Digiscoping with an SLR is better?

[vanveen]

Hello all,

I am writing because I would like to purchase a spotting scope. My purpose is to use it for both birdwatching and digiscoping. My questions are the following

- I already own a Nikon D80. Some manufacturers, such as Zeiss, have devised special adapters for digitals SLRS. Will I get noticeably better results if I use suchadapters than if I use a compact camera that I can more easily place on the eyepiece? Indeed, one of the drawbacks of the DSLR solution (at least, that's my impression - is it correct?) is that is difficult to switch between looking at the bird and photographing it as you have to unscrew the adapter, replace the eyepiece, etc.
- If I opt for the "compact camera" solution, am I better off with a 30X eyepiece than with a zoom eyepiece or a 40W eyepiece (such as Zeiss')?
- Finally, I was considering buying the Zeiss DIASCOPE. Would that be a good choice? Or is there an inherent advantage in opting for a Nikon fieldscope if I use it with my D80? Or is there a "cheaper" spotting scope as good as the Zeiss?

Thanks for your replies to my questions! And sorry if they have been answered already.

Olivier

[mmdnje]

HI vanveen. welcome to this forum. I tryied both compact PandS camera and DSLR for digiscoping. It is easy to digiscope with a PS camera (to start you can use the camera autofocus, screen to frame the animal..). With the dslr I have to focus using the camera viewfinder and after a while becomes a pain. I prefer a 20-30X eyepiece for digiscoping with either type of camera.
Im my gallery you will find picures taken with both setups.

[vanveen]

Thanks for your reply, mmndje. By the way, your gallery is superb.

[postcardcv]

All of the main scope manufacturers produce SLR adapters for directly attaching your camera to your scope. I have used three such adapters and have never been entirely happy with the results. IMO to get the best out of a DSLR you really need to use it with a proper lens. I have digiscoped with numerous P&S cameras over the years and have always found this much easier than using a DSLR on a scope. As has been said a P&S will use it's Af to tweek your focusing which can be very helpful. Also a P&S will be much lighter than a DSLR making it much easier to balance your scope with the camera attached.

[Jaff]

I finally managed to try this out recently, a 300D attacthed to a Swaro STS65 HD.

I was shocked at how impossible it was to get a decent shot, admittedly the light was bad but it highlights the point that this is only attemptable on the brightest days and trying to focus the scope through the viewfinder isn't easy, the latest cameras with Liveview would be a better solution but otherwise I'd say forget it and get a P&S camera. Most new cameras these days rival DSLR's with the pixel count so I really don't see any benefits of DSLR scoping.

Hope I'm helping. :hi:
Jaff

[vanveen]

Hi Jaff and postcardcv,

Thanks very much for the very helpful feedback. I'll go through the PS way then.

Cheers,

Olivier

[vanveen]

I ended up ordering a used Zeiss 85mm diascope with a 20-60 eyepiece. Now, my next task is to find the right tripod, adapter, and camera for digiscoping. I don't know if any of you more experienced digiscopers would care to comment on my ideas below...but here they are:

- From what I read on this site and on the web a Manfrotto 055V + a 701 RC2 head would be good given my height (1M73) + Nikon P5100 + Spidertech adapter.

Cheers,

Olivier

[postcardcv]

From what I read on this site and on the web a Manfrotto 055V + a 701 RC2 head would be good given my height (1M73) + Nikon P5100 + Spidertech adapter.

That's a good tripod and an excellent camera... I've no experience of the adapter so can't help there.

[Fido]

Dang it. Lost my post...

Okay, summary: I'm in the same situation as you, Vanveen. I'm looking for a digiscope setup.

I like the Nikon, but think there may be better choices:

The Nikon P5000 (similar to P5100?) is slow, not good if the bird is on the wing?
http://www.neocamera.com/review_nikon_p5000.html

The Fujifilm camera has the best low light operation (how important is that?) but no optical stabilization (again, how important?).
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf31fd/page17.asp

The Canon SD800is has stabilization and all around performance. Plus I like the 28mm lens for non-birding uses (househunting, party pics, landscapes).
http://www.neocamera.com/review_canon_sd800.html

I hope that experienced digiscopers might help me. What are the most important features for birding? In order: low light ability, speed of operation, picture quality, image stabilization?

thanks!

[iporali]

I hope that experienced digiscopers might help me. What are the most important features for birding? In order: low light ability, speed of operation, picture quality, image stabilization?

Fido,

You have excellent options in your shortlist. I use a Panasonic FX01 which is very similar to the Canon SD800IS: it has IS and 28mm, which I find very useful - but not necessarily in digiscoping. IMO the most important features are good "digiscoping friendly" optics and a sensor/processor that produces sufficient image quality. Digiscoping is never fast - even with a fast camera. Nor does it work well in low light - even with a low-light capable camera. I don't think IS helps if the camera is attached with an adapter but it does help A LOT if you handhold.

As a summary I would say 1) the best pics would probably come with the P5000, 2) you would get relatively more "good" pics with the Fuji F31 but 3) you would end up digiscoping the most with the Canon SD800 :t:.

Best regards,

Ilkka

[Fido]

Dang it! Lost my post again! Why does the quick reply forget your text if you accidentally hit the "back" button? Very annoying.

It is a shame that we have to compromise, I wish I could have parts of each camera. And throw in some of the Panasonic Lumix features too (style, ease of use). But I ended up buying the Canon... just blends my different needs the best (I hope).

I hate compromise. grumble grumble