Moon

[fishinglizard (Fishinglizard)]

Is the moon too bright to look at un filtered when its nearly full/or full?

[rmcpb (Rob)]

Nope

I can be a bit bright initially as your eyes are partially dark adapted but the iris soon closes and no harm done. Remember, you look at it during the day with NO ill effects but your scope effectively gathers more light and concentrates it to your eye. If you want to use low powers for what ever reason you could invest in a variable polarising filter but, like a pair of sunnies, its not necessary, just makes life a bit more comfy. The problem of brightness will disappear as you increase the power and much lunar observing is at the higher end of the power range.

Keep looking up......

[Matty P (Matt)]

I find that the initial impact of looking at the Moon unfiltered is very bright and uncomfortable. It takes a while for your eye to adjust to the brightness of a Full moon but once adjusted you shouldn't have any problems there after. I always use a Moon Filter when observing a Full Moon. It reduces the brightness and increases contrast.

[iceman (Mike)]

I found the same question in the beginners start here thread

Just concentrate on the terminator - the area where day meets night on the moon.
Use a high-power eyepiece and your pupil will eventually contract and it won't be blinding any more

When it's FULL, a widefield view is much more pleasing than a close-up view.

[TrevorW]

The other option is to mask the aperture of your scope thereby reducing the amount of light it gathers it will help to improve the image.

Cheers

[AstralTraveller (David)]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

The other option is to mask the aperture of your scope thereby reducing the amount of light it gathers it will help to improve the image.

Cheers

I don't understand that idea. The resolving power of a scope is directly proportional to its aperture, so masking the scope will decrease the resolution. It is also no use 'losing' aperture by increasing the size of the secondary obstruction as that increases diffraction and so reduces contrast. The only way I can see to reduce the amount of light without losing performance is to use a filter.

cheers,
Dave

[psyche101]

I am quite new to star gazing,(almost 12 months, slowly but surely..) I bought filters a few months into the hobby, and they seem worth the trouble of buying a set to me. They do make a bright moon a more enjoyable experience. Not all are coloured either. I have a neutral filter that is great to use on the moon.

[TrevorW]

Originally Posted by AstralTraveller

I don't understand that idea. The resolving power of a scope is directly proportional to its aperture, so masking the scope will decrease the resolution. It is also no use 'losing' aperture by increasing the size of the secondary obstruction as that increases diffraction and so reduces contrast. The only way I can see to reduce the amount of light without losing performance is to use a filter.

cheers,
Dave

please refer to these articles:

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/a...hp/t-5877.html

http://hou.lbl.gov/~vhoette/Explorat...perture-s.html

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=548

http://www.astronomics.com/main/defi...f9lghe8/Page/1

Regards