Back to forums

Would you replace the Built in UV/IR cut on a 2600MC with AR glass?

ZWO ASI2600MC Pro CMOS UV/IR Cut Blooming
5 replies•146 views
Would you replace the Built in UV/IR cut on a 2600MC with AR glass?
Single choice poll 19 votes
26% (5 votes)
74% (14 votes)
You must be logged in to vote in this poll.
Itto Ogami avatar
Itto Ogami avatar

Hello All,

I am looking to replace the built in UV/IR cut window on a 2600MC-Pro with AR window and using a better UV/IR cut filter with better cutoffs in the UV and IR (Baader cmos optimized UV/IR cut filter) so i get less UV and IR and better glass, coatings etc.Been seeing slightly bloated stars and halos with the built in ZWO UV/IR cut and someone at starfront said they saw an improvment after replacing the built in filter with the AR window and using a high quality filter.

I am sending an Ultracat 108 to starfront in the next few months. I already have a spacecat 51 rig there. I am looking to get the ultracat 108 setup as maximized as possible. The reason I’m considering the swap is i see a little blurriness/softness and haloing on my stars. Want to get them tighter. Thnking a better UV/IR cut will help or is stacking the 2 suffficient?

I am very nervous to mess with the camera. Has anyone done this replacement? Also I see some forums just saying to leave the built in UV/IR filter and to use the better UV/IR cut together with no impact to image quality, athough I dont know the level of imaging expertise for those suggesting to do this. To use both seems like it wouldnt be as good as using a clear AR window and a good filter. I would surmise that having more glass and inferior glass in the built in filter used in combination with a high quality filter would not be what I would want to do.

I really dont know what to do here. Should i just use both UV/IR cut filters for a slightly better cutoff ? Others have noted that when doing dualband I already am using 2 filters (built in UV/IR plus the dualband) ant thoughts and suggetsions would be appreciated

Any advice would be appreciated!

Regards,

Itto (Jim)

andrea tasselli avatar
andrea tasselli avatar
Just use a "better" (i.e.,  stricter) UV/IR filter ahead of the camera and you're done. No risk of messing up the sensor with dust (unless you have a clean room this a clear and present danger.) I can't see any downside to this course of action.
V avatar
V avatar

Replace it in a clean room, it’ll do great. My 2400 has an AR window installed. It allows for much better filter variety into the IR and UV wavelengths, and a little bit more reds, but honestly the IR does more harm than good when unfiltered. If you are not using a reflector, and even with a reflector, it tends to wash out colors and provide greyish or redder images of further objects. The upside is it acts like a built-in luminance frame against the rest of the image, unaffected by light pollution.

Tony Gondola avatar
Tony Gondola avatar

Having an AR window will give you greater flexibility in the long run. I’d do it if it were a choice I had to make.

Well Written
Alan Brunelle avatar
Alan Brunelle avatar

If for some reason you were using the camera on a RASA, then I would do the replacement if the quality of the window was important to you. Celestron claims that the number of glass elements before the sensor is critical to optimal performance for the RASA. That said, I have done some swapping of glass elements prior to the sensor when I had my RASA and I could not see any real differences. Ultimately, you could test this with your setup and in the end report back here to tell us if it was important or not. I am interested.

One risk to doing the swap is breaking the seal into the sensor chamber and thereby causing issue with needing to deal with frost or dew appearing on the sensor.

Helpful Insightful Respectful Concise
Itto Ogami avatar
Itto Ogami avatar

Thanks everyone for your help. I am asking because I contemplated doing the ar swap on an ultracat 108 soon. I have seen some haloing and a lack of star sharpness/softness in my stars on my spacecat 51 at starfront using just the built in filter. I was thinking this was due to the ZWO filter letting in a little UV/IR from what i have read. I wanted to eliminate this by using the baader with better cut offs on the new ultracat setup. I would prefer not to mess with the camera and dont know if just using a better UV/IR filter in front of the built in one would fine or if replacing it with an AR window and using a better filter would be a better option. I just assumed more glass or an inferior filter mixed with a better one would not be optimal.

I am using this strictly for broadband imaging, no UV IR imaging at all. I have used dualband filters but have used them with the ZWO UV/IR in place (since its built in).