big-guy Loc: Peterborough Ontario Canada

Hi folks, I am considering having one of my cameras modified for astro but am somewhat stuck on exactly which option to use. Lifepixel offers a full spectrum and an H-alpha option. I asked them if it would be better to get the full spectrum and use the clip in filters. Here is their response;

"Our H-alpha conversion passes at almost 100% between 400-700nm so you can technically use the clip in filters you mentioned with this conversion or full spectrum as Sulfur II, Oxygen III, and H-alpha all fall within this range."

I do understand that with a full spectrum I can capture the full spectrum range or filter for specific wave lengths but is this a practical approach vs. the limiting H-alpha mod? Primary use would be astro.

My question(s) is if their H-alpha conversion covers all the spectrum range then why do they make Sulfur II, Oxygen III, and H-alpha filters? Is there a best practice for this spectrum separating? If I choose their H-alpha conversion is there a downside? Upside? (besides saving $$ on filters)

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

I donno Peter.
I decided to go the route of astro cameras, and leave my DSLR (1) alone.

In my opinion, there is a lot of unnecessary stuff going on inside a DSLR for Astrophotography.

But there are many here who have and use modified cameras.

Hang on, they'll be weighing in.

Europa Loc: West Hills, CA

Isn’t the full also removing UV/IR?

I think what they are saying is IF you are using the NB filters, it is limiting to the extent that UV/IR is not a factor. But if you ever want LRGB, then it will. I could be wrong on this, hopefully someone else having access to the filter wavelengths will chime in. I do believe most go for the Ha type conversion.

tony85629 Loc: Sahuarita, Az

You should consider a dedicated astro camera ccd or cmos as long as it has cooling. You can choose either one shot color or mono with a filter wheel. The one shot color is simpler and easier for starting out. SRLRS main disadvantage is the lack of cooling and therefore much noisier and expensive to modify for astro.
There are many fairly inexpensive astro cameras to choose from these days. If you are just starting out in this hobby join a local club. You will get a lot of help and advise that can save you much frustration, time and money.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

The idea behind the 400-700nm range is to allow to either use the full 400-700nm range. Or to selectively use a narrow range filter such as Sulfur II, or Oxygen III or Hydrogen-alpha so that you don't drown out what you are wanting from all the superfluous light you don't want.

There is no problem going full spectrum as it gives you the option of doing things in IR too. I have several modified full spectrum cameras and all I need to do 400-700nm is to just use a filter for it. I have a UV-IR cut filter that extends into the hydrogen-alpha just like one of the options you have.

Its all about having flexability. I live near San Jose, and nearby is the 120 inch Shane telescope. Since San Jose has grown to the point that it provides rediculous levels of light pollution, the telescope now operates in the IR spectrum where there is far less light pollution.

What type of camera are you looking to modify?