![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The original plan was to turn my three-hole Kendrick Kwik Focus into a solar
filter. I was going to put filter material over all three holes, but it seems like most people say that will give a degraded image over just using one of the holes. I'll see what light my moon experimentation will shed, and if it validates what the people are saying. Jeff http://www.mindspring.com/~jeffpo "Jon Isaacs" wrote in message ... Although multiple holes might not yield "better results" over a single hole, my main concern was a degradation in the image. The plus side was going to be brighter images or shorter exposure times, but I didn't want that at the expense of image quality. I plan on doing some experimenting on the moon when it comes back around (and I have clear skies). I'll see if I can actually tell a difference in quality of the image with one hole versus three. It seems to me that the real comparison should first be whether the mask improves or degrades the image. A mask of any sort certainly lengthens the exposure times and reduces the possible resolution, or so it seems. jon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Filter(s) for deep sky | Frodo | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | March 16th 04 09:02 PM |
Nebula Filters? | Dave Grist | Amateur Astronomy | 14 | December 29th 03 10:48 PM |
Filter Question | Doink | Amateur Astronomy | 7 | October 29th 03 03:13 PM |
Filter Help!!!! | Jon Yardley | Astronomy Misc | 2 | July 26th 03 05:01 PM |
LPR filters | Søren Kjærsgaard | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | July 24th 03 11:04 PM |