I have gone on several night and Milky way photo expeditoins to the Arches National park near Moab, Utah and everything you say makes sense Mike. Simply avoid light pollution - there are no short cuts or silver bullets to solve the problem of light pollution. As always, another excellent and useful video.
Thanks so much Viswanathan! Most definitely...it's just best to avoid it at all costs. I've tried to go to a few locations closer to the city and I always end up regretting it. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Thanks for the 'to the point' review of the filter. It's very comforting to hear honest reviews that don't sugarcoat the basic facts. I live in an area with very little light pollution (the Sierra Nevada Mts. of California) and thankfully don't need to use these types of filters.
Thanks so much John. It was an interesting test to do and even though I was sceptical about this in the first place I did want to give it a fair go...I'm going to try it against some other filters as well soon, once we're allowed outside again...maybe get a whole host of light pollution filters in to see if any are better than others...I think that would be quite interesting. 👍
Very good diligence, well-presented, but I have to call out your title: it’s extremely misleading. You are testing ONE filter from ONE manufacturer, and the implied conclusion is “light pollution filters are not worth it” when actually, what you’ve shown is “THIS PARTICULAR light pollution filter is not worth it.” Again, great video, super informative and helpful, but IMO implying one single make/model is representative of them all is a mistake that will put amateur astronomers/astrophotographers off LPF’s altogether.
In my experience using a pretty cheap light pollution filter, it didn't do as much to decrease huge lumps of light pollution on the horizon, but the contrast of the milky way was improved significantly. Without the filter I had to increase contrast beyond Lightroom's normal limit using the brush tool to cover the whole sky area, but while I haven't edited the photos with the filter yet it's obviously much better. I think it depends on where you're shooting; if you're in bortle class 3 or below I don't think I'd bother, but I noticed a difference where I am right now in bortle class 4-5.
Thanks for your thoughts. It's just interesting to see whether or not it helps...and if so in what way does it help... I'm definitely going to try it again in a bortle 4/5 location and maybe in the city just to see what happens. Thanks for watching and commenting, much appreciated. 👍
Nice video as always. Good topic. I use the Breakthrough Photography night filter and really like it a lot having done similar comparisons. That said, and as you eluded too, if I’m in a locale that is really dark, the difference is minimal. I also find that manually adjusting the Kelvin level to between 3,000 and 3,500 to be very practical. However, when near city lights, where one cannot always hide from the lights, I have found the filter extremely helpful. I put this to a “practical” test when a photographer friend promised me a beer per image for each image I could produce from that area. Seven beers later they conceded. Cheers.
Haha!! I like the idea of the beer challenge...👌 I want to try it again when we're allowed out at night, in the city or closer to the city. It would be interesting to see how it works in that scenario. Thanks for watching and commenting, great to hear your thoughts. 👍
Hello Mike, for light pollution reduction, one of the most performant filter is from HUTECH IDAS LPS P2. No modification of white balance and selective wave bands to optimise the usefull transmission of light. I've also ordered the OPTOLONG L-eNhance, a dual narrowband filter, very recomended for nebulas (red clouds in MW). More info to come when received and tested in pollution conditions and without.
Awesome, Thanks for the info Patrick. It is a minefield to find the good ones so it'll be interesting to see how you find the optolong. This was just a basic one but they sent it to me so I thought I'd try it out. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
found out about these filters just the other day and looked really promising for me since I live in an urban area where it’s really tough to get completely away from light pollution. thank you for your honest review and for helping me save 120$ 😁
No worries. Glad I could help! I'm going to try it out in some other locations once we're allowed out again and probably will try some other filter brands to see if there are any others that do a better job. 👍
I'm glad I could save you some money. It's all to do with the location you can get to...ultimately, the less light pollution there is and the less dust in the air, the better your shots will potentially be. I might do a follow up trying it in different locations once we get to go outside again, so keep an eye out for that one. 😁👍
Great video, Mike. I remember seeing these filters about a month ago and wondered if they work. You answered that for me. It is just another filter that promises the moon and falls very short. Thank you. Everything is starting to open up on my side so things are getting better. Stay safe and sane.
Most definitely Lance. By far the best way to get a good sky in your night shots is to plan to go to a really dark location...nothing else will beat this strategy...even if you only had a kit lens...this would be 10 times better than having any filter trying to get rid of the bad bits of light!! Great to hear things are starting to open up again for you. It's the same here, we're allowed to go out for walks in the day now and parks open up tomorrow...let's hope it keeps going in that direction. 😁👍
@@mikesphotographyLooking at it from the bright side, such hypocrite reviews helps filtering my UA-cam subscriptions 😁. Your honesty earned you a new subscriber. Thanks again.
This was a really informative video, Mike. I looked in to purchasing a light pollution filter last year and decided against it. I just kind of figured that the goal should be getting to locations where light pollution would not be a factor, therefore, having a light pollution filter would not be necessary. I also could not ever get an answer on how a piece of glass could help eliminate light pollution without eliminating light in general. I spend a small fortune on that Sony 24mm 1.4 prime to allow as much light as possible, so I did not then want to restrict the light that was coming in. It is nice to see you out shooting the stars. Hopefully you can get some good trips in before the Milky Way sets for the year.
Thanks so much dude. I was really hoping this would help but in reality you're right...whatever you do to cut out light, will affect your whole shot and won't generally be able to just cut out certain types of light... I was just about able to get a whole nights worth of astro before our lockdown came in to force in March...was busy getting as many photos as possible for tutorials as I had a feeling we'd be locked up for a while...There are still a few more to come yet!! 😁👍 Most definitely...I really hope to get a few more sessions out this year but there's no chance at the moment...
Hi Chris, I'll definitely do a few different tests once the lockdown has been lifted...I'll also be trying it in a bortle 4/5 and maybe a 6/7 location when I can get to them at night. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Man, this is such a bummer! I live 25 miles from Chicago and it's damn near impossible to get anything from my own yard. Was rooting for this, but thanks for saving me the money! That would have been 129 down the drain.
I know what you mean Jake. I was hoping it would make a difference...It is tricky finding good locations...and the place I might be moving to soon has less dark locations than the middle east so I was really hoping this would help!! It looks like astro vacations might be an idea...🤔 Thanks for watching. 😁👍
I've used light pollution filters from K&F and Kase. Neither give that awful blue cast and do seem to reduce light pollution a little, or perhaps I should say used to! The relentless move to using bright LED street lighting is reducing the effectiveness of these types of filters which were optimised for the orange sodium street lighting. I have seen a recommendation that they can slightly improve red sensitivity in astro shots but I haven't really noticed that myself, though I haven't done specific comparisons looking to check.
Hi Andy, Let me know how you get on with it! It'll be great to see if you get any differing results. I'm going to try it out again in a bortle 4/5 location and maybe in the city to see if there is any difference those locations as well. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Light pollution filters are great for emission nebulae but not galaxies. Since galaxies emit light in a variety of wavelengths, LP filters remove much of the light that you actually want.
Thanks for the info Tim, I was thinking they would be better when shooting emission nebulae. Most companies just don't tell you that in the marketing patter so I wanted to see what practical differences it would make. Thanks for watching. 👍
The Freewell product doesn't seem like a multi-band filter. I think you did a good job evaluating the filter and would like to see you do a similar evaluation of a truly multi-band light pollution filter. BTW, all light pollution filters will darken the image because they are eliminating some wavelengths of light.
Thanks Sean...It was an interesting test to do...although I don't think freewell will send me any more filters after this one!! 😆 I'd definitely like to try a muli-band LP filter soon...do you recommend any? That's a good point about them darkening the image, makes perfect sense. 👍
Hi Mike. Awesome video. Have you tried the Hoya Starscape filter? Stan Moniz took a bunch of UA-camrs out to Sedona a year ago for astrophotography. Theyused the Hoya filter with the same Sony 24mm F1.4 GM you used. Would be neat if you could compare your filter with the Hoya one.
Hi Baron, I'll have to check that one out. I'd be well up for doing a test against other filters to see if there are any out there that do a better job. One thing I found was that out in the field, it did look better on the back of the camera, but when it came to editing, I was very underwhelmed. Another test I'll be doing is taking it out at different locations. So at a bortle 4/5 location and then in the city, just to see if I can work out what it is doing and if there is any use for it. 😁👍
Hi Mike, I was thinking, as the lpf is a blue colour wont it need to be compensated by adjusting the lelvin to be less blue, maybe daylight.....maybe worth experimenting with
Hi Andy, Most definitely...one great thing with shooting in RAW is that the file keeps all of the WB data so correcting for the blue tint is a breeze in most photo editing programs. Makes it easier than trying to get it spot on in camera. Thanks for watching 😁👍
It's getting worse, too. I live in Seattle where they have partially installed 2700K LED but it's not narrow-band. It's also too bad that my city didn't install smart lamps that dim to 50% after midnight which are found in other cities.
Thanks Chris...I'm wondering if I'll get any backlash...but I was dissapointed that it didn't do a better job and I wanted to let you guys know about my findings. Thanks for watching 👍
This is more to do with landscape photography not so much Astrophotography. The filters we use on telescopes and dedicated astro cameras are invaluable you have blurred the lines here with your headline. I agree if you are photographing the milky way sure do it in a bortle 3 or less sky but for astro photos of deep space in the backyard the proper dedicated filters work wonders
You're right Nick, but there are a lot of filter companies that kind of give us the impression that they will work for wide-field astrophotography...so I wanted to try it out to see if it would make any difference. Thanks for watching. 👍
@@mikesphotography Very few mate try the Astronomy sites for roper light pollution filters, Optolong, Idaas, Baader ZWO etc. All the rest that profess to do magic are rubbish.
I guess it's time for getting a tracker and more specific narrow/broadband filters. Cause class 9 light pollution basically renders most astrophotography attempts futile. This one probably didn't work. Maybe a few others will. Have you tried the hoya red enhancer and some from optolong and a few other brands
Most definitely...and getting to as dark a location as possible is always best...and trackers are such a great way to get a lot more detail and quality light into the camera...a few others have suggested the hoya, so I'll see if I can get one and give that a go. Thanks for the info, much appreciated 😁👍
@@mikesphotography pro tip: if you're travelling to india, make sure you either go to the himalayas or the central forests or the southern hills, any other place and light pollution will be on your neck choking you
First, I'm not advocating for the filter, just looking for some clarity on your method. You said you set your white balance to tungsten and that made the image more blue, did you undo the tungsten setting before using the filter? If not, it would be like putting your usual amount of sugar in your tea and then, wanting to test a new sugar, adding that to your existing tea and saying it's the new sugars fault for making it too sweat.
Setting the white balance to tungsten was a preference of mine so I could see more clearly what is happening on the back of the camera. However, because I am shooting in raw, the data file will save all of the white balance data, so when editing, this is irrelevant. I like to set it to that and then adjust it from there. It's more like adjusting the temperature in your car to suit you at the time...you can go back and change the temp, whenever you want. Thanks for watching 👍
First hahaha From ph btw beginner at astrophotography thanks for helping us 😁 im getting nikon d5300 and celestron powerseeker 114eq is that a good beginner gear?? Thankss if you reply😁
Hi Chris, No worries, I hope they're helping! I'm not a pro at deep space astrophotography but from what I've seen getting a tracker mount really helps if you want to Photograph objects in the sky. The celestron 114eq is a manual tracker so you have to turn dials to move the scope, so this is better for just looking at deep space objects... But it would be good for photographing brighter objects like the moon. I'd see if there's one with a tracker mount within your budget, then you could get longer exposures of the objects and ultimately better photographs. If you check this link out, every one has a motorised mount apart from the first one: www.google.com/amp/s/www.digitalcameraworld.com/amp/buying-guides/best-telescopes-for-astrophotography I hope that helps. 👍
I have light pollution filter but haven’t been out yet to capture Milky Way..... Florida’s weather during summer is always rainy and not much clear sky. Anyway, I have a question about light pollution from behind? like at the beach facing east, light will be behind me. And no light straight out southeast to north east. Does this work for shooting Milky Way? Thanks ahead of time
It all depends on the air quality and the intensity of those lights. In the UK, I was shooting from a bortle 5 location, with a city about 5 miles behind me...but in the direction I was shooting, it was out to sea with no light pollution so I got some useable shots. The best bet is to go out and try it on the next clear night... Thanks for watching. 👍
Yes, we were about 2 hours out of the city of Abu Dhabi, towards Razeen. A good location...not the darkest skies in the UAE, but a good option that is not too far away. 👍
Well drat, I live in Las Vegas, I can see the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, and Venus but literally can see no stars, even on a clear night. However, I only have to drive about 3 miles East for some pretty fair shooting. Northern Arizona is much like Abu Dhabi I think.
I know what you mean. In the cities here it is pretty much the same. It's all about driving to darker locations to get the best shots. Thanks for watching 😁👍
Think LPS filters only really come into there own when a camera is modified to collect more Ha, ( red channel)then the blues and reds really contrast each other .
Thanks Andrew, most definitely...it's just a shame they don't advertise this on most of the websites you can buy them from...I think a lot of people think this would be a filter that cuts out a lot of light pollution whilst retaining the stars and other objects in the sky (like a quick fix) so I was just showing that it isn't quite as easy as that. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Thanks Paul. I was hoping this would work, but deep down I thought it wouldn't make much difference if any. I'd say $10 on a decent photo planning app would be a much better investment. Thanks dude 👍
I had mangnetic manfrotto Xume filters adapter and they are suck... the idea is good but the material with magnetic is not good... it's easy to scratch and lose the magnetic propoerties...
Well you could always fly somewhere remote...ah wait...😫🤦🏻♂️ I know your pain...I'm living in Bangkok at the moment and there is sooo much light here...really need to get my astro fix soon... Thanks for watching 😁👍
Yea but doesnt trying to get the photos the closest to each other defeat the purpose. You should have just edited them identically. Only difference being more warm tint necessary with the filter
That's a good question. I was hoping to try them out but we've been on lockdown for two months so I haven't been able to try it yet. Hopefully soon. I don't think it will give that much filtration of any use but we'll see. Thanks for watching. 😁👍
properties of optical lens properties of astro-physicists edge pollution, edge lighting, purple fringing, ... well, it is worth the study into = why they see things
today, the separation layers of atmosphere density ranges in spherical glycolic with centrifugal spin resulted in more fabric of space-time continuum of back-to the-future movie-grade diss-con-cussions. fabric of atmosphere lighting their lens. cross pollution of optics algorithm
If you're a deep space shooter with long lenses and trackers, then they are worth it, but for wide-field, I'd stay clear of them and save up the money to travel to darker locations. 👍
LP filters are used for reducing overexposed areas in individual subs (and introducing some contrast) when shooting very fainth DSOs from urban and suburban areas, not for landscape photography. Your conclusion is somewhat misleading, sorry for your efforts.
So then they should be marketed as such...the problem is people will think that they are good for getting better wide field photographs of the night sky and that was my point. If you read through the comments, I've saved a few people from making this mistake ... but thanks for your feedback.
Result is: light pollution filter hardly helps, getting the camera down really low to avoid horizon so as those associated light pollutions is what I'm gonna do anyway without the filter.
Hi Juan, That's actually a long exposure of a plane flying by. The lights flash on the plane so when the shutter is open for a long time, it leaves a trail of lights. Thanks for watching 😁👍
doesn't appear to be worth buying at the miniscule difference, if there's any.. I would not even be able to tell there was a filter on. so, not worth it
You don't even mention which filter you used and then you drawed this conclusion. From my experience with high quality filter the result is very obvious.
I have gone on several night and Milky way photo expeditoins to the Arches National park near Moab, Utah and everything you say makes sense Mike. Simply avoid light pollution - there are no short cuts or silver bullets to solve the problem of light pollution. As always, another excellent and useful video.
Thanks so much Viswanathan! Most definitely...it's just best to avoid it at all costs. I've tried to go to a few locations closer to the city and I always end up regretting it.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Thanks for the 'to the point' review of the filter. It's very comforting to hear honest reviews that don't sugarcoat the basic facts. I live in an area with very little light pollution (the Sierra Nevada Mts. of California) and thankfully don't need to use these types of filters.
So true John. Mike's reviews are objective to the core and are user centric and not manufacturer sponsored ads couched as product reviews.
Thanks so much John. It was an interesting test to do and even though I was sceptical about this in the first place I did want to give it a fair go...I'm going to try it against some other filters as well soon, once we're allowed outside again...maybe get a whole host of light pollution filters in to see if any are better than others...I think that would be quite interesting. 👍
Very good diligence, well-presented, but I have to call out your title: it’s extremely misleading. You are testing ONE filter from ONE manufacturer, and the implied conclusion is “light pollution filters are not worth it” when actually, what you’ve shown is “THIS PARTICULAR light pollution filter is not worth it.”
Again, great video, super informative and helpful, but IMO implying one single make/model is representative of them all is a mistake that will put amateur astronomers/astrophotographers off LPF’s altogether.
Great video as always Mike. Right to the point, honest and no “faffing”.
Thanks so much Chris. 😁👍
In my experience using a pretty cheap light pollution filter, it didn't do as much to decrease huge lumps of light pollution on the horizon, but the contrast of the milky way was improved significantly. Without the filter I had to increase contrast beyond Lightroom's normal limit using the brush tool to cover the whole sky area, but while I haven't edited the photos with the filter yet it's obviously much better.
I think it depends on where you're shooting; if you're in bortle class 3 or below I don't think I'd bother, but I noticed a difference where I am right now in bortle class 4-5.
Thanks for your thoughts. It's just interesting to see whether or not it helps...and if so in what way does it help...
I'm definitely going to try it again in a bortle 4/5 location and maybe in the city just to see what happens.
Thanks for watching and commenting, much appreciated. 👍
Nice video as always. Good topic. I use the Breakthrough Photography night filter and really like it a lot having done similar comparisons. That said, and as you eluded too, if I’m in a locale that is really dark, the difference is minimal. I also find that manually adjusting the Kelvin level to between 3,000 and 3,500 to be very practical.
However, when near city lights, where one cannot always hide from the lights, I have found the filter extremely helpful. I put this to a “practical” test when a photographer friend promised me a beer per image for each image I could produce from that area. Seven beers later they conceded. Cheers.
Haha!! I like the idea of the beer challenge...👌
I want to try it again when we're allowed out at night, in the city or closer to the city. It would be interesting to see how it works in that scenario.
Thanks for watching and commenting, great to hear your thoughts. 👍
Hello Mike, for light pollution reduction, one of the most performant filter is from HUTECH IDAS LPS P2. No modification of white balance and selective wave bands to optimise the usefull transmission of light. I've also ordered the OPTOLONG L-eNhance, a dual narrowband filter, very recomended for nebulas (red clouds in MW). More info to come when received and tested in pollution conditions and without.
Awesome, Thanks for the info Patrick. It is a minefield to find the good ones so it'll be interesting to see how you find the optolong.
This was just a basic one but they sent it to me so I thought I'd try it out.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
found out about these filters just the other day and looked really promising for me since I live in an urban area where it’s really tough to get completely away from light pollution. thank you for your honest review and for helping me save 120$ 😁
No worries. Glad I could help! I'm going to try it out in some other locations once we're allowed out again and probably will try some other filter brands to see if there are any others that do a better job. 👍
I was about to buy a light pollution filter. This video came out just in time to help me make my decision.
I'm glad I could save you some money. It's all to do with the location you can get to...ultimately, the less light pollution there is and the less dust in the air, the better your shots will potentially be.
I might do a follow up trying it in different locations once we get to go outside again, so keep an eye out for that one. 😁👍
Great video, Mike. I remember seeing these filters about a month ago and wondered if they work. You answered that for me. It is just another filter that promises the moon and falls very short. Thank you. Everything is starting to open up on my side so things are getting better. Stay safe and sane.
Most definitely Lance. By far the best way to get a good sky in your night shots is to plan to go to a really dark location...nothing else will beat this strategy...even if you only had a kit lens...this would be 10 times better than having any filter trying to get rid of the bad bits of light!!
Great to hear things are starting to open up again for you. It's the same here, we're allowed to go out for walks in the day now and parks open up tomorrow...let's hope it keeps going in that direction. 😁👍
Thanks for your honesty. Not like some other reviewers who keep promoting useless stuff to earn few bucks.
Thanks very much Amin! It is amazing how many people just promote things for the sake of a few dollars...
Thanks for watching 😁👍
@@mikesphotographyLooking at it from the bright side, such hypocrite reviews helps filtering my UA-cam subscriptions 😁. Your honesty earned you a new subscriber. Thanks again.
Haha! That's a good point!! 😆
Thanks very much for subscribing, and welcome to the club! 😁👍
Hi Mike: Thanks for providing this unbiased review of this filter. You have just saved me some money for something else. Cheers, Keith (Canada)
Thanks very much Keith! Haha! There are always plenty of other things to buy in photography ! 😆😁👍
This is the favorite and ideal lightning photographer hairstyle
Before or after the lightning has struck!? 😆
Brilliant love the tip about the dips or valleys to get low and block out lights that way 👍👍👍👍
Thanks so much Mark! Yep, it always helps having something in the way of all the light pollution! 😁👍
@@mikesphotography yeah cheers you saved me forking out for a night filter 👍👍👍
I almost want to purchase one of those filters, but luckily I found your video. Thank you for saving my money 😊😏
Great to hear I could help. 😁👍
This was a really informative video, Mike. I looked in to purchasing a light pollution filter last year and decided against it. I just kind of figured that the goal should be getting to locations where light pollution would not be a factor, therefore, having a light pollution filter would not be necessary. I also could not ever get an answer on how a piece of glass could help eliminate light pollution without eliminating light in general. I spend a small fortune on that Sony 24mm 1.4 prime to allow as much light as possible, so I did not then want to restrict the light that was coming in. It is nice to see you out shooting the stars. Hopefully you can get some good trips in before the Milky Way sets for the year.
Thanks so much dude. I was really hoping this would help but in reality you're right...whatever you do to cut out light, will affect your whole shot and won't generally be able to just cut out certain types of light...
I was just about able to get a whole nights worth of astro before our lockdown came in to force in March...was busy getting as many photos as possible for tutorials as I had a feeling we'd be locked up for a while...There are still a few more to come yet!! 😁👍
Most definitely...I really hope to get a few more sessions out this year but there's no chance at the moment...
Please try the filter in a City and check how well the filter is on reducing the yellow street lights!
Hi Chris,
I'll definitely do a few different tests once the lockdown has been lifted...I'll also be trying it in a bortle 4/5 and maybe a 6/7 location when I can get to them at night.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Man, this is such a bummer! I live 25 miles from Chicago and it's damn near impossible to get anything from my own yard. Was rooting for this, but thanks for saving me the money! That would have been 129 down the drain.
I know what you mean Jake. I was hoping it would make a difference...It is tricky finding good locations...and the place I might be moving to soon has less dark locations than the middle east so I was really hoping this would help!!
It looks like astro vacations might be an idea...🤔
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
I believe it depends on which type of astrophotography you are doing. For nebula or galaxies, the filters make a real difference.
That is true Thiago. I just wish companies would be more specific in their marketing.
Thanks for watching 😁👍
I've used light pollution filters from K&F and Kase. Neither give that awful blue cast and do seem to reduce light pollution a little, or perhaps I should say used to! The relentless move to using bright LED street lighting is reducing the effectiveness of these types of filters which were optimised for the orange sodium street lighting. I have seen a recommendation that they can slightly improve red sensitivity in astro shots but I haven't really noticed that myself, though I haven't done specific comparisons looking to check.
I appreciate your objective review. Well done.
Thanks very much Rich!
Great review as always, honest and to the point. Thanks Mike.
Thanks so much Andy. 😁👍
I appreciate this; it saved me some money.
Awesome review mike.... and I hit the buy button on an A7 iii today 😎😎😎😎
Hey Gavin,
Thats excellent, you'll love it, such a great little camera that really packs a punch.
Welcome to the club!! 😁👍
Already bought one ( cheaper version) after reading an article that recommended it. I will try it out when I get it and let you know
Hi Andy,
Let me know how you get on with it! It'll be great to see if you get any differing results. I'm going to try it out again in a bortle 4/5 location and maybe in the city to see if there is any difference those locations as well.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
@@mikesphotography maybe try a warmer light balance to compensate for the blue tint
Light pollution filters are great for emission nebulae but not galaxies. Since galaxies emit light in a variety of wavelengths, LP filters remove much of the light that you actually want.
Thanks for the info Tim, I was thinking they would be better when shooting emission nebulae.
Most companies just don't tell you that in the marketing patter so I wanted to see what practical differences it would make.
Thanks for watching. 👍
Great video, thx for the testing and sharing!
And thanks for watching! 😁👍
The Freewell product doesn't seem like a multi-band filter. I think you did a good job evaluating the filter and would like to see you do a similar evaluation of a truly multi-band light pollution filter. BTW, all light pollution filters will darken the image because they are eliminating some wavelengths of light.
Thanks Sean...It was an interesting test to do...although I don't think freewell will send me any more filters after this one!! 😆
I'd definitely like to try a muli-band LP filter soon...do you recommend any?
That's a good point about them darkening the image, makes perfect sense. 👍
@@mikesphotography The Optolong L-Pro or the SkyTech LPRO-MAX. Both filters seems to have the same spectral window.
Thanks Sean. 😁👍
Good honest review. Thank you Mike.
And thanks for watching Christian. 😁👍
You are complety right..! I've always said it.. Is much better and cheaper if you are un a dark zone
Great advice, thank you
Yes you saved my 60 dollars..
Thanks
Great to hear I could help Mansoor! 😁👍
Hi Mike. Awesome video. Have you tried the Hoya Starscape filter? Stan Moniz took a bunch of UA-camrs out to Sedona a year ago for astrophotography. Theyused the Hoya filter with the same Sony 24mm F1.4 GM you used. Would be neat if you could compare your filter with the Hoya one.
Hi Baron,
I'll have to check that one out. I'd be well up for doing a test against other filters to see if there are any out there that do a better job.
One thing I found was that out in the field, it did look better on the back of the camera, but when it came to editing, I was very underwhelmed.
Another test I'll be doing is taking it out at different locations. So at a bortle 4/5 location and then in the city, just to see if I can work out what it is doing and if there is any use for it. 😁👍
Hi Mike, I was thinking, as the lpf is a blue colour wont it need to be compensated by adjusting the lelvin to be less blue, maybe daylight.....maybe worth experimenting with
Hi Andy,
Most definitely...one great thing with shooting in RAW is that the file keeps all of the WB data so correcting for the blue tint is a breeze in most photo editing programs. Makes it easier than trying to get it spot on in camera.
Thanks for watching 😁👍
Thank you Mike. Like always, good review!
Thanks so much! 😁👍
What lens do you use most. I just got a 600MM lens for nature but was thinking about doing some astro.
It's getting worse, too. I live in Seattle where they have partially installed 2700K LED but it's not narrow-band. It's also too bad that my city didn't install smart lamps that dim to 50% after midnight which are found in other cities.
Really good video Mike thank you
No worries, thanks for watching 😁👍
Love the honesty!
Thanks Chris...I'm wondering if I'll get any backlash...but I was dissapointed that it didn't do a better job and I wanted to let you guys know about my findings.
Thanks for watching 👍
Awesome review Mike!
Thanks so much Gianvi! 😁👍
This is more to do with landscape photography not so much Astrophotography. The filters we use on telescopes and dedicated astro cameras are invaluable you have blurred the lines here with your headline. I agree if you are photographing the milky way sure do it in a bortle 3 or less sky but for astro photos of deep space in the backyard the proper dedicated filters work wonders
You're right Nick, but there are a lot of filter companies that kind of give us the impression that they will work for wide-field astrophotography...so I wanted to try it out to see if it would make any difference.
Thanks for watching. 👍
@@mikesphotography Very few mate try the Astronomy sites for roper light pollution filters, Optolong, Idaas, Baader ZWO etc. All the rest that profess to do magic are rubbish.
I guess it's time for getting a tracker and more specific narrow/broadband filters. Cause class 9 light pollution basically renders most astrophotography attempts futile. This one probably didn't work. Maybe a few others will. Have you tried the hoya red enhancer and some from optolong and a few other brands
Most definitely...and getting to as dark a location as possible is always best...and trackers are such a great way to get a lot more detail and quality light into the camera...a few others have suggested the hoya, so I'll see if I can get one and give that a go.
Thanks for the info, much appreciated 😁👍
@@mikesphotography pro tip: if you're travelling to india, make sure you either go to the himalayas or the central forests or the southern hills, any other place and light pollution will be on your neck choking you
First, I'm not advocating for the filter, just looking for some clarity on your method.
You said you set your white balance to tungsten and that made the image more blue, did you undo the tungsten setting before using the filter? If not, it would be like putting your usual amount of sugar in your tea and then, wanting to test a new sugar, adding that to your existing tea and saying it's the new sugars fault for making it too sweat.
Setting the white balance to tungsten was a preference of mine so I could see more clearly what is happening on the back of the camera.
However, because I am shooting in raw, the data file will save all of the white balance data, so when editing, this is irrelevant. I like to set it to that and then adjust it from there.
It's more like adjusting the temperature in your car to suit you at the time...you can go back and change the temp, whenever you want.
Thanks for watching 👍
First hahaha From ph btw beginner at astrophotography thanks for helping us 😁 im getting nikon d5300 and celestron powerseeker 114eq is that a good beginner gear?? Thankss if you reply😁
Hi Chris,
No worries, I hope they're helping!
I'm not a pro at deep space astrophotography but from what I've seen getting a tracker mount really helps if you want to Photograph objects in the sky.
The celestron 114eq is a manual tracker so you have to turn dials to move the scope, so this is better for just looking at deep space objects... But it would be good for photographing brighter objects like the moon.
I'd see if there's one with a tracker mount within your budget, then you could get longer exposures of the objects and ultimately better photographs.
If you check this link out, every one has a motorised mount apart from the first one: www.google.com/amp/s/www.digitalcameraworld.com/amp/buying-guides/best-telescopes-for-astrophotography
I hope that helps. 👍
Love the honesty 👌🏼
Something tells me that you've been binge watching...🤔...😆 Thanks very much Matt!! 😁👍
Just to let you know, if you put camera in daylight mode or 5000+ Kelvin it takes away the blue tinge to everything
Thanks for the info Andy good to know...I'll have to try that next time I am out. 👍
I have light pollution filter but haven’t been out yet to capture Milky Way..... Florida’s weather during summer is always rainy and not much clear sky. Anyway, I have a question about light pollution from behind? like at the beach facing east, light will be behind me. And no light straight out southeast to north east. Does this work for shooting Milky Way? Thanks ahead of time
It all depends on the air quality and the intensity of those lights.
In the UK, I was shooting from a bortle 5 location, with a city about 5 miles behind me...but in the direction I was shooting, it was out to sea with no light pollution so I got some useable shots.
The best bet is to go out and try it on the next clear night...
Thanks for watching. 👍
How does the filter perform if you would use it in your backyard, in the middle of a city ?
About the same...the only way you'll get good night sky photographs is to find a good dark location. 👍
Thanks for honest review, where is this place with sand dunes? Thanks!!
Yes, we were about 2 hours out of the city of Abu Dhabi, towards Razeen. A good location...not the darkest skies in the UAE, but a good option that is not too far away. 👍
Thanks for honest review!
No worries, thanks for watching. 👍
wow great photos.
Thanks very much! 😁👍
Well drat, I live in Las Vegas, I can see the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, and Venus but literally can see no stars, even on a clear night. However, I only have to drive about 3 miles East for some pretty fair shooting. Northern Arizona is much like Abu Dhabi I think.
I know what you mean. In the cities here it is pretty much the same. It's all about driving to darker locations to get the best shots.
Thanks for watching 😁👍
I use a red intensifier. works awesome
Hi Jerry, good to hear!! I'll definitely have to try one of those out. Which one do you have?
I use Hoya red intensifier. Think I only paid $35. Helps the IR light stand out more in the Milky Way.
thank you for the video! the issue is have is the various neighbors that all use LED lights, i need to target that!
Haha! The only way to combat that is to use a BBgun late at night. 😆
Thanks for watching 😁👍
Awesome shots btw
Think LPS filters only really come into there own when a camera is modified to collect more Ha, ( red channel)then the blues and reds really contrast each other .
Thanks Andrew, most definitely...it's just a shame they don't advertise this on most of the websites you can buy them from...I think a lot of people think this would be a filter that cuts out a lot of light pollution whilst retaining the stars and other objects in the sky (like a quick fix) so I was just showing that it isn't quite as easy as that.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
Changing to tungsten did the trick for me. Two thanks here.
Thanks for the two thanks Chris! 😁👍
Sincere effort, candid outcome - nice. Would light pollution mapping apps be a better investment?
Thanks Paul. I was hoping this would work, but deep down I thought it wouldn't make much difference if any. I'd say $10 on a decent photo planning app would be a much better investment.
Thanks dude 👍
Honest review. Thanks a lot.
And thanks for watching Akkarpark! 😁👍
Honest review. Good points.
Nice guitar!
Haha! Thanks very much!! 😁👍
Cheers for the great video it’s saved me £££££👍👍👍
That's great to hear!! 🙂👍
@@mikesphotography just awaiting some clear skies as a sigma 50mm 1.4 art just arrived can’t wait to try that on the R6
Nice! 😁 Hopefully it'll clear for you soon! 😁👍
I had mangnetic manfrotto Xume filters adapter and they are suck... the idea is good but the material with magnetic is not good... it's easy to scratch and lose the magnetic propoerties...
It sounds like the magnetic filters have come on a bit since then. These are the freewell filters and they work really well. 👍
'Go to a dark area'
Well im living in the Netherlands...good luck with that 😅 its the most light poluted area in europe
Well you could always fly somewhere remote...ah wait...😫🤦🏻♂️
I know your pain...I'm living in Bangkok at the moment and there is sooo much light here...really need to get my astro fix soon...
Thanks for watching 😁👍
Ik leef ook in Nederland, naast Amsterdam dus ik heb ook geen donkere plek maar volgens mij zijn de wadden wel donker.
What software is that?
That is lightroom.
Yea but doesnt trying to get the photos the closest to each other defeat the purpose. You should have just edited them identically. Only difference being more warm tint necessary with the filter
Trying to get the images close to each other will show whether the stars pop a little more...or not... with the filter.
Thanks for watching. 👍
Nice
Thanks 😊👍
I just cant afford the equipment I want. But good info here.
I know what you mean, I am the same ... my photography shopping list is getting longer and longer by the day ... 😩
Thanks for watching 😁👍
what do you think light pollution filters in cityscape photography shot?
That's a good question. I was hoping to try them out but we've been on lockdown for two months so I haven't been able to try it yet.
Hopefully soon.
I don't think it will give that much filtration of any use but we'll see.
Thanks for watching. 😁👍
properties of optical lens
properties of astro-physicists
edge pollution, edge lighting, purple fringing, ...
well, it is worth the study into = why they see things
today, the separation layers of atmosphere density ranges in spherical glycolic with centrifugal spin resulted in more fabric of space-time continuum of back-to the-future movie-grade diss-con-cussions. fabric of atmosphere lighting their lens. cross pollution of optics algorithm
im thinkin to buy one but now i dont no
If you're a deep space shooter with long lenses and trackers, then they are worth it, but for wide-field, I'd stay clear of them and save up the money to travel to darker locations. 👍
@@mikesphotography yea not shooting night very often but when i do then its more wide angle.
LP filters are used for reducing overexposed areas in individual subs (and introducing some contrast) when shooting very fainth DSOs from urban and suburban areas, not for landscape photography. Your conclusion is somewhat misleading, sorry for your efforts.
So then they should be marketed as such...the problem is people will think that they are good for getting better wide field photographs of the night sky and that was my point.
If you read through the comments, I've saved a few people from making this mistake ... but thanks for your feedback.
Result is: light pollution filter hardly helps, getting the camera down really low to avoid horizon so as those associated light pollutions is what I'm gonna do anyway without the filter.
Yep, that was my thoughts...i habbent used it since I made this video. 👍
@@mikesphotography Yeah I agree. Maybe light pollution filters are useful when shooting city night photos
I'm going to try that with it soon.
Another way I hear they are useful is for deep sky objects on a tracker with a telephoto lens. 😁👍
@@mikesphotography Yeah, looking forward to your new video!
19.99.for my drone filter from freewell
That's an ok price. 👍
4:16 you can see starlink satellites
Hi Juan,
That's actually a long exposure of a plane flying by. The lights flash on the plane so when the shutter is open for a long time, it leaves a trail of lights.
Thanks for watching 😁👍
mate,you seems just come back from solar flare shower
Haha!! Maybe I should have used more sunscreen! 😆
doesn't appear to be worth buying at the miniscule difference, if there's any.. I would not even be able to tell there was a filter on. so, not worth it
Exactly! I'm glad I blagged this off the company to try as I would have been annoyed if I'd have bought it.
Thanks for watching 😁👍
You don't even mention which filter you used and then you drawed this conclusion. From my experience with high quality filter the result is very obvious.
Thanks for your feedback gong
Loit pollution :3
snackable :3
No. Waste of moneys they never work properly need editing photos so without the filter you can get similar results.
Yep, I agree. No need for a filter like this...it's better to go to a good location instead. 😁👍