Ha images other than a round blob. They are not narrow enough to show prominences - for that you need 0.9-0.1 angstroms bandwidth (i.e. 10 angstroms to 1 nm).

3. A DSO broad or narrow band filter behind a white light blocking filter may help make the image more contrasty or show some surface granulation.

Just incase people think they can get cheap solar prom and eclipse shots :D

My experience, other than white light - I built my own spectrograph - it's performance was measured by others at R6000 and 0.9Angstroms bandwidth.. a couple of mods over summer will see that bandwidth fall to 0.3-0.4A. This is not only good enough to show proms as the solar scopes do.. it can also differentiate the speed of the matter in the proms on the suns surface (± about 200,000Km/hour) measured by redshift in the spectra..
Once finished ... it should be pretty good as I get to image in multiple colours at the same time.
 
Last edited:
Tbh Think I might just try my ND 3 + ND variable when the sun is most covered

Take a few shots and be done.

IIf this is equipment dangerous (only using live view) I just won't bother.
I would have thought at 90pc coverage an ND solution will at least prevent any damage
 
Last edited:
Tbh Think I might just try my ND 3 + ND variable when the sun is most covered

Take a few shots and be done.

IIf this is equipment dangerous (only using live view) I just won't bother.
I would have thought at 90pc coverage an ND solution will at least prevent any damage

The photographic film is ND 3.8, so as long as you're not looking through the camera viewfinder with the variable you're probably in the range of ND 3.0-4.0 I assume (your risk :)) so the images will be short and the DSLR shutter taking the focus of the heat.

I can't use ND3.8 as the scope I use has a field flattener cell at the back of the scope (where all the heat is focused on a continuous basis) and only one camera I use has a shutter (min exp time of 3 seconds!) so I don't have the luxury of a shutter to take any heat.
 
I've picked up some Baader Solar Film, so I'm going to have a play with making filters.

Which apertures should I be using? Is ISO 100 the best to use?
 
Completely missed this post!

Has anyone ever tried a star trail/long exposure shots of something like this? I've got a 10-stop ND filter but given the amount of light would this even work?
 
I've picked up some Baader Solar Film, so I'm going to have a play with making filters.

Which apertures should I be using? Is ISO 100 the best to use?

I picked up a sheet of that stuff too.

I made a simple filter holder out of card. Two pieces with a hole cut to match the lens hood with the paper sandwiched between them and then a sort of 'cup' bit so it hangs on the hood without falling off.

Bhj4ZX7.jpg

lr7jYzJ.jpg


Tried a really quick and nasty test this morning. ISO100, F8, 1/320th
The sun is so bright that ISO 100 is more than enough. The other settings are just whatever takes your fancy I think.

U1h4cky.jpg
 
Might pass this up. I don't think I'm particularly excited enough by pics of what I see to risk my equipment
If this was totality it would be completely different.
 
I wasn't expecting a partial eclipse to have such severe impact on equipment. I was interested in photographing it but I won't risk any of my gear either, simply not worth it, I haven't even got any solar eclipse glasses yet so I won't be watching it if that's the case either! They're all going for about 20 quid on the bay and such like.
 
Awesome

Wow I'm seriously impressed, I never even considered taking photos of the sun Awesome :D
I picked up a sheet of that stuff too.

I made a simple filter holder out of card. Two pieces with a hole cut to match the lens hood with the paper sandwiched between them and then a sort of 'cup' bit so it hangs on the hood without falling off.

Bhj4ZX7.jpg

lr7jYzJ.jpg


Tried a really quick and nasty test this morning. ISO100, F8, 1/320th
The sun is so bright that ISO 100 is more than enough. The other settings are just whatever takes your fancy I think.

U1h4cky.jpg
 
I picked up a sheet of that stuff too.

I made a simple filter holder out of card. Two pieces with a hole cut to match the lens hood with the paper sandwiched between them and then a sort of 'cup' bit so it hangs on the hood without falling off.

Can I suggest a rubber band or strap around the collar to help secure it?
 
I wasn't expecting a partial eclipse to have such severe impact on equipment. I was interested in photographing it but I won't risk any of my gear either, simply not worth it, I haven't even got any solar eclipse glasses yet so I won't be watching it if that's the case either! They're all going for about 20 quid on the bay and such like.

Exactly my thoughts.
I know anywhere around me won't be enough to see the diamond ring. So all I will see at best is a white crescent
 
Back
Top Bottom