Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 16th May 2015, 18:00   #1
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Digiscoping vs. "Astroscoping"

Hello,
About 10 years ago I started my bird photography hobby digiscoping with my old Coolpix 990 on a Leica 62mm scope. Gradually I moved away from digiscoping to using a DSLR and long lens. I think one of the limitations of digiscoping is the slow focal ratios and diffraction. Usually about the best you can do even with low power eyepieces is ~f/9. Zoom in even a little and your equivalent f-stop quickly goes to f/11 or more. Of course digiscopers still get great results, but I think diffraction becomes a significant limiting factor.

I've been occasionally visiting your group here and admiring your photos. Later this year I'm going to be getting a high end 80mm f/6 APO triplet refractor. The telescope is still being made so I won't have it for a few months, but it should be very nice. My main purpose with the scope is astronomy, but after admiring your photos I want to try using the telescope for bird photography. I'm hoping that using the small telescope maybe I can get a lot of "reach" like digiscoping but maybe get a little higher quality photos. Obviously I give up the ability to enjoy the wonderful view through the eyepiece of a spotting scope, but if my main priority is getting a photo, maybe I'll be happier with the results? All of your wonderful photos generally lead me to believe that, but what do you people think as far as the pros and cons of spotting scopes vs. using small telescopes for bird photography?

Also, if any of you would like to point me at old threads that cover all the basic questions for "newbies" wanting to use astronomy telescopes for bird photography, that would be great. I plan to use a good red dot finder and my Olympus E-M1. My E-M1 is not getting used nearly often enough these days. Those of you who use the Olympus OM-D bodies, are there any special adapters that you prefer?

Thanks for sharing all your great photos.

Dave
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 17th May 2015, 07:35   #2
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Dave,
An E-M1 on a good scope is a killer setup. I have tried a number of different cameras on the scope, (E-30, D-7000, D-7100, 5 D II) but none of them touch the E-M1 in terms of picture quality and above all, ease of use.
All you need is about 70 to 80mm of extension tubes and a T2->m4/3 adapter and you are good to go. I have a different setup that allows me more flexibility, scope ->T2-Nikon-F -> Nikon-F to 4/3 adapter (Fotodiox) and then a 4/3->m4/3 adapter. This lets me use extension tubes (Nikon) and TCs (Olympus EC-14 or home made TN) if I need them. Looks a bit funny with all those different adapters and extensions, but it works well. I don't think there is any real need for expensive Novoflex adapters. The fleabay cheapies also work well. At 480mm, you may well want to also use TCs at times.
Digiscoping is OK, but you will never be able to touch what you can do with that scope and an E-M1.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th May 2015, 16:29   #3
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
I second what Dan writes (one of the scopes I use is a TLAPO804, 80mm F/6, and I use the E-M5/E-M1 as well), and adding some reflections:

Prior astroscoping I digiscoped for a season using a Nikon ED82A scope and a Canon S90 camera. I got some decent results at times, but there is no way such a digiscoping setup will deliver IQ near what astroscoping setup does. Furthermore the operational ergonomy is so much better, reminding of a lens with rack-and pinion focuser.

A 480mm scope is a very nice and versatile tool that is just about right for many situations. I tend to use it more and more over my longer 600 and 700 mm scopes (but it depends of course on the situations and motifs). I like to explore new places and photograph in the field so portability is nice. Sometimes I will pick a spot and shoot from there, in such cases I will often bring the big gun but that adds additional 4kg.

What I recommend to invest into is a CF tripod and a gimbal head. I prefer dual axis gimbal but some like the single axis. Monopod is not that great because of the torque excercised on the adapter. Handheld operation of a 480mm scope weighing 2-3 kg is feasible with some practice.

I suppose you could easily mount an eyepiece to the rear port instead of the 2" tube and sue the scope for observation.

Having several adapters and extension tubes that you can combine is a good idea so that you can use accessories such as TC. A high end triplet can accomodate a TC without significant IQ degratation. I have been using both T2 and one piece adapters. CNC supplies (US based) have nice adapters of high quality and good mechanical fit: http://www.cncsupplyinc.com/index.htm?true2.htm

Hope this helps
Tord
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th May 2015, 12:15   #4
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
 
JGobeil's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Quebec City, Canada
Posts: 1,331
Hi Dave, welcome to the club.

I use a EM-1 with a SkyWatcher 80ED and I am quite pleased with the results.

I fully second what Dan and Tord have written. I use the CNC adapter and I highly recommend it.

Tord's suggestion of a good tripod and gimbal is right on. It makes a big difference.

Also, you may want to make your own TN (Tele Negative) which is a sort of tele converter extracted from a zoom lens. It will give you about 1.5X with little or no degradation in picture quality when more reach is needed. This is a fun project and it costs peanuts. See this thread:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=182146

Regards
Jules
__________________
Jules Gobeil
Nature Photographer
http://www.julesgobeil.com
JGobeil is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th May 2015, 20:37   #5
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Dan, Tord, & Jules,
Thanks for your helpful and encouraging responses. It sounds like you generally agree that the quality of photos possible using a camera directly mounted to a small refracting telescope is superior to what you can get with most "digiscoping" set-ups using a spotting scope. I guess I will be finding out for myself.

I learned that my new 80mm scope may be delivered approximately in July, so I have a lot of time to get ready. I should be all set for support. In addition to my E-M1, I already have a nice Gitzo series 3 tripod that I was planning to use, and I have a Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head that I use with my DSLR photography. But I'm also planning to get this "Hitch Hiker" smaller gimbal head. The Hitch Hiker is not yet in full production; I pre-ordered one of 10 initial "demo" units. I have another larger astronomy mount made by the same guy in Texas, and he does excellent work. I would prefer to use the Hitch Hiker if I can, because it is a full lb. less weight than the Wimberley. I'm trying to keep the overall weight down by using a lightweight Crayford focuser rather than a heavy rack & pinion. Even so, I doubt I will ever try to hand-hold this rig, especially with manual focusing...

So will I absolutely need a 70 or 80mm extension tube, or is that just a suggestion to increase my "reach" and effective focal length? If I can predict ahead of time what I will need, I'll get it in advance. I'm glad to hear that the Olympus EC-14 teleconverter works well. Would you say that will work as well as any home-made TN converter?

This thread may last a while. I will certainly follow up but it will be a few months until I share my own verdict on whether I like "astroscoping" better than digiscoping. In the meantime maybe others will contribute their thoughts on the merits of these 2 different approaches to bird photography.

Thanks again,
Dave
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th May 2015, 23:03   #6
Paul Corfield
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Corfe Mullen, Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,010
The extension tube is so that you can achieve focus over a useful range, say from around 8m to infinity. The amount of close focus depends on the scope and focuser. A combination of tubes stacked together will let you focus down to just a couple meters or less. If you want to do that then it can be handy to have a range of tubes, or use one extension tube all the time and use macro tubes on the camera for extra extension. If you just stick the camera in the back of the scope without an extension tube then the image would be blurred throughout most of the range, certainly from close range to middle distance would be lost.

A scope is designed to use an erecting mirror/prism with an eyepiece to reach focus and this adds distance to the light path. Because the camera doesn't need these parts the extension tube is used to take up that extra light path distance to reach focus.

If you already have the EC-14 then that should be fine. TN's are very good and cost effective if you don't already have a teleconverter. They are also good if you want to go to 2X or 3X or even more with no hit to image quality. Just needs a very steady hand or a steady set up.

Paul.
Paul Corfield is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 20th May 2015, 21:01   #7
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Thank you Paul.
So the extension tubes don't increase my magnification, they only allow reaching focus at closer and closer distances, the longer the extension tubes are. I'll try to figure out a single extension tube that will be optimal for mostly subjects at a distance of ~7-30 meters.

I don't have the EC-14 teleconverter, but if it works very well, I can imagine I might eventually add that. I'll look for example images using an 80mm scope + EC-14.

Dave
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 20th May 2015, 22:23   #8
Paul Corfield
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Corfe Mullen, Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,010
I should imagine an 80mm tube would easily cover those distances, may even get you down to around 5 or 6 meters and out to infinity or near infinity.

DanC and Tord both have the EC-14, I should imagine there are some photos taken with it on the scope in the gallery section.

Go to this link and use the 'search this thread' function and search for EC14. Don't search for EC-14 as it wont show any results, just a quirk of the way the search function works.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread....194789&page=89

Paul.
Paul Corfield is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 21st May 2015, 10:16   #9
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Have a look here
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread....09#post3219809
starting with post # 537
Testing like this tells me a lot more about how well something works than just taking a few pictures. Got to get rid of the variables.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd May 2015, 09:15   #10
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post
Thank you Paul.
I'll look for example images using an 80mm scope + EC-14.

Dave
The Lapwing and the Oystercatchers are taken with the TLAPO804 + EC14:
https://500px.com/photo/108191383/no...m=user_library

https://500px.com/photo/105524561/oy...m=user_library

(Note: I missed to take the EC14 into account when publishing the photos, so the lens data is not up to date. It should have been 700mm, F/8.4)
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 10th July 2015, 00:37   #11
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Hello,
My new 80mm f/6 APO telescope is now targeted for delivery in September, so I still have several weeks to wait. But I am definitely planning to get an extension tube and give it a try for bird photography with my E-M1.

The Olympus MC-14 is a little less expensive than the EC-14 and I would prefer it if I end up getting the upcoming 300mm f/4 Pro lens (will it ever be announced?). Have any of you been using the newer MC-14 teleconverter with your astro telescopes or are you all using the EC-14?

Thanks,

Dave

Last edited by opticoholic : Friday 10th July 2015 at 00:46.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 10th July 2015, 11:41   #12
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post
Hello,
My new 80mm f/6 APO telescope is now targeted for delivery in September, so I still have several weeks to wait. But I am definitely planning to get an extension tube and give it a try for bird photography with my E-M1.

The Olympus MC-14 is a little less expensive than the EC-14 and I would prefer it if I end up getting the upcoming 300mm f/4 Pro lens (will it ever be announced?). Have any of you been using the newer MC-14 teleconverter with your astro telescopes or are you all using the EC-14?

Thanks,

Dave
Dave,

Yes you should give it a try. Here is a gallery from a Birdforum member, as you can see very nice pictures taken with a 80mm F/6 triplet scope (same model as I am using). http://fernandobatista.smugmug.com/Galeria/Aves-Birds/

Regarding the EC14 vs MC14:

I use the EC14 since I started with the 4/3 system and later on acquired a m4/3 body (EM5) mainly for use with my scope. Next I acquired a EM1 since its AF system performs OK with the 4/3 lenses and I wanted a second body in addition to my E5. (Not that the AF performance of the EM5 is extremely slow when used with 4/3 lenses).

I intend to keep using my 4/3 lenses (I do not regard size/weight as an issue) and for that reason I have no direct plan to acquire the MC14 or invest in m4/3 telephoto for that matter, until Olympus launch a body with CAF performance in par with Canon/Nikon).

The MC14 is specially designed for the 40-150 F/2.8 and most likely Olympus also had the upcoming 300 F/4 in mind when designing it. It will give you 420 F/5.6. Compare that with 480 F/6, so not sure it will fill a gap (unless you are looking for a more portable setup as complement to the scope). It is likely it should give good/excellent results with the scope, but I cannot confirm. The EC14 does. The drawback is you need a 4/3 --> m4/3 adapter and this adds more weight and may dteriorate the mechanical rigidity compared to the MC14. I used a third party adapter from Hong Kong and the fit is OK, a layer of electrical tape made the fit even better.

Another option if you are handy is to make your own magnifier from the telenegative excavated from a surplus or dysfunctional zoom lens and a set of cheap macro tubes (m4/3 fitting in your case). Paul Corfield has demonstrated several times this can give great results, there is a thread dedicated to this topic: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=182146



/Tord
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 11th July 2015, 02:14   #13
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Tord--
Thanks for your reply. I'm with you, hoping that Olympus can improve continuous AF on the E-M1 successor to make it as good as Nikon/Canon. I'm kind of disappointed with Nikon in general these days. In many ways I'm more impressed with Olympus. Anyway, you make a good point about the similarity of the 480mm f/6 manual telescope set-up vs. the 420mm f/5.6 autofocus if I ever get the both the Oly 300 and the MC-14. I won't order the MC-14 right away, but I think I really will want a little more reach on the 480mm scope to make it more like a spotting scope at low power. My main use of the new scope will be astronomy. I'm hoping that maybe I will also use it as a higher quality alternative to digiscoping. That gets us getting back to the title of this thread. I see digiscoping and "astroscoping" as similarly challenging in terms of narrow field of view/target acquisition, very high power/steadiness, and maybe most of all, manual focus! By the end of this thread, I will post my own conclusion as to whether "astroscoping" gives me better results than digiscoping. Your beautiful images and the others shared here lead me to hope for that.

Dave

Last edited by opticoholic : Saturday 11th July 2015 at 02:27.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 8th February 2016, 22:08   #14
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
I know this is an old thread and maybe you thought it was over, but there were unexpected delays getting my new telescope. I finally received my new CFF 80mm f/6 APO triplet on December 31. Then it took a while for me to get the adapters and the whole set-up ready, plus I have not been taking any vacation and the weather has been mostly cloudy and rainy for weeks. But this past weekend was sunny and beautiful and everything finally came together very nicely!

I will attach a photo of my complete set-up:
  • CFF 80mm f/6 APO telescope
  • lightweight Feather Touch crayford focuser
  • Olympus E-M1 with firmware 4.0
  • 80mm extension tube
  • Olympus EE-1 dot sight
  • Olympus RM-UC1 remote shutter cord
  • Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head
  • Gitzo series 3 tripod (GT3541XLS)
  • McNett Tactical CamoForm Protective Gun Wrap

This is a nice set-up but it will take time to get used it. The process felt awkward: Find and frame the bird, do the initial focus, adjust the exposure and fire a few shots, then magnify, reposition the magnified frame on the bird's head, fine-tune the focus, then finally fire the shutter for more perfect focus. I expected this, but at first it was so strange that sometimes I was just standing there not even sure what buttons to press, fumbling to even find the focus knob! I will say that the EE-1 sight helps a lot. It is expensive but I highly recommend it. I also love the silent shutter and the enhanced focus peaking on the E-M1 with firmware 4.0! I will get a little faster with more practice. Of course it will never be ideal for action, but again, I knew that from my past digiscoping...

The good news is that I am very happy with the image quality! Not only it is much better than anything I ever got from digiscoping, I would also say that my first images approach the same quality that I get with my very expensive Nikon DSLR + 500mm lens! That surprised me. Here are links to 3 high quality jpeg images from my first day out last Saturday (note eventually I may remove these images from my Dropbox, but I'll try to leave them available for a while):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...mit_Thrush.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...Woodpecker.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._Scrub-jay.jpg

These images have been processed--cropped, colors/levels adjusted, resized to 1600 pixels, and some noise reduction on the background. But I did not add much sharpening to these at all. I will say that these birds were rather cooperative, and the light was pretty good, although the Hermit Thrush was in complete shade/shadow. Here is a link to open an unprocessed 100% crop of the Scrub-jay's head:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...rcent_crop.jpg

I might just be overexcited right now, but the 100% image quality in good light might even be better than I get with my 500mm Nikon lens and the larger sensor D7200... Is that possible? The CFF 80mm triplet is a very high end scope, but it wasn't that much more expensive than any other high end 80mm APO triplet. ...way less than the Nikon 500mm lens... Anyway, time will tell but the early indications are this little CFF 80mm is a pretty special scope indeed.

Besides the extra reach compared to my Nikon DSLR, I think maybe I'm seeing one more advantage to the astroscoping rig: There seems to be greater depth of field, with more of the entire bird in perfect sharp focus. With my DSLR, even when I stop down the aperture, very often the depth of field is too shallow to get the whole bird in focus.

I have several more examples from my first 2 days using the new scope, and I think some of these illustrate the greater depth of field, but I will start posting those over on the other long ongoing thread.

I bought this 80mm refractor mostly for astronomy, and I thought I might sometimes use it for bird photography as a higher quality alternative to digiscoping. But I am so pleased with my first bird photos that I think I might use it for bird photography more often than astronomy!

Dave
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	cff80mm_ready_for_bird_photography.jpg
Views:	116
Size:	236.2 KB
ID:	573225  

Last edited by opticoholic : Monday 8th February 2016 at 22:32.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 8th February 2016, 22:23   #15
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
Thanks for keeping us updated. These first photos look really good, keep them coming!

One possible explanation behind the increased DOF is the smaller sensor on the EM1 compared to the D7200.
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 00:05   #16
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
 
JGobeil's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Quebec City, Canada
Posts: 1,331
Congradulations for your acquisition. It looks like a nice setup.

I'm also surprised by the increased DOF you seem to experiment. My SkyWatcher 80 ED has a very shallow DOF and I also use an EM-1.

I'm not surprised by the sharpness however. Your scope is a high level unit, much better than mine and mine is already extremely sharp. Large diameter lenses and simple optics allow these scopes to compete if not beat the big guns from the majors. Your Nikon lens has 14 elements in 11 groups, stabilizer and autofocus systems while your scope has only 3 elements and nothing else to corrupt the image. It is also made with top quality glass and coatings.

I remember my first outings with a scope and I'm not surprised to read that you find it difficult. It is so much different from a regular autofocus lens. It is big and you must focus manually. Not only that, but you must get used to focus differently with knobs placed differently, that do not move the same way and that require more rotation. Add the stress of doing it quickly before the bird says goodbye... Not easy !

I've been using it for a few years now and I still find it difficult. Practice makes perfect ! Lots of practice...
__________________
Jules Gobeil
Nature Photographer
http://www.julesgobeil.com
JGobeil is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 04:34   #17
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 291
Here are a 3 more of the best examples from my second day (yesterday) practicing with the new astro scope set-up (same location):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ack_Phoebe.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...rn_Flicker.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...Woodpecker.jpg

Again these links may not work forever, but I'll try to leave these high quality jpeg files in this Dropbox folder for quite a while... I'm just so happy and surprised that the image quality is so high, comparable to what I get with my expensive DSLR + 500mm lens. The resolution is so good I still have freedom to crop images. All 3 of these images were cropped about the same amount. Here are links to open small copies of the same 3 images above showing the full uncropped frame... I definitely am getting a little bit more reach... I will be very interested how well the image quality holds up when I add a teleconverter or TN.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._uncropped.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._uncropped.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._uncropped.jpg

I don't think I'm imagining the increased depth of field with the astro scope. It is evident in the Northern Flicker photo and the Black Phoebe photo, where pretty much the whole bird is in focus... The only explanation that makes sense is the smaller sensor size of micro-4/3 compared to the larger APS-C sensor in my Nikon SLR. I guess the slightly shorter focal length might also be helping a tad (480mm on the astro scope vs. 500mm on my Nikon SLR). Also the distance to my subject may be a little greater when I'm using the astro scope, which of course would also increase my depth of field. And maybe one more thing: Although I rarely shoot wide open at f/4 with the 500mm, I do quite often shoot stopped down 1 stop to f/5.6, so that small aperture difference (f/5.6 vs. f/6) might sometimes also contribute a tiny bit... So maybe it is a combination of factors all adding up... All I know is that I am noticing right away that sometimes I'm able to get the entire bird in focus with the f/6 astro scope, more often than the same kind of images with 500mm + D7200.

Jules you make a good point about the simpler optical design with less glass... The CFF scope has an oil-spaced triplet objective, so that means 4 less air-to-glass surfaces compared to more common air-spaced triplets. I have no idea how much that matters... I wonder why most pro super telephoto lenses have such complex designs with so many lens elements?

Dave

Last edited by opticoholic : Tuesday 9th February 2016 at 04:57.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 06:30   #18
cango
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Tyresö
Posts: 707
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post
Here are a 3 more of the best examples from my second day (yesterday) practicing with the new astro scope set-up (same location):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ack_Phoebe.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...rn_Flicker.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...Woodpecker.jpg
Great results :-)

The light and details of that flicker are beautiful!
cango is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 07:19   #19
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Looks good.
"I would also say that my first images approach the same quality that I get with my very expensive Nikon DSLR + 500mm lens! That surprised me."
Doesn't surprise me at all! These scopes far exceed the Big White (and Black ) Monsters in terms of resolution. I would guess that your scope has a Strehl ratio around 0.98, and the Canon and Nikon people don't even want people to know what their big telephotos do. Leica did for a while until they perhaps found 0.80 too embarrassing. My friend at the telescope shop has tested a few mid range Canons, like the 300/4, which is considered to be very sharp. It weighed in at 0.68. No astrojock in his right mind would even consider anything that low, especially when you consider that the "cheep" SW 80/600 lies in the 0.94 range, which is very good for that kind of money!
The big whites have other strengths and I feel it is really hard and not too wise to compare, though I did compare a Canon 500 with my 90/600 triplet. In terms of sharpness, the triplet won hands down, but the bokeh of the 500 was more pleasing, something I really dislike about the scope. Lets face it, astrophotographers are not all THAT concerned with bokeh.
Plus the autofocus of the Canon was FAR superior to my scope!

The super telephoto designs have become more and more complicated since the advent of autofocus and now image stabilization. The old Leica Telyts were fantastic at the time and also only had three elements.
I am not so sure about whether the air to glass surfaces have much to do with resolution. Have to ask my friend who is at the moment traveling somewhere in South America. It cuts down on reflections for sure, but with modern coating techniques the advantage is not all that great, and as I understand it, it makes any post production adjustment of the lens block more difficult. No, it is more the number of elements that has the greatest effect. Each one has its own job to do, but brings with it the possibility of inaccuracies, and they add up when you get so many stacked up.

Last edited by DanC.Licks : Tuesday 9th February 2016 at 07:32.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 10:52   #20
Paul Corfield
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Corfe Mullen, Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,010
Looks like a nice set up Dave the and the photos are really good too. Keep practicing and in time the whole process can become very fluid. I've been doing it so long now that I can aim the scope without any aids and without looking through the camera viewfinder. Focusing is the same, if I switch targets then I'm racking it in or out to roughly where I think it needs to be at the same time as I'm panning the scope to the target. I'm also clicking the exposure up or down a couple of clicks depending on how I see the light. All those three things are happening at the same time and the photo can be taken within 2 or 3 seconds of seeing the bird. I don't use any remote triggers, just aim and shoot with all the tripod axis loosened. When I get my eye to the viewfinder the bird is nearly always there and focus just needs a small tweak one way or the other. Got my first astro scope in 2007 and taken 100's of 1000's of photos with this method. Before that I used to build my own scopes to mount to the camera which were a simple draw tube style made of cardboard tubes. Still worked well though. :-)

Paul.
Paul Corfield is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 11:50   #21
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post

...

This is a nice set-up but it will take time to get used it. The process felt awkward: Find and frame the bird, do the initial focus, adjust the exposure and fire a few shots, then magnify, reposition the magnified frame on the bird's head, fine-tune the focus, then finally fire the shutter for more perfect focus.

...

Dave
Dave,
The method you describe is more or less the one I usually stick to myself.

I start by firing shots with 1X magnification, with some luck you will get one that is in focus. If the subject is cooperative then next I will magnify (5X) and fine tune focus. I have assigned the E-M1 F2 button to EVF magnification, the F2 button feels natural.

There is however a risk when magnifying and focusing on the head of close subjects, that is cropping the subject. To workaround this: either re-compose, or focus on shoulders with some bias towards back-focus, or if you have time use the arrows to move the magnified portion of the EVF.

To take full advantage of the maginifying feature you will probably want to engage the IS upon half-press of the shutter release button.

If shutter times start to become critical I will also take some shots using a gentle touch on the LCD. I find it quite often produces sharper results than pressing the shutter release button when times are longer than 1/80 s or thereabout.

Alternatively you can use the Olympus smartphone as a remote control. Works fine, but means yet another device to keep track of.

I expose in A mode and find the auto-ISO quite useful (I set the upper limit to limit 1600). I don't have insight into the details of the Oly algorithm but the camera seems to honor shutter times fairly well.

Lastly I have saved the setting fore use with scope in one of the "Mysets", this way you can use the camera with scope and other lenses without need to reprogram half a dozen of settings.
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 12:26   #22
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
 
JGobeil's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Quebec City, Canada
Posts: 1,331
Paul, I wish it was that easy for me... Unfortunately, I don't use the scope as much as you do.

Tord, I'm glad the F2 button works well for you. I prefer to use the 2 buttons on front of the camera below the shutter: Magnify on the White Balance button and Peaking on the Preview button. I always keep WB on auto and I never use the Preview feature which I find useless with the WYSIWYG viewfinder.
__________________
Jules Gobeil
Nature Photographer
http://www.julesgobeil.com
JGobeil is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 12:39   #23
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGobeil View Post
Paul, I wish it was that easy for me...
Tord, I'm glad the F2 button works well for you. I prefer to use the 2 buttons on front of the camera below the shutter: Magnify on the White Balance button and Peaking on the Preview button. I always keep WB on auto and I never use the Preview feature which I find useless with the WYSIWYG viewfinder.
I forgot to write in my previous post that I use the EM-5 together with the scope. EM-5 has no support for focus peaking.
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 9th February 2016, 16:05   #24
Paul Corfield
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Corfe Mullen, Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGobeil View Post
Paul, I wish it was that easy for me... Unfortunately, I don't use the scope as much as you do.
I tend to only get the scope out in springtime each year at the moment, mainly just March and April. That tends to be when most birds are about here, not many leaves on the trees and temperatures are stable enough for long range shooting. Even so, I found that doing that for the last few years I take to the scope as if I hadn't been away, it's completely ingrained in me now. Haven't used the scope since last summer so I will be dusting it off soon once nesting season begins.

Running my own business doesn't give me anywhere near as much time as I'd like to get the scope out these days which is a shame. Saves me a bit of money as I'm not buying up cheap lenses on ebay to take apart for TN's.

Paul.
Paul Corfield is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"David Attenborough's", "First Life" BBC2 Frid 21.00-22.00pm Part 1/2 05/11/2010 Peewit TV & Radio Alert For Birding, Nature and Other Wildlife 2 Friday 19th November 2010 12:17
Digiscoping with "normal" tele lenses? MXP The Birdforum Digiscoping Forum 2 Wednesday 29th April 2009 08:22
What makes a person a "naturalist" rather than a "nature lover"? Terry O'Nolley Birds & Birding 9 Friday 16th September 2005 11:42
"Lifers" - usually on a "birding trip" or by chance when you least expect it? pattianne Your Birding Day 17 Wednesday 4th February 2004 01:23



Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.28541708 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37.