Comparison UV/Infrared Cutoff filter vs. without filter - Celestron 4SE NexStar NexImage

I just bought a UV/Infrared (IR) Cutoff filter and wanted to answer a simple question: does it make a visible difference on real planetary footage, or is it mostly theory?

Yes — the basic idea is well known: many planetary cameras record some near-infrared, and that extra light can slightly soften focus and reduce contrast. But the purpose of this post is not to repeat the spec sheet — it is to test it. So I recorded Saturn twice using the same setup and compared the result.

Equipment: Celestron NexStar 4SE + NexImage (CCD), stacking in RegiStax.

Saturn photos with UV/Infrared Cutoff Filter and without filter, Celestron 4SE, NexImage

Top: with UV/IR Cutoff Filter
Bottom: without filter

What I Noticed

I’m not going to “force” a conclusion here — the best part of this test is that you can judge it visually. But when I compared the two results, the filtered image looked:

• a bit sharper (especially along ring edges),
• slightly higher contrast on fine detail,
• cleaner overall with less of a soft haze around the planet.

It’s not a dramatic, night-and-day change — but on a compact setup like the NexStar 4SE, even a small improvement matters. For me, this quick Saturn experiment was enough to justify keeping the UV/IR cutoff filter in the planetary imaging kit.

Related Saturn Astrophotography Posts

• Saturn – Celestron NexStar 4SE Telescope, RegiStax, NexImage
  Backyard planetary imaging with a 4-inch telescope and webcam-style CCD.


• Saturn – NexStar 4SE, RegiStax 6, NexImage, Bahtinov Mask & Vibration Pads
  Improving focus precision and reducing vibration for sharper planetary detail.


• RegiStax 6 – Astrophotography Saturn (Testing v6)
  Early testing of RegiStax 6 wavelet sharpening on Saturn data.


• Saturn Opposition – RegiStax 6, Celestron NexStar 4SE
  Imaging Saturn near opposition with a compact 4-inch Schmidt–Cassegrain system.