Knight Owl EWA eyepieces and Pentax 65 (1 Viewer)

FrankD · Jun 21, 2006

I had some time this afternoon so I thought I would snap a few pics with the various Knight Owl EWA eyepieces. All pictures were taken with a Kodak DC 3200 1.3 megapixel digital camera. The pictures have not been altered in any way except to put them into the collage pictured. Just thought some of you would like to see what type of image they provide through the Pentax scope. I apologize for a bit of blurriness but these were all handheld.

PTPIER · Jun 21, 2006

FrankD said:
I had some time this afternoon so I thought I would snap a few pics with the various Knight Owl EWA eyepieces. All pictures were taken with a Kodak DC 3200 1.3 megapixel digital camera. The pictures have not been altered in any way except to put them into the collage pictured. Just thought some of you would like to see what type of image they provide through the Pentax scope. I apologize for a bit of blurriness but these were all handheld.

You must have a fairly steady hand Frank. I tried a few hand-held shots with my new Pentax 65 but I'm experiencing some vignetting and blurriness with a 26mm Plossl (from my telescope).
My Canon A60 does have a delay lag on the shutter release which doesn't help my shaky hand. I am looking into adapters, converters, brackets, etc. to firm things up...........I am getting new EP's and I do have a 9mm EWA on the way from Owl as well. Maybe that may improve things for me.
Good Luck!
Paul

FrankD · Jun 21, 2006

Paul,

I remember reading in another post on this forum about how the apparent field of view can directly determine the amount of vignetting in the image. The EWA eyepieces have an AFOV of somewhere around 66-70 degrees if memory serves me. I would be willing to bet that is why I am not experiencing vignetting with them. On the other hand I have a 25 mm Meade eyepiece that I get vignetting from. I would assume the APOV is around 50 degrees.

As for adaptors, etc..., I am going to buy that Universal Digiscoping Adaptor that I saw someone mention in another thread. It seems the best option for combining any given camera with any given scope.

Below is a quick pic I took of a cooperative Robin at a distance of about 10 yards with the 20 mm EWA. The reddish blurriness in foreground was a bush in the backyard.

Thanks for the reply.

FrankD · Jun 23, 2006

I purchased a new digital camera yesterday in hopes of improving the quality of my digiscoping pictures. I chose the Casio Exilim EX Z1000 as it appears to meet all of the criteria for a digiscoping digital camera and the price was within what I was willing to spend. I may yet return it though and opt for one of the Sony Cybershot or Nikon Coolpix P series models. Here is a shot with the Casio, the Pentax 65 ED A and the Knight Owl 20 mm. The picture was taken at 3x optical magnification in the camera and the dove was at about 45 feet.

Can Popper · Jun 23, 2006

Good stuff, Frank.

Looks like you aren't having any problems with eyerelief.

One of the things I found with taking pictures is that I really have to learn the manual controls on my digital camera. The auto controls often results in overexposure or improper tones. Also the photometry on how the camera picks objects to focus and adjust lighting is important.

Using the Universal Digiscoping Adapter made it easier to do those adjustments on the fly because I can keep the subject in sight while messing with the controls. Trying to hold the camera by hand and mess with the controls is way too difficult.

I also made a little mod to my camera. The nose of my Fuji F10 is silvery and it was reflecting light back into the eyelense of my eyepiece which then shows up in my picture. This lowered the contrast of my pics. Now I taped a piece of black velcro felt to all the silvery areas and my pictures have improved.

Yes, a wide FOV helps reduce vignetting. In the very last post of my Various Eyepiece Review thread, I gave John Fleet a list of the best eyepieces for digiscoping. They all have the maximum physically allowable FOV for their focal length while at the same time having 20mm of ER for good camera compatibility.

FrankD · Jun 23, 2006

Can Popper,

Thank you for both the suggestions and the compliment. I appreciate the suggestions about first determining the various camera functions before making a more permanent decision on whether or not to keep it. I just started playing with it this morning and basically just used the auto function for everything. I am going to start attempting Manual focus as well as different ISO settings, etc...

No problem whatsoever with vignetting on the 20 mm. I have not tried it yet on the 15 or 9 as I had some household "honey-dos" to complete first. I will check out your last post in that other thread shortly. I do believe I am going to attempt to fashion my own adaptor out of some PVC or similar material. It should be relatively easy to do.

FrankD · Jun 25, 2006

Here are a few shots with the Knight Owl 15 mm and the previously mentioned Casio and Pentax 65. The first two were under a shaded tree canopy so they are not quite as bright or as detailed as the third.

Can Popper · Jul 5, 2006

Frank, don't forget to experiment with the exposure compensation feature on your camera. That will go a long way towards eliminating the overexposed pics that you are currently getting. I often have to take several pictures with different exposure compensation settings to get pics that are better.

Next setting to experiment with is the white balance. You want to play with it until the pictures look like what you are seeing with your eyes.

The bottom two pictures will help illustrate how important learning how to use the exposure compensation setting can be.

FrankD said:
Here are a few shots with the Knight Owl 15 mm and the previously mentioned Casio and Pentax 65. The first two were under a shaded tree canopy so they are not quite as bright or as detailed as the third.

FrankD · Jul 8, 2006

Can Popper,

Thank you for the suggestions. I have been given similar advice over on the digiscoping forums. I will post some more recent pics to show the improvement shortly.

Can Popper · Jul 8, 2006

I went over to the digiscoping forum to check out the advice you were getting. Some of the stuff they do there is pretty extreme.

Like that lady who digiscopes by practically standing next to the bird. Man, my gear is too heavy to pull something like that off.

There is another guy who advised you to try more expensive eyepieces. That would be good advice for taking things to the next level. I find that when digiscoping, my cheaper eBay eyepieces with the exception of the Plossls do tend to fall out of favor and I like to use my $100+ Sieberts more.

I am attaching two long range shots I took using a Siebert 7mm eyepiece with no camera zoom and camera zoom pushed up all the way. No, it isn't as clear as the bird lady's shots but I didn't do any computer correction nor stand next to the bird either. I wish people would post the range they took their pictures at so we could do a better apples to apples comparision.

The cheapest low hanging fruit you can pick is to use a black felt cloth to cover the space between your camera and eyepiece. I made mine by going to Walmart's cloth section where they sold velcro felt cloth with velcro strips. I then cut the felt to be long and wide enough so I could wrap it into a cylinder around the camera nose and the eyepiece. This way it blocks off and absorbs any stray light that may wash out the images. I secure the felt in place by attaching the velcro strip.

I also cut the velcro felt to the contours of any silvery part of my camera nose so I can black those areas out and prevent reflections. This solution only costs around $5.

BTW, it looks like your pictures have gradually improved. Good job and keep at it :t:

FrankD said:
Can Popper,

Thank you for the suggestions. I have been given similar advice over on the digiscoping forums. I will post some more recent pics to show the improvement shortly.

Neil · Jul 8, 2006

A comment on magnification - rule of thumb for an 80 mm scope is that a combined magnification of 60x (camera plus scope eyepiece ) maxes out the resolution, so on a 65 mm scope that would equate to approx 50x magnification. Neil.

FrankD · Jul 8, 2006

Can Popper,

Again, some great info. I thank you..and thank you for the compliments. I am trying to find the best combination of settings to maximize my digiscoping setup.

Your comments about distance to the bird for most pics has me wanting to post a thread to that effect in that forum. It would be interesting to see what distance most digiscoping shots are taken from.

As for the new eyepiece, I am afraid I am going to have to pull money from somewhere as I will not be satisfied until I get better resolution out of my setup. With that thought in mind I believe I am going to order a 20 mm Pentax XW. I believe that is probably the best route to go.

Thanks for the adaptor idea. I was planning, initially, to just take a black magic marker and color in a toilet paper roll which would be cut to appropriate length. That should block a majority of the light entering the eyepiece/camera lens area. Should it work I am going to invest in something more permanent like the felt cloth design you mentioned.

A comment on magnification - rule of thumb for an 80 mm scope is that a combined magnification of 60x (camera plus scope eyepiece ) maxes out the resolution, so on a 65 mm scope that would equate to approx 50x magnification. Neil.

Neil,

So what you are saying is that I shouldn't really go above 2x optical zoom on my digital camera if I am going to be using the 19.5x eyepiece? Thanks.

Can Popper · Jul 8, 2006

Frank, before you plunk down a pile of change for a Pentax 20mm XW, might I suggest getting the Siebert Ultras in the 17mm to 19mm range? The big problem with the Pentax 20mm is that it's barrel is very wide as you can see from this picture: http://www.pentaximaging.com/produc...D--7690347/subsection--astronomical_eyepieces

Most likely, your current universal digiscoping adapter will not fit. You will need to buy the bigger one from William Optics that fits the 2" eyepieces.

The good thing about the Ultras in the 17mm to 19mm range is that they only use 4 lenses (like a plossl) versus the 6 lenses for most pentax eyepieces. They have been reviewed by others to be as good as Pentaxes and Televues but only cost 1/3 their price. Also, their eyerelief and FOV are identical to the Pentaxes but the Siebert's barrels are narrow enough for your current Universal Digiscoping Adapter to fit. Finally, they come with a 30 day money back satisfaction guarantee.

FrankD · Jul 8, 2006

Ok, I will bite, especially since I just received a fairly sizable medical bill for surgery I had done last month.

Where can I buy one of these from and which size would you suggest, the 17 or 19 mm? I would lean towards the 19 for better light levels. I could always increase the optical magnification on the digital camera but I cannot decrease it (beyond its lowest setting) if I go the 17 mm route.

Thank you.

FrankD · Jul 8, 2006

Can Popper,

Forget my questions. I found the website and will order the 19 mm model. They seem fairly large in diameter. Will my Williams Optics adaptor definitely work with these?

Can Popper · Jul 8, 2006

I have the Ultra 24mm, the 9mm, and the 7mm and my Williams Optics universal digiscoping adapter fit over all of them with no problem. I now have a Performance 35mm Siebert on the way for short range high quality digiscoping.

Some of the great things about the Siebert Ultras is they all come with the same long eyerelief across the whole line, they come with a long black rubber eyecup that helps partially shield and absorb stray light, they have wide FOV's, have large lenses, and they come in light strong aluminum barrels.

If you are concerned about the barrel size, just call the number and the eyepiece maker Harry will pick up and anwser your questions. The eyecup on the 19mm looks like the same one on my 7mm and 9mm so you should have no problems since we are both using the same Williams Optics UDA. You can even call on weekends. Usually they are open.

FrankD · Jul 10, 2006

Can Popper,

Yes, they are open late.

I called and spoke with a woman last night around 9:30 pm. I have a Siebert Ultra 19 mm on order. I think the size will work out quite fine for digiscoping with the 65 mm model. Thanks for the tip. I look forward to giving it a try.

Just out of curiousity for now, how does it compare to the Knight Owl Eyepieces?

Can Popper · Jul 10, 2006

In my opinion, the Sieberts kick the butt of the Knight Owls.

The problem with the cheap ebay eyepieces is that they do not have a flat field and edge to edge sharpness. Thus, when you are digiscoping at say 1x, your picture will always have distortion towards the edges.

Another thing is color correction on the Knight Owls. I think the Sieberts use better glass and coatings so their pictures look "more right" color wise. With the Knight Owls, I tend to get a bit more chromatic aberration and that "just not quite right" feeling.

Third, the Siebert 24mm, 19mm thru 17mm, use very few lenses (3 and 4 lenses) to achieve their 20mm ER and 65-70 degree FOV; compared to the 5 to 6 lenses for the Knight Owl SWA and EWA (or even Pentaxes!). Fewer lenses means better details and greater brightness when digiscoping. Murphy's Law dictates that if something can go wrong, it will. The greater number of lenses increase the chance of misalignment in the eyepiece and greater internal light scattering which washes out images. Greater number of lenses also means more surface interfaces for light to pass which then attentuates light.

Finally, the Sieberts have a consistent 20mm ER throughout the whole Ultra line. The Knight Owls have variable eyerelief which makes some better for digiscoping than others.

FrankD said:
Can Popper,

Yes, they are open late. I called and spoke with a woman last night around 9:30 pm. I have a Siebert Ultra 19 mm on order. I think the size will work out quite fine for digiscoping with the 65 mm model. Thanks for the tip. I look forward to giving it a try.

Just out of curiousity for now, how does it compare to the Knight Owl Eyepieces?

FrankD · Jul 11, 2006

CP,

Thank you for all the great info. Much appreciated. I look forward to getting mine in the next day or two. I did take some pics today while out with the family picnicing. My best pic is of this swallow. However, I also had the opportunity to take a pic of a Great Blue Heron resting atop a pine tree approximately 200 yards away. Image quality is far from acceptable but the fact that I was able to identify it at all with this setup pleases me. 19.5x scope magnification and 3x optical zoom on the camera.

Can Popper · Jul 11, 2006

The swallow image is quite pleasing. It don't think it is an unacceptable picture given that you were shooting into the bright sky. You probably had the exposure compensation jacked up to reveal the finer details such as underside feathers and the glint off the eyes of the swallow. Did you have the blackened tube between the eyepiece and camera? If not, you can give the image a further boost by doing so. Also take a black marker and blacken out any silvery part of your camera's nose which may result in light being reflected back into the eyepiece.

The great blue heron is decent given its range. I am not privy to the atmospheric conditions but for shooting into the sky on a more humid day at a time of lower light levels, one really shouldn't expect high definition perfection given the 200 yard range. Such a picture would be a good candidate for further digital enhancement using software to balance things out to reveal further detail. Of course that wouldn't be true to the original results, IMO.

Often, the sharpness and amount of detail great depends on the coorperation of the bird in question. If the bird is moving slightly when your camera snaps the picture, then the image will not reveal the finest detail.

There is this thread on the Camera and Photography section: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=46673

which explains why we should never expect image perfection from our eyepiece projection digiscoping setup. After I read this one, it removed any equipment envy I had and allowed me to appreciate what our digiscoping setup is capable of and its limitations.

Maybe in the future when I want to go the prime focus DSLR route, I'll get Harry Siebert's power mag wheel http://www.siebertoptics.com/SiebertOptics-OCA.html#PMW and then hook up the DSLR behind it....ha-ha... It'll be like having multiple telephoto lenses in one.

For the attached picture, I used every suggestion that I provided you. Just couldn't get closer because I always snap my pics from a balcony facing a park/bird preserve. My exposure compensation was set just a tad dark on the first pic.

FrankD said:
CP,

Thank you for all the great info. Much appreciated. I look forward to getting mine in the next day or two. I did take some pics today while out with the family picnicing. My best pic is of this swallow. However, I also had the opportunity to take a pic of a Great Blue Heron resting atop a pine tree approximately 200 yards away. Image quality is far from acceptable but the fact that I was able to identify it at all with this setup pleases me. 19.5x scope magnification and 3x optical zoom on the camera.

Knight Owl EWA eyepieces and Pentax 65 (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Attachments

Active member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread