What spotting scopes can be used with a Canon 20D?

[ramblingman]

Hello all,

I have a canon 20D and am considering on whether to purchase a spotting scope for further shots, or a higher mm lens, e.g. 600mm. What is the best option for getting clear really distant shots?

I already own a 28-300mm, but want to get in closer.

And if I purchase a spotting scope, how will it connect to my 20D?

Lots of feedback and help in this quest for knowledge on the subject would be appreciated.

Thanks!

[hollis_f]

Well, I bought a gizmo to connect my 20D to my Opticron ES80 GA ED. This converts the scope to an 1150mm f14.4 lens. While that 1150mm number may look good the f14.4 is the one I should have looked at more carefully. It makes the image very dark, which makes focussing (which obviously has to be done manually) extremely difficult. However, it wasn't too expensive (£150) compared to a long lens.

When we get some better weather I'll try taking it out to see if I can get any decent shots.

[nigelblake]

I have been trialing a Zeiss 85T Fl scope with the Zeiss camera adaptor and EOS 20D, as stated above the focusing is manual and the viewfinder image is dark at an effective aperture of about f12, but with a 20D you have a "lens" that is equivalent to 1600mm (1000mm) on 35mm or full frame digital.
The key to good sharp focus is getting the dioptre correction on the viewfinder accurately set this can take some trial and error, its best done on a static subject.
As long as the scope/camera combination is well supported and steady the results can be good. with good light you can work at 200iso but in the main you will need to use 400iso or greater.

[Chris Galvin]

I have also been using the Swarovski STS80 HD with SLR adapter the TLS800. The TLS800 is attached to my 20D using a T2 mount. This turns the scope into an 1300 lens when using a 20D. As Nigel says the only way to make sure that you expose your subject correctly is to fire off a few test shots and then alter your camera settings accordingly.

When I have pulled my images into BreezeBrowser I have noticed in the EXIF data that the aperture is wide open with an f-stop of 0.7 thus enabling me to get some pretty fast shutter speeds, but had to underexpose to retain detail in the images.

Dont forget of course that the whole ensemble is pretty unsteady & I recommend a heavy stable tripod.

[deshojo]

A 600mm f4L IS will undoubtedly get the best quality shots possible.
It is highly corrected for distortion, aberrations etc., it has image stabilisation, you can attatch a 2x extender to get a 1200mm f8, and the quality is so good that at a stretch you can even stack 2x and 1.4x extenders to get a 1680mm f11 (2688mm equiv. FOV on a 20D).
It has superb autofocus (including tracking moving subjects) alone or with the 1.4x on a 20D, and is quite easy to manually focus with the 2x at f8.

The drawbacks are tremendous cost compared to a scope (around £6k), considerable weight (about 12lbs), and you will need a very sturdy tripod and head, hence more cost and weight (allow about £700-£1K and about 10lbs).

If you intend to be a serious photographer I would suggest the 600mm. If you just want to get shots of birds for yourself and web publication the scope may be a sufficient option.

You should also bear in mind when talking of "clear really distant shots" that no matter what magnification you have, past a certain distance, maybe only 50 yards on a hot sunny day (remember those?), atmospheric pollution like dust etc, and particularly heat haze will seriously reduce picture quality. There is no substitute for getting closer, though that's not so easy on an estuary or cliff face!

[ramblingman]

Seems like a lot of work to get a camera to shoot at far distances. Buying a high MM lens is expensive and using a spotting scope may not get you the results you want without trial and error shots and more knowledge than I have at this point. I don't know what to do at this point. Probably just keep reading the forum until I learn more.

BTW Chris, I really liked your shots, but wished you had posted camera data by your shots. This way I could see what kind of pics you were getting with what camera and lenses. What did you use for the majority of you shots?

[macshark]

Seems like a lot of work to get a camera to shoot at far distances. Buying a high MM lens is expensive and using a spotting scope may not get you the results you want without trial and error shots and more knowledge than I have at this point. I don't know what to do at this point. Probably just keep reading the forum until I learn more.

BTW Chris, I really liked your shots, but wished you had posted camera data by your shots. This way I could see what kind of pics you were getting with what camera and lenses. What did you use for the majority of you shots?

Your observations are correct. However, there is an easy (though not inexpensive) way out.

You can get a 400mm f/5.6L lens and a non-reporting 1.4x TC (e.g. Tamron 1.4x). This combination will still give you AF on a 20D/30D and the effective focal length is 560mm. If you add in the 1.6x crop factor, the field of view will be equivalent to a 900mm lens on a 35mm SLR.

The 400mm prime + 1.4x TC does not give you as much reach as a scope, but it will give you better sharpness. In most cases, you can crop the image down by 2/3 in both dimensions and still get a decent or good image. If you can get the bird to fill about 1/3 of the frame, the results can be excellent.

Since the 400mm prime does not have IS, you would either need high shutter speeds (high ISO or bright daylight) or you would need a tripod. Since this combo is nowhere near as big and heavy as the 600mm prime, you can get away with a medium-grade tripod and a medium grade ball-head. It is also possible to use a self-standing monopod (e.g. Bogen/Manfrotto 682) as long as your shutter speeds are more than 1/100.

[ramblingman]

You can get a 400mm f/5.6L lens and a non-reporting 1.4x TC (e.g. Tamron 1.4x). This combination will still give you AF on a 20D/30D and the effective focal length is 560mm. If you add in the 1.6x crop factor, the field of view will be equivalent to a 900mm lens on a 35mm SLR.

That is another option I was looking into, but am unfamiliar with the TCs and somewhat confused on how some work with some lenses and not others. Apparently Canon is only good with Canon lenses. Obviously not everyone buys Canon so I looked into a Tamron. Can any one opine on the Tamron TC? I was considering a 1.4x because I was told a 2x would not yield good results. Also, when you refer to non-reporting are you referring to the aperture value?

I was told that AF will be slower, but this is good because it won't hunt too much because of the faster AF without the TC.

I really need want to find out which TCs are compatible and how they will work with my current camera and lenses. A quick lesson by any willing person would help me tremendously.

[IanF]

That is another option I was looking into, but am unfamiliar with the TCs and somewhat confused on how some work with some lenses and not others. Apparently Canon is only good with Canon lenses. Obviously not everyone buys Canon so I looked into a Tamron. Canon brand converters only come in bayonet mount to fit Canon cameras - hence they won't fit other brands.

Tamron, Sigma and a few others are independent manufacturers who produce products for most of the main camera brands.

Can any one opine on the Tamron TC? I was considering a 1.4x because I was told a 2x would not yield good results. Also, when you refer to non-reporting are you referring to the aperture value?

I was told that AF will be slower, but this is good because it won't hunt too much because of the faster AF without the TC.

I really need want to find out which TCs are compatible and how they will work with my current camera and lenses. A quick lesson by any willing person would help me tremendously.On anything less than a Canon full frame sensor you lose autofocus on a lens above f5,6 when a converter is added.

Personally I use the Canon 20D with Canon 1.4x with the Canon 400mm f5,6. There is some loss of sharpness but the extra reach often outweighs the small loss in quality - focus does need to be spot on though paticularly as depth of field is usually pretty shallow. You lose 1x f-stop with this converter.

The reason I don't use the 2x with this lens is that you lose 2x f-stops and loss of sharpness it likely a little greater.

If relying on autofocus with the Canon 20D+Canon 1.4x then it will not work at all unless you tape over the three left pins as you look down into the lens end of the converter. Doing so turns it into 'non-reporting' for aperture as it fools the camera into thinking it's not there - however auto exposure still works as does autofocus but it is very slow and it does hunt a lot. Best technique I've found is to simply manually focus onto the subject and then use autofocus - as long as the lens is in more or less the right focus, autofocus works pretty quickly for fine focus or if the bird moves slightly or just a short distance - usually it works but sometimes it still hunts. No use for flight shots with the converter unless you use manual focus.

Tamron make two converters - an ordinary 'dumb' converter which has lower quality optics but will autofocus quickly but produce soft results and a 'Pro' version which has better quality optics but operates in the same fashion as the Canon converter requiring the pins taping. It's cheaper than the Canon version and I've seen some very good results taken with it, but I still wonder if it's as sharp as the Canon version.

[hollis_f]

Tamron make two converters - an ordinary 'dumb' converter which has lower quality optics but will autofocus quickly but produce soft results and a 'Pro' version which has better quality optics but operates in the same fashion as the Canon converter requiring the pins taping. It's cheaper than the Canon version and I've seen some very good results taken with it, but I still wonder if it's as sharp as the Canon version.
Or there's the Sigma version Which is on a par with the Canon as far as quality is concerned, but about £100 cheaper.

[deshojo]

You may wish to check out the nature fora at these two photography sites:

http://www.photo.net/

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/41

There are many excellent photographers using less expensive equipment who will freely offer their advice. Non-marque brands like Sigma and Tamron may well offer exactly what you are looking for. A few weeks/months research would be a lot cheaper than buying the wrong lens.

nature-photos.biz (http://www.nature-photos.biz)

[macshark]

Tamron make two converters - an ordinary 'dumb' converter which has lower quality optics but will autofocus quickly but produce soft results and a 'Pro' version which has better quality optics but operates in the same fashion as the Canon converter requiring the pins taping. It's cheaper than the Canon version and I've seen some very good results taken with it, but I still wonder if it's as sharp as the Canon version.

The lower end Tamron 1.4x converter (MC4) is optically quite good on 1.6x crop bodies (like the 20D/30D/300D/350D/400D). Even though I use the Kenko Pro 1.4x TC, I have seen some very high quality 100% crops from a Tamron 1.4x + 400 f/5.6L combination.

EOS mount versions of Tamron and Kenko TCs basically work with all Canon telephoto primes and many other lenses. If it is a reporting TC, aperture has to be f/5.6 or wider. If the TC is non-reporting (or made to be non-reporting using the pin taping trick), f/8 usually works. Some people report limited AF success using one of the horizontal AF points on the 350D at even f/11 using a non-reporting TC.

[ramblingman]

What about lens multipliers that are +1, +2, +3?

[IanF]

What about lens multipliers that are +1, +2, +3?
The only ones I know of with these gradings relate to diopter and are close-up lenses attached to the front of the objective to enable closer focus - not as effective as extension tubes used with interchangeable lenses but still useful devices for use with fixed lens cameras.

Teleconverter lenses enable extend the range of a lens rather than reduce it.