• 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.

Which Nikon Fieldscope is this ? (1 Viewer)

Musoman said:
Thanks Henry - the MC 24x30xW is obviously going to make a big difference in terms viewing/ photography. When looking through the scope with that 30x, although the view is excellent, i only have to wobble a tiny fraction, ( i'm talking a millimetre or 2 ) and the view is gone. Sometimes its my own eyelids getting in the way ;)

Is that the narrow view angle, or the poor eye relief ...or both ?

Your maths re the focal lengths now makes sense regarding why all the light suddenly evaportated when i held the 40D / 55mm f1.8 lens up to the EP

And going by your maths - 30x EP + 55mm lens = 1650 focal length. Divide the 1650 focal length by 60mm scope aperture and we get f27.5
No wonder all the light disappeared as i held the cam + lens up
Click to expand...

Thats why a compact is best for digiscoping when digiscoping through an eyepiece its actual focal lengths are much smaller giving better aperture and hence better results.

I think you need to get a compact, even if its only a cheap second hand one or at least use a smaller lens on the DSLR.

Given its 60mm and non ED your probaly going outside the scopes focal range aswell which ever camera you use. You need big scopes to get good results with longer focal lengths.

With your current setup I doubt you are going to get anywhere near the results you obtained using the skywatcher.
 
You're right, i'm definately going with a compact, but just a bit of a struggle to know which one.

There's a 100 different answers to questions about compacts, whether for or against. It simply isnt that easy picking one

All i know is that i shoot RAW, so thats the first need. Image Stabilisation too. A remote shutter option as well. Mega Pix are not my main concern, as the war currently fought by manufacturers is just plain silly

When you say the focal length of a compact isnt the same as a DSLR lens, are you talking about the actual reach ?

EG.. the zoom on a Pana LX3 ( 24 -60 ) if i were to zoom to 55mm on the Pana, and compare it with the reach of my 55mm EBC Fujinon, they would be different ? This would definately affect which camera i buy.
I need to start saving for that Nikon EP too. What a hobby - its like a money pit ! :)
 
Musoman said:
You're right, i'm definately going with a compact, but just a bit of a struggle to know which one.

There's a 100 different answers to questions about compacts, whether for or against. It simply isnt that easy picking one

All i know is that i shoot RAW, so thats the first need. Image Stabilisation too. A remote shutter option as well. Mega Pix are not my main concern, as the war currently fought by manufacturers is just plain silly

When you say the focal length of a compact isnt the same as a DSLR lens, are you talking about the actual reach ?

EG.. the zoom on a Pana LX3 ( 24 -60 ) if i were to zoom to 55mm on the Pana, and compare it with the reach of my 55mm EBC Fujinon, they would be different ? This would definately affect which camera i buy.
I need to start saving for that Nikon EP too. What a hobby - its like a money pit ! :)
Click to expand...

the dslr lens should give higher mag because of crop factor of 1.6. remember you have to change everything to 35mm to compare.

To work out aperture you need to use actual focal length. The actual focal length of the pana for example is much smaller which gives lower f number.

Leaving aside the mathematics.
If you put a DSLR on the scope, it physically looks like a a slow lens, ie small objective.
If you put a a much smaller compact, with a smaller sensor, the scope looks much bigger proportionally it looks more like a faster lens, the objective seems proprtionally bigger compared to the compact.

DSLR cameras need much bigger objective lenses than compacts.
 
So really, the complaint that i've seen posted here about the LX3 only zooming to 60mm, isnt such a problem for me ?

Assume i've stumped up for the MC 24x W Nikon EP, If i were to use the LX3 at its full reach of 60mm, that will give 60x24 ... 1440mm - seems very respectable, even if its not a true 1440mm focal length. I was struggling to get good pics at 1296mm with the Astrokit, so even if the reach of 1440mm with a compact isnt quite the reach of a DSLR lens, its ballpark and good enough IMO, even if it was 1200mm, or 1000mm
 
Paul Corfield said:
Put a nice eyepiece like a Hyperion on your SW and that will give you an idea of how good ED glass can look. When I put my 17mm Baader (35X) on my SW the views are so crisp, razor sharp. None of my spotting scopes or ones I've looked through could compare to it.

alphan - musoman is on a long journey to the dark side, a journey that may ultimately lead him back to prime focus, where image quality reigns supreme :t:

Paul.
Click to expand...

Paul, do you mean if we put an ED eyepiece over an non ED Objective lens, we get ED result? If that is the case, If I am to put an ED eyepiece or ED Barlow over the normal non ED astroscope, I get ED result similar to Nikon EDG system if not better?

Musoman is a very enthusiastic traveler. He will love his journey and will relate a lot to us when he came back to the bright side LOL.
 
alphan said:
Paul, do you mean if we put an ED eyepiece over an non ED Objective lens, we get ED result? If that is the case, If I am to put an ED eyepiece or ED Barlow over the normal non ED astroscope, I get ED result similar to Nikon EDG system if not better?

Musoman is a very enthusiastic traveler. He will love his journey and will relate a lot to us when he came back to the bright side LOL.
Click to expand...

No, I was just saying that putting a decent eyepiece like a wide field Baader Hyperion on the SW 80ED or its variants produces excellent viewing results, either for terrestrial or astro viewing.

Not sure what effect an ED eyepiece has on CA on a basic achromat as I've not tested it before. I've read on astro forums that trying different prisms and barlows can greatly correct CA on basic achromats so an eyepiece might have some effect too.

Paul.
 
Musoman,

are you going to get the camera before the new eyepiece and try the camera out on your current eyepiece? I was just wondering because I've been mucking around with an old erfle eyepiece on my SW today with surprisingly good results. The eyepiece came off an old spotting scope and it's just marked 30X, it's an obvious erfle design with very little eye relief, decent enough glass though. My point and shoot (Panasonic DMC-LS85) doesn't vignette after 2X and on the SW the eyepiece is coming out at around 50-60X because of the scopes longer focal length. Shutter speeds on my point and shoot camera are coming out a fair bit higher and at a much lower ISO than my dslr. I might use this eyepiece with P&S for those times when I need longer reach, like 4000mm and above.

Paul.
 
Here's one of the photos I took today through an old erfle eyepiece. Not bad for nearly 4000mm equivalent and a cheap P&S.

Paul.
 

Attachments

  • erfle.jpg
    erfle.jpg
    253.9 KB · Views: 144
Paul, i had the intentions of buying a P&S before getting the MC 24xW, and trying it with the scope and its current narrow angle 30x EP

Are you thinking that i should possibly try the 30x EP that i have now, in the SW80 ?

The photo is excellent, but i have to take into account how good you are at any type of photography ;)
 
I was just thinking out loud and saying try it in the new spotting scope with the new P&S before shelling out for a new eyepiece. You might find the 30X is fine as it is despite the dslr image not being all that good.

I just hand held my P&S behind the eyepiece for the posted image. I wouldn't mind a better P&S as I only bought this one a couple of years back for the family to muck around with. It's not very digiscope friendly.

Paul.
 
Ok, i get you now.

Well yep, i will definately have a new P&S camera before a new EP.

Steve ( Astley ) has already pointed out the the reason for such a dull photo taken with the 40D...

And f27.5 isnt doing anyone any favours :)
 
The impression i get from what i have read is that and looking at photos is that the skywatcher is
a cheap way of getting good glass (ed and fluorite i believe?) and hence acheiving good image quality.

If so will you be happy with stepping down from a 80mm ed fluorite to a 60mm standard, although it is nikon.

IMO because of the scope you will be limited as to the the actual mag that will give good results.

As are result if i was you i would look at the new batch of superzoom wich or more portable and are now rivilling digiscoping and dslr for acheivable distances, especially when you add a teleconverter. less hassle

Having said that you seem like somebody who likes a bit of hassle to tinker, experiment and sure you will got good results eventually.
 
The SW80 ED [ FPL-53 glass ] is definately a cheap way of getting excellent bird photos.

You only have to look at Paul and Fernandos back catalogues.

But this is at the expense of size and weight. I may or not may not be disappointed with going from an 80mm ED to a 60mm Non ED, but i'm happy to try things.
If i like digiscoping, but find i'm hampered by the old tech, early non ED Nikon scope, I'll do a post office job and get a nice ED 80 something or other.

I've already got a superzoom camera, ( FZ18 Lumix ) and i've already used a a TC on it, but this hobby is a money pit, and something has to go, so that i can keep on experimenting
 
Musoman said:
The SW80 ED [ FPL-53 glass ] is definately a cheap way of getting excellent bird photos.

You only have to look at Paul and Fernandos back catalogues.

But this is at the expense of size and weight. I may or not may not be disappointed with going from an 80mm ED to a 60mm Non ED, but i'm happy to try things.
If i like digiscoping, but find i'm hampered by the old tech, early non ED Nikon scope, I'll do a post office job and get a nice ED 80 something or other.

I've already got a superzoom camera, ( FZ18 Lumix ) and i've already used a a TC on it, but this hobby is a money pit, and something has to go, so that i can keep on experimenting
Click to expand...

Keep on experimenting :t: were would digiscoping and astrophotography be without people experimenting.
 
Steven Astley said:
Keep on experimenting :t: were would digiscoping and astrophotography be without people experimenting.
Click to expand...


True, but most of the hard work re. experimenting , were done by the likes of Paul over many years, and long before i came to the scene. I cant take much credit Steve :eat:
 
For a ' low ' tech scope, thats a pretty wild shot. Its a shame really that i cant do the same thing with this Nikon, as Henry already pointed out.

I'd love nothing better than to slap a WO or Baader EP in the scope and avoid paying the silly money that shops are asking for the MC24xW
 
I mess around more with photos, and i came up with a different finish to that Cormorant. Not looking so ' Sunset ' any more though
 

Attachments

  • Cormorant21.jpg
    Cormorant21.jpg
    126.4 KB · Views: 117
That's cool to play around. In real life it was probably somewhere between the two, quite late evening with a very orange sun. The Fuji F31d made it easier with its decent ISO shooting. I think modern P&S can compete in that department though. I think with a P&S on the Nikon, fingers crossed it should work ok as the camera plays a big part. I never tried my 60mm scope with the stock erfle eyepiece but it's the same erfle I was using today on the SW.

Just been using the erfle just now to take photos of Jupiter with the dslr and a Pentax 50mm f1.7 lens. Got some decent shots with the main band on Jupiter very visible.

Something I found today was that the powerful small erfle digiscoped better than my 17mm Baader Hyperion. I've calculated that my erfle is giving around 43X on my SW making it around 14mm focal length.

Paul.
 
I'm betting that if you had this 60mm Nikon, you'd be pulling it apart to see what EP's you could get glued in ;)

Henry reckoned that this 30x EP i have is an Abbe Ortho, rather than an Erfle, and i'm not sure if there is a quality difference between the two, rather than just a narrow 43 degree FOV of the Abbe.

I bet, somewhere, there's an obscure EP that'd slip in the Nikon with a bit of help, but its too risky experimenting. We'll see what happens when i get a camera.

Depending whether this impending CA rears its ugly head, i'm also thinking about what you said re. a -violet filter. If i bought the A590IS, the converter adapter for this model, which is still available, has 52mm outer thread, and if there's a -violet filter in 52mm mount, could be worth experimenting with
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 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.

Similar threads

M
Nikon ED82 A - go with Nikon FSB-6 and Coolpix 5100 or iPhone 13 Pro?
Replies
3
Views
761
Jason Bugay Reyes
Jason Bugay Reyes
B
Tripod Suggestions
Replies
3
Views
795
BevJ
B
S
Opticron ED/HD/VHD glass and coatings - very confused!
Replies
3
Views
1K
Conndomat
Conndomat
W
Fieldscope Eyepiece 20x/30x/38x wide MC
Replies
10
Views
951
Astroguy2000
A
Passakorn
Better but smaller options than the Nikon Monarch 60/82ED that can reach 60X?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Tringa45
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top