Timeline for Is a Solar Filter Different from an ND-Filter?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 15:41 | vote | accept | Itai | ||
| Jul 1, 2017 at 15:41 | vote | accept | Itai | ||
| Jul 1, 2017 at 15:41 | |||||
| Jul 1, 2017 at 15:10 | history | edited | dpollitt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 52 characters in body
|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 13:43 | comment | added | scottbb♦ | Good stuff all around. Just to add to the caution, when buying a solar filter for your camera, make sure it says it's "safe for viewing". There are several filters that are OD 3.8 (about 12 1/2 stops) that are intended for digital imaging. They are not considered safe for direct visual viewing (including through an optical viewfinder). For those types of filters, the safe-for-visual is usually around OD 5.0 (about 16 2/3 stops). | |
| Jul 1, 2017 at 4:23 | comment | added | Michael C | Infrared from the sun can damage your eyes without you even knowing it. The retinas have no pain receptors. Viewing the sun through a camera not properly filtered can literally cook the surface of the retina. Most of the effects on vision don't begin to show up for hours afterwards as scar tissue begins to form on the surface of your retinas. | |
| Jul 1, 2017 at 3:16 | history | edited | dpollitt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 3:09 | history | edited | dpollitt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 469 characters in body
|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 2:38 | history | edited | dpollitt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 112 characters in body
|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 2:33 | history | answered | dpollitt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |