CCC Forum

One for the fans of astronomical* photography?

http://petapixel.com/2016/12/14/purenig ... ky-photos/

Personally, I am struggling with this as there seems to be little difference between the shots taken with and without the filter. Maybe if there is an articial light source nearby, the effect can be reduced. I am not sure that it would give a clearer view of the night sky if shooting from within an area suffering from light pollution. To be fair to those behind this filter, that is not a claim they are making. Rather, it appears mainly to be giving a more natural result straight out of the camera rather than relying on changing the white balance in post capture processing.

I would be interested in the views of those who who know more about astrophotography regarding the usefulness of such a filter.

* No, not a reference to the size and cost of the Leica SL with 50 Summilux lens I wrote about in another post recently.

It's not meant to give a clearer view of the sky, but adjust the colour temperature to compensate for the yellow haze you get with light pollution . So yes, you can see the difference - but at $220 I won't be buying one !! I can adjust the colour in LR !

Rose wrote:It's not meant to give a clearer view of the sky, but adjust the colour temperature to compensate for the yellow haze you get with light pollution .

That's pretty much what I thought. I was wondering whether I had overlooked something and the filter was doing more that was apparent.

Rose wrote:I....... at $220 I won't be buying one !! I can adjust the colour in LR !

Exactly. It's a lot of money for not much gain.