Solar filters?

gregmcc

gregmcc

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
29,427
Reaction score
10,492
Location
Somewhere in the world
With the eclipse coming up shortly I'd like to see if I can take some pics of it.

Reading up and they say you need to solar filter otherwise you could damage your camera.

I presume there are good quality solar filters and cheap junk.

Can anyone recommend something decent (For a Canon 650D) - hopefully I can order it online and get it with the next day or two.
 
You will need a neutral density filter of around 10 stops.
 
Doubt you can damage your camera. Filters are more for getting the best image of the effect.
 
gregmcc said:
With the eclipse coming up shortly I'd like to see if I can take some pics of it.

Reading up and they say you need to solar filter otherwise you could damage your camera.

I presume there are good quality solar filters and cheap junk.

Can anyone recommend something decent (For a Canon 650D) - hopefully I can order it online and get it with the next day or two.
Click to expand...
Were the skies good to you today?
 
From just about every post I've read they reckon you will damage your lens without a filter - I was not going to take a chance.

Skies were horrible overcast but I bought a cheapish lens off eBay and it seemed to work pretty well. I'm fairly pleased with the pics. Maybe made the filter too dark - will hopefully be better next time around in 10 years or so :)

IMG_2117 - Copy.jpg

IMG_2140_copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
gregmcc said:
From just about every post I've read they reckon you will damage your lens without a filter - I was not going to take a chance.
Click to expand...
Can't see how it would damage your lens - it's just glass. I'm sure extended exposure wouldn't do your sensor any good but the biggest risk would be to your eyes unless you use live view.
 
Most of what I get only warns of damage to the eyes when using an optical viewfinder. Sensors are rather robust working with light levels from seconds to less than 1 millisecond of exposure. Extended exposure to concentrated light can probably damage it but I doubt it would occur naturally.
 
Swa said:
Most of what I get only warns of damage to the eyes when using an optical viewfinder. Sensors are rather robust working with light levels from seconds to less than 1 millisecond of exposure. Extended exposure to concentrated light can probably damage it but I doubt it would occur naturally.
Click to expand...

The thing is you're either using the optical viewfinder and destroying your eyes or using live view and destroying your sensor.
 
[XC] Oj101;14851018 said:
The thing is you're either using the optical viewfinder and destroying your eyes or using live view and destroying your sensor.
Click to expand...
Sensor is more robust than our eyes.
 
Swa said:
Sensor is more robust than our eyes.
Click to expand...

But nowhere near indestructable. The focused light from a lens can melt plastic.

burnt-camera8593.jpg


300mm lens left pointing at the sun.
 
[XC] Oj101;14851562 said:
But nowhere near indestructable. The focused light from a lens can melt plastic.

burnt-camera8593.jpg


300mm lens left pointing at the sun.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with that but in how many situations would the perfect circumstances exist to damage a sensor in a short amount of time? Lenses also diffuse light instead of concentrating it. Zooming results in less light reaching the sensor. Using a magnifying glass in reverse like we used to do as kids is negative zoom.
 
I've shot the sun on a perfect day to see sunspots using a 300mm lens. But I stacked 2 ND filters to get to 16 stop reduction. It let me see the sun perfectly fine through the viewfinder with no chance of damaging my eyes. Also meant I could shoot wide open if I wanted. Was able to get lovely shots of sunspots. Later stacked a 1.4 tele on and stopped the lens down to get even more reach.
 
Juzz Wuzz said:
I've shot the sun on a perfect day to see sunspots using a 300mm lens. But I stacked 2 ND filters to get to 16 stop reduction. It let me see the sun perfectly fine through the viewfinder with no chance of damaging my eyes. Also meant I could shoot wide open if I wanted. Was able to get lovely shots of sunspots. Later stacked a 1.4 tele on and stopped the lens down to get even more reach.
Click to expand...

And what difference would you expect this to make? Optically, lenses are rarely their sharpest wide open (or fully stopped down).
 
bwana said:
And what difference would you expect this to make? Optically, lenses are rarely their sharpest wide open (or fully stopped down).
Click to expand...

Bokeh? ;)

But aperture (not necessarily wide open) would also affect flare and how well you render the dust on your sensor/front element :)
 
bwana said:
And what difference would you expect this to make? Optically, lenses are rarely their sharpest wide open (or fully stopped down).
Click to expand...

Yes of course, but it allowed me to control the aperture to shoot at my sharpest point on the lens without overexposing. I wouldn't shoot it wide open. But its better than not having enough filter and needing to stop down to like f/22 and have issues with diffraction
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X