• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Extreme Digiscoping (1 Viewer)

It's not often to get such clear light out on the mudflats with only minimal heat haze with about 60% humidity.
This red buoy is at least 1.5 kms from the hide so I had to crank up the scope to 70x.
Neil
Sony RX 100 and Swarovski STX 95 mm Scope and DCB 11 Adapter
Mai Po Nature Reserve
Hong Kong China
July 2013

The details is awesome!
 
So if I was looking at darvic/alpha numeric rings on waders/gulls/anything through my Kowa 883 at 60x and wasn't able to read them due to distance, could I improve my chances by investing in a camera to boost the zoom?
 
Yes, I read many color rings and when I have problems due to distance I always take some pictures and many times help me to read the code.
This gull was at 150-200 m. was imposible to read with the teelscope.
Niko CP 4500+SW ATS 80 HD
Regards
 

Attachments

  • 4BCS Naranja.jpg
    4BCS Naranja.jpg
    442.2 KB · Views: 465
So if I was looking at darvic/alpha numeric rings on waders/gulls/anything through my Kowa 883 at 60x and wasn't able to read them due to distance, could I improve my chances by investing in a camera to boost the zoom?

It can but is more efficient if you do an adapter like mentioned in http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=105037 and use an astro-eyepiece that increase the magnifications - I recommend a 4.5 to 5mm eye-piece. Have a look at http://www.pt-ducks.com/cr-telescopes.htm#Test of 5mm eyepieces

A camera only improve resighting performance during windy weather when is difficult to red codes due to scope trembling... Another solution is to use a optical buster see it at http://www.pt-ducks.com/cr-telescopes.htm#Test_of_2.5x_magnifiers and do a search on the birdforum scope forum.
 
So if I was looking at darvic/alpha numeric rings on waders/gulls/anything through my Kowa 883 at 60x and wasn't able to read them due to distance, could I improve my chances by investing in a camera to boost the zoom?

Sometimes it's possible to get the numbers off video clips too.
Neil.
 
With good light distance is not such an impediment. These are taken at about 200 meters. The Coucal on the left arrow and the osprey on the right.
This is the video of the coucal
https://vimeo.com/70986847
Neil
Sony RX 100 and Swarovski STX 95 mm Scope and DCB 11 Adapter
 

Attachments

  • view Tower Hide2 nex7 sig30mmDSC09364_edited-2.jpg
    view Tower Hide2 nex7 sig30mmDSC09364_edited-2.jpg
    105.6 KB · Views: 433
  • osprey MP rx100 stx95 DSC05552_edited-2.jpg
    osprey MP rx100 stx95 DSC05552_edited-2.jpg
    177.7 KB · Views: 552
Wood pigeon at 120 meters

I love this thread. I have photographed this wood pigeon this morning, at 120 meters distance. Not as far as Neil's osprey, but a pigeon is only half as large. Magnification 40x, which is the maximum for my scope and camera combination (Panasonic DMC G3 and Swarovski ATM 80 HD scope)
 

Attachments

  • 25_juli_2_small.jpg
    25_juli_2_small.jpg
    203.2 KB · Views: 304
I love this thread. I have photographed this wood pigeon this morning, at 120 meters distance. Not as far as Neil's osprey, but a pigeon is only half as large. Magnification 40x, which is the maximum for my scope and camera combination (Panasonic DMC G3 and Swarovski ATM 80 HD scope)

Well done.
Digiscoping has always been about pushing the boundries using various optics so I'm glad people are still having fun with it.
Neil
 
Heron @150 meters

A Grey Heron flying by at ~150 meters distance, overcast/between showers and dull light, but on the other hand the air had little distortion.

Skywatcher ED80 600mm refractor scope + EC20 (2X TC)
50% crop of Olympus OMD-EM5 frame @ISO 1600, ~1/1000s

(Not sure if 150 meters qualifies for being "extreme" but it's probably beyond the range for what most telephoto lenses would capture).
 

Attachments

  • Grey_Heron_Ardea_cinerea_12.jpg
    Grey_Heron_Ardea_cinerea_12.jpg
    406.4 KB · Views: 327
I think 'extreme' also depends on the size of the object (bird) being digiscoped. A sparrow for instance, is 15 cm, a wood pigeon 40 and a grey heron 95 centimeters (all measured from point of beak to end of tail). So 150 meters for a grey heron is equally extreme as 63 meters for a pigeon and 24 meters for a sparrow. If my reasoning makes sence, the 150 meters for the Heron is not extreme, as compared to the pigeon I posted above, which was 120 meters away, almost twice as far as 63. Compared to the Osprey (57 cm) photographed by Neil, the heron should have been 333 meters away to be equally extreme. Maybe this reasoning is not correct, because with larger distance air turbulance and other disturbing factors become more important, so possible there should be a correction factor for that. Other idea's of what's extreme?
 
Last edited:
I think 'extreme' also depends on the size of the object (bird) being digiscoped. A sparrow for instance, is 15 cm, a wood pigeon 40 and a grey heron 95 centimeters (all measured from point of beak to end of tail). So 150 meters for a grey heron is equally extreme as 63 meters for a pigeon and 24 meters for a sparrow. If my reasoning makes sence, the 150 meters for the Heron is not extreme, as compared to the pigeon I posted above, which was 120 meters away, almost twice as far as 63. Compared to the Osprey (57 cm) photographed by Neil, the heron should have been 333 meters away to be equally extreme. Maybe this reasoning is not correct, because with larger distance air turbulance and other disturbing factors become more important, so possible there should be a correction factor for that. Other idea's of what's extreme?

I think it is very important not to underestimate the effect of haze, air turbulence and even the curvature of the earth for very long distances. IMO, these are the major limits. I also think that differences in the size of the target has more to do with the resolution power of a system being the quality of the lens, the size of the sensor and the numeric noise.

Anyway, as far as I am concerned, exceeding 100 meters can be considered extreme. Good atmospheric conditions, a very stable camera and expertise in post-processing are needed to produce good results.

Regards
Jules
 
I think you are absolutely right about the importance of haze, air turbulence etc. for extreme digiscoping. I am not sure about the size of the bird. Of course the resolution power and other factors you mention are very important factors, but untill now I haven't been able to make a reasonable picture of a house sparrow further away then 75 meters (see photo), but maybe my maximum magnification (60 x) is too low for that. I would be very interested in seeing photograph's of birds of this size taken at a longer distance then around 75 meters.
 

Attachments

  • 1_aug_small.jpg
    1_aug_small.jpg
    166.3 KB · Views: 358
I think there are two dimensions to consider.
1. The angle required to capture the subject (in order to preserve the relative size it occupies in the frame)
2. The distance to the subject

You provided three examples, all three would require an angle of view of around 0.37 degrees to fill the viewfinder so in that sense they are comparable. With the sensor size I am using (four-thirds) this would require a focal length of about 3500mm, which is not achievable practically using prime focusing. Anyway, 3500mm or 1200mm for that matter is quite respectable considering you shoot on dynamic subjects (birds tend to move around), long focal lengths require short shutter speeds, are prone to wind and all kind of unwanted vibrations etc.

However the distance to subject introduces an additional challenge - air. Depending on atmospheric conditions (haze/fog/heat distortion) the upper limit for the distance at which you can shoot without degradation of contrast/sharpness varies a lot.

In ideal conditions you can shoot through 10km air or even more without experiencing noticeable degradation of quality - see for instance the aircrafts earlier in this thread.

But shooting in intense sunlight through air with uneven density can cause pictures taken from as close as say 20 meters to be severely impacted. Focus is spot on, shutter time is short and yet the picture lacks details.

And to answr your question I personally have not managed to take any high quality/detailed pictures of such small subjects as a sparrow at distances exceeding 25-30 meters.
 
Yes, air condition is very important and can be very frustrating if bad. Yesterday I tried to photograph pigeons at about 60 meters, but none of the pictures was good enough. This morning, when I photographed the sparrow, atmospheric condition was much better. I have also tried airplanes, but non were nearly as good as yours. A couple of days ago I bought a 30 mm lens for my (4/3 Panasonic) camera (only had a 20 mm), which gives me a focal length of 3000 (calculated for 35 mm film). This was the fl. I shot the sparrows with.
 
I've been dealing with incessant morning overcast and humid air for almost 2 months during my morning photography outings, and ever since I bought my new C90 scope!

I've caught a Song Sparrow at 60m (image here) when the overcast thinned (no direct sunlight, but higher ambient light). And reaching out to 100m has been "okay" (attached).

But although I can see the birds out at 230m or more, the low light (not a plus with my camera) and moist, hazy air are frustrating me (image here). And moving subjects in low light, forget about it--my camera isn't good at that either. I envy folks catching those shots.

Regarding size. I've attempted a few shots of smaller birds on the same perch as the Kite in the 230m shot, and they come out as nothing but a silhouette. So I think subject size, color, and relative activity level do all come into play at as the distance grows (in addition to atmospheric issues).

I try not to complain, these cool/cold mornings this late into Summer have been a blessing to my electric bill. But I can't wait to see what I can do at longer ranges once the lighting improves. :)

And for those of you taking shots measure in kilometers or reasonable fractions thereof--WOW. That is "extreme digiscoping"--and impressive. :clap:
 

Attachments

  • 130704_OBRS_Solo_Fence_01.jpg
    130704_OBRS_Solo_Fence_01.jpg
    69.9 KB · Views: 384
While waiting for some action that never took place I took these shots the past winter during those many cold days days that offered clear visibility.

Shot with Olympus E620 through the SW 600mm scope and cropped for 1:1 rendering, so it is not "extreme" disgiscoping in the true sense.

The Emirates flight is taken at approximately 60 degree angle, meaning around 20 km distance, Japan Arlines flight is shot at a more square angle, distance something like 13 km.

Some air is visible, but the result is quite OK I think. I suppose it would have been possible to use 2xTC with even better results in those light conditions.

Nice Really Big Bird images!!!!!!

Mike
 
Calvin, the song sparrow has much detail, especially given this very large distance. I also like the 230 meter kite with the mouse.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top