I recently travelled to a lesser-known area of Western Colorado to shoot a large-format astrolandscape / Milky Way photo commission project for a client. The goal was to produce a rather complex image consisting of 2 rows of 8 tracked images each for the sky, and two rows of 8 focus-stacked images for the foreground. The location was in a very dark, remote area with nearly zero ambient light (with the exception of a barn light from the one nearby ranch) but the horizon showed significant light pollution spilling over from a city in the area.
Since the final product was intended to be a very large, crazy-high resolution print at 95″ wide, it was critical that I captured as clean of raw images as possible, so I used the magnetic clip-in light pollution filter from Kolari to help tackle this issue and that’s what we’ll take a look at in this review.
CLIP-IN FILTER FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS
I found this filter to be a great asset since it clips in to my camera directly in front of the sensor and under the lens via a light magnetic mount. I love this style because I can use it with any lens, regardless of whether it has front threads or not (I’m looking at you, you big bulbous front element) and I don’t have to worry about moving the filter if I change lenses. It just sits there doing its job quietly and unnoticed.
The filter itself feels very high quality. It’s made of an all-aluminum frame that drops in, snapping in to place easily via a small magnet, and feels like it’s going to last for quite some time. The low profile around the edges and hydrophobic coating on the glass also make it very easy to clean. And to be honest, having an extra layer of protection sitting in front of my sensor is a welcome bonus.
But now for a bit of a reality check – While this filter can be used with ultra-wide and wide angle lenses, it can cause some pretty serious stretching of stars in the corners of the frame. Unfortunately, that means when shooting astro it can’t really be used on something like my 14mm because the stretching is just too severe. Generally, it’s difficult to get sharp images in astrophotography with super-wide lenses, especially when adding filter glass. This is due to the thickness of the filter glass and the distance it is from the sensor, which altogether magnifies the effects of refraction that is already present on super-wide lenses. (It’s worth it to note, however, that drop-in filters don’t have the same issues as magnetic clip-in filters.) On my 24mm used for this project the stretching is definitely noticeable. If I were shooting just a single-frame image I’d consider it to be right on the border of acceptable (read: fixable), but in a multi-row pano like this, it was perfectly fine. Since I’m overlapping or cropping each frame by ~50% on all sides, the distorted stars essentially get cropped out when merging the pano since I’m only using the middle 50% of each frame where the stars remain nice and sharp. In some of my other tests with this filter, the effects of corner distortion were barely noticeable and perfectly acceptable on 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and longer. For any other types of night photography that use these longer focal lengths, I wouldn’t even hesitate to include this in my image train – there’s just no reason not to. (Unless, of course, you have questionable decision-making skills and really love light pollution…)
Comparative Tests
While shooting this project, unfortunately I didn’t have the time to shoot comparative images on location (it was a race against time to complete a 4 hour shoot on a clear, moonless night with a foreground + Milky Way alignment that only happens once a year). Afterward, I traveled to an area near my home that is only 25 miles outside of a city of ~100,000 people to shoot some new test images to compare. On this night there were some passing clouds in the air that actually made it easier to see the effects of this filter since the light from the city was amplified as it reflected off the clouds. As you can see in these images, the overall light pollution was reduced by the filter, but what’s more obvious is how clean the color is. The filter removed nearly all of the ugly yellow cast present throughout the image. (Disregard the slight blur in the trees; these images were shot on a tracker for a longer exposure that further exaggerates the effects of light pollution.)
Pros and Cons
PROS:
- Convenient clip-in filter that can be used with any lens
- No need to move the filter or change step up rings when changing lenses
- Easily removes the ugly yellow color cast caused by artificial light pollution
- Solid, all-aluminum construction
- Easy to install / remove with the magnetic clip-in style
- No noticeable glares, internal reflections, or ghosting
- Lifetime guarantee against defects from the manufacturer
CONS:
- Can cause severe distortion in the corners when used with wide-angle lenses
- Not available for all cameras makes and models
Conclusion
All in all, this is a fantastic filter. It’s not going to magically remove all light pollution, but it will certainly reduce those effects and help you produce a much cleaner, true-color image that will be easier to work with in post. The clip-in style does limit its use to lenses with focal lengths outside the ultra-wide / wide angle categories – I would say this is the major downside to the clip-in style, but for astrophotographers and general night shooting with longer focal lengths, and/or shooting with methods that negate this issue (as described above) the sheer convenience far outweighs the negatives. And for those that don’t need images as critically controlled as pin-point stars, it’s a no-brainer – if you’re shooting at night and want a cleaner image, use this. As long as you’re aware of the limitations and are operating within those boundaries, I would absolutely recommend using a filter like this.
Have you used this or other similar filters? I’d love to hear about it – Leave a comment below, or find me on Instagram @marcrasselphoto and show me the images you’re creating with it – I’d love to see them!
Disclosure: Kolari provided this filter for testing at no cost, but I have not been paid or compensated in any other way for writing this review.


No Comments