Digiscope or SLR?

[Ruth Daniel]

I'm looking to upgrade my equipment from a 2ndhand 15 year old scope to a new one (Kowa 80?) with either a digital camera to digiscope or a DSLR? (Nikon 50?)
I'm not sure which would be best for me as a beginner in bird photography,
Any advice please??

[markho]

I use both Ruth , just depends on what and where as to which I am using. However I do find that I am using my DSLR camera more now than my digiscoping kit.

[Reader]

It really depends on how much you want to spend.

I am no expert on DSLR but I have used a combination of the Nikon CP4500 and the Kowa 824 and found it to be an excellent combination. Unfortunately I badly damaged my scope and decided to upgrade to the latest Swaro but to be honest I can't see the £800 difference it cost between the two scopes. Don't get me wrong, the Swaro is an excellent scope but so is the Kowa 823 / 824 for the money.

Regarding DSLR, I'm sure someone will come along with their views.

[greypoint]

From what i've seen of both methods - DSLR is easier, probably better for flight pictures etc. I respect those people who digiscope as i'm sure i'd never get the hang of doing it well - gets you closer of course. I can thoroughly recommend the D50 as a fantastic budget buy - very easy to use and you don't need to spend a fortune on lenses to get you started.

[Ruth Daniel]

Yes,I've been impressed with all I've read/researched about the Nikon D50 but am not sure whether the lens' that I could afford with it are going to get me near enough? which of course the digiscope method would.
Against digiscoping is the fact that it ties up your scope to just photography where as with the DSLR I could view and photograph!
Some more research needed I feel! lol!
thanks for all your help.

[postcardcv]

I'm looking to upgrade my equipment from a 2ndhand 15 year old scope to a new one (Kowa 80?) with either a digital camera to digiscope or a DSLR? (Nikon 50?)
I'm not sure which would be best for me as a beginner in bird photography,
Any advice please??

Assuming you are going to buy a new scope then the digiscoping route is a much cheaper option and is a good way to get started in bird photography. If you buy a dslr you'll probably want to get a 400/500mm lens, even the cheaper lens options will add £300-500 to the cost of the camera.

The Kowa 820 series are excellent scopes, amazing value for money, and as Reader has mentioned almost comparable optical quality to the more expensive makes. If you are going to use the scope for digiscoping it is worth paying the extra for a flourite version of the scope (823/824), this will help you photos. You can get a digiscoping camera & adapter for under £150 (see my recent thread on budget digiscoping - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=44480) which makes digiscoping a good way to try photgraphy and see how you go.

The DSLR route is much more expensive, and you will not get the same level of magnification that digiscoping allows. However DSLR's are great to use and are generally much faster than digiscoping, so you're more likely to 'get the shot'. To get a DSLR set up for bird photography the cheapest option would be the Nikon D50 (£489) with a Sigma 135-400 lens (£300), you'd probably want to add a spare battery and a large memory card so it will come in at over £900. Also be warend once you start down the dslr road, there is always another lens that you want - macro, wide angle...

[mcapper]

I agree with Sue (Greypoint) about DSLR being a bit easier. But one thing to consider with bird photography is that with a DSLR and limited lens size and experience, you are unlikely to get many framefilling photos at first.

I know that as a teenager with a small zoom lens I was rather put off by the tiny specs that were the birds in my photos.

Digiscoping allows much more reach and much more bird in shot. It was taking up digiscoping and getting such shots that really fired a new enthusiasm in me for bird photography.

So, for the occasional cracking shot that will keep your enthusiasm fired up as a beginner, I think digiscoping is ideal.

Digiscoping has limitations though and many birders eventually seem to follow a path from digiscoping to SLR (one I want to take soon). Click on Greypoint's profile and visit her website. It is a good example of how a DSLR will give you a much bigger range of shots including scenic and flight shots. With digiscoping it is often framefiller shots of slower birds only.

You may well find yourself wanting to follow that path eventually if you go down the digiscoping route but I wouldn't let that put you off digiscoping.

If you buy a DSLR and reasonable lens, it will be inevetable that if you get into bird photography, you will always want a little more quality and a little more reach. This often means an upgrade of lens and camera follows.

So, go for digiscoping, get some frame fillers, get enthused, get saving, and eventually get a DSLR as well! That way, you can do both!!

Hope this is helpful

Matthew

[postcardcv]

Against digiscoping is the fact that it ties up your scope to just photography where as with the DSLR I could view and photograph!
Some more research needed I feel! lol!
thanks for all your help.

Switching between digiscoping and viewing is fairly easy, even with the cheaper adapters, with some of the really smart ones it's a 2 second job.

Are your choices scope and digiscoping camera or no scope and a dslr? If so I'd definitely recommend the digiscoping route, it is more versatile and gives much higher mags when viewing. Using a dslr and long lens to vuew birds is not the best solution...

I'd agree that flight shots with a digiscoping set up are not as easy as with a dslr, but with practice it is possible.

If you're a birder who wants to take photos go for digiscoping, if you're a photographer who likes birds get a dslr. Or if you're a mug like me take both set ups out with you, I love using the dslr for photography but am a birder at heart and would not be without my optics.

[Ruth Daniel]

My choices are scope AND a camera but whether to go for DSLR or just a basic Digital camera to go on the scope?
At least I know my choices of both scope and DSLR are good ones so thanks to all of you for that.....I think I'll continue to save and see where I am moneywise but will probably go for the DSLR as I could always borrow hubbies Fuji to try digiscoping!!
Brilliant photo's btw on Greypoints site.....I love the swans in particular!
Have a good weekend all,
Best wishes,

[Reader]

One relatively cheap option that gives you a slightly better chance of flight shots is the eagle Eye 5x teleconverter lens. This also allows you to get good shots of birds that are too close for a scope but too far for the camera's zoom.

I have attached a few of my flight shots. Not world beaters I agree but better than nothing and all taken with the 5x teleconver. Looking at Warehouse Express they are charging £164 for this piece of kit and here is a link to their digiscoping section. http://www.warehouseexpress.co.uk/index.cfm?binsandscopes/digiscoping/nikon.html

[rayl]

The D50 is an excellent choice entry level DSLR, mine came from A J Purdy they have a good selection of 'kit' lenses and the service was first class.

Ray

[salty]

digiscoping will be the cheaper option, but it is loads harder than using a DSLR.

although good points with digiscoping, are the fact you can seperate your camera and scope, so you can use your camera for allsorts. where as the DSLR will be a birding only tool unless you get different lenses.

DSLRs are more pricey, but you will get better results. and they are more practical at times, you simply stick it round your neck and off you go. no tripods and big scopes to carry around!

[mw_aurora]

To repeat others - the choice really comes down to what you want to do.

Personally I am a birder and always have been.
I also have a keen interest in photography, again started at a very early age.

I wanted to combine the two, so started digiscoping...which is great, the camera (Nikon Coolpix) can deal with general photography and attached to my scope can produce the occasional reasonable bird photo (some people have even offered to buy them off Surfbirds!?!).

But, the photographer in me cried out to go back to SLR...so I recently bought a DSLR kit. I am now thinking if I really need the digiscoping kit...however my scope...that stays!

Cheers Mark.

[rezMole]

I considered digiscoping, but somehow, i didn't think my son would have stood still long enough for me to digiscope him when he was playing on the beach!

It really depends what you are going to take photos of. If it's ONLY birds then digiscoping would probably be the way to go for getting shots of birds that are far away. If you want great phots of birds that are fairly close, family pics, landscapes, close-ups, snap-shots etc. etc. then you ought to go with DSLR.

A DSLR will out perform a digital compact camera.

[postcardcv]

It really depends what you are going to take photos of. If it's ONLY birds then digiscoping would probably be the way to go for getting shots of birds that are far away. If you want great phots of birds that are fairly close, family pics, landscapes, close-ups, snap-shots etc. etc. then you ought to go with DSLR.

A DSLR will out perform a digital compact camera.

Not sure how true this statement really is.

A good quality compact, good glass and reasonable mp count, will produce very good images. They are often far easier to use than a dslr, and are certainly cheaper - to cover all those requirements, family pics, landscapes, close-ups, you'd need a range of lenses, which means even more money.

I have heard a number of reviews that suggest that if you want to take the camera out of the box and get good photos, then compacts are the way to go. To gain the full advantage of a DSLR you need to use the manual controls and spend some time 'processing' photos afterwards. So I think it depends how it will be used as to which option will deliver better results.

[rezMole]

to cover all those requirements, family pics, landscapes, close-ups, you'd need a range of lenses, which means even more money.

I have heard a number of reviews that suggest that if you want to take the camera out of the box and get good photos, then compacts are the way to go. To gain the full advantage of a DSLR you need to use the manual controls and spend some time 'processing' photos afterwards. So I think it depends how it will be used as to which option will deliver better results.

A decent zoom is all you need - i use the Tamron 28-300mm a great lens for the price (a tad over £200). It would cover most things except macro work.

As for DSLR out performing a compact, i meant technically, with the ssumption that the user would know how to get the best from it. My first forray into digital was with a Fuji non-SLR. To be honest, i wasted my money - the limitations were just too great. Biggest drawback was lack of manual focussing - at night, using flash, the damn tthing wouldn't focus on anything.

[Ruth Daniel]

I've used a digital non SLR (Fuji) for years now and feel well ready to further my experiences.But am going to use the Fuji on my new scope to try digiscoping too.
I had a look at the Nikon 50 yesterday and was really thrilled with the feel of it.I also saw a Sigma 300mm lens at £99.99 which seemed remarkably good value!