Is Baader AstroSolar ND 3.8 safe for solar photography at 500–3000mm?
Asked 12/30/2021
5 views
2 answers
0
I have an M42 500mm lens and want to photograph the sun. I also have 2x and 3x teleconverters, so my effective focal length could range from 500mm up to 3000mm. I have a Baader AstroSolar DIY solar filter labeled ND 3.8 (about 1/6300 transmission), intended for solar photography.
Does required solar filter density depend on focal length? In other words, do longer focal lengths need a stronger ND filter? My camera has no optical viewfinder, so I am not looking through the lens with my eye. The filter would be mounted securely at the front and fully cover the lens opening.
Is ND 3.8 generally considered safe for the lens and sensor at these focal lengths, and does crop factor matter here?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
4y ago
2 Answers
4
That filter should be safe with any lens that has the correct filter thread or to which it can be securely mounted and fully cover the entrance pupil.
One common misconception is that a longer lens concentrates more light; in fact, it's the other way around. A longer focal length makes a larger solar image on the sensor, therefore that image is dimmer (for lenses with similar entrance pupil diameter). The figure of merit here is the old f/ ratio. An f/8 lens at 100 mm will give the same image brightness as an f/8 lens of 20 mm, or one of 500 mm focal length.
Generally, the only concession you need to make for a longer lens is that, for a given focal ratio, the longer lens will have a larger filter mounting ring.
BTW, don't forget that your 2x converter costs you two stops of exposure (f/8 becomes f/16), the 3x costs three and a third (f/8 becomes f/24); combined, an f/8 lens is now f/48. With digital, your camera will meter through the lens, so you shouldn't need to manually compensate, but you need to be aware (in part, of why that combination isn't used much). You'll also give up some image quality with each converter, as well as lose a bit of contrast from the increased number of glass-air and glass-glass surfaces.
Originally by user89902. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user89902
4y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Focal length by itself does not require a stronger solar filter. What matters for image brightness is the f-number: lenses at the same f-ratio produce similar image brightness regardless of focal length. A longer lens makes a larger image of the sun, not a brighter one. Crop factor also does not change the light passing through the lens.
If your Baader AstroSolar filter is truly optical-density ND 3.8 (about 1/6300 transmission), and it is mounted securely over the front and fully covers the entrance pupil, the community answers indicate it is generally considered the minimum accepted level for solar imaging with camera sensors.
Also note that teleconverters reduce exposure: a 2x costs about 2 stops, and a 3x costs even more, so they do not make the image brighter at the sensor.
The main caution raised was practical rather than theoretical: one answer was hesitant about going much beyond roughly 1200mm with teleconverters, despite ND 3.8 generally being regarded as sufficient. Be careful not to confuse optical density “ND 3.8” with photographic filter notation like “ND4”; they are very different.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI4y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Can I photograph a solar eclipse with a 10-stop ND filter, or do I need a proper solar filter?
What kind of hydrogen-alpha filter is needed for safe solar photography, and can I use a regular astronomy H-alpha filter?
Is stacking teleconverters worth it for photographing the moon on film?
How do focal length and sensor size relate to a lens’s actual magnification?
Do I need a solar filter for eclipse photos with a wide-angle lens?