Dean Peach
Well-known member
Can anyone advise me on a camera for a Swaro ATX 95 please? I was thinking Lumix GX1. Any thoughts/suggestions?
Thanks
Thanks
-
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.
Camera for Swarovski ATX (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Dean Peach
- Start date
Dean Peach
Well-known member
Hi RJM, I just got your reply.Thanks for that. I bought the Lumix GX1 and TLS Apo. Just waiting for the T2 adapter to arrive.
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
I'll be curious how well the GX1/you can focus. I figure the effective aperture of the TLS APO on the ATX95 will range from ~F10-22 depending on the zoom mag. That's pretty dim viewing on the LCD. I think you will need the EVF and/or a Hoodman-type loupe too.
Then there is the rock solid support needed to balance this beast, maybe a Manfrotto 503 class head, balance rail and tripod with 34mm top legs? Otherwise the slightest vibrations will sap all the potential resolution of this rig. Speaking of which, I would keep scope mag between 30x-40x to minimize the effects of diffraction which already starts to kick in ~F8 on 16mp m4/3 cameras.
Looking forward to any updates!
Then there is the rock solid support needed to balance this beast, maybe a Manfrotto 503 class head, balance rail and tripod with 34mm top legs? Otherwise the slightest vibrations will sap all the potential resolution of this rig. Speaking of which, I would keep scope mag between 30x-40x to minimize the effects of diffraction which already starts to kick in ~F8 on 16mp m4/3 cameras.
Looking forward to any updates!
Last edited:
dalat
...
Hi RJM, some interesting thoughts here, that I (just starting to consider buying some gear for digiscoping and having not much clues about photography) don't really understand however..
Regarding effective aperture, how would the APO-TLS plus micro 4/3 body compare to APO-TLS plus DSLR body or a compact digicam with DCB adapter or similar? Would the first one be dimmer than the other setups?
And regarding stability, would the APO-TLS and m4/3 be in any way more sensitive than other setups?
Reading about this APO-TLS adapter, I thought that this plus a m 4/3 would probably provide for one of the most compact and best image quality setups for digiscoping available, so after your critical comments I wonder if I got something completely wrong?
Thanks for some help
Florian
Regarding effective aperture, how would the APO-TLS plus micro 4/3 body compare to APO-TLS plus DSLR body or a compact digicam with DCB adapter or similar? Would the first one be dimmer than the other setups?
And regarding stability, would the APO-TLS and m4/3 be in any way more sensitive than other setups?
Reading about this APO-TLS adapter, I thought that this plus a m 4/3 would probably provide for one of the most compact and best image quality setups for digiscoping available, so after your critical comments I wonder if I got something completely wrong?
Thanks for some help
Florian
Last edited:
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
Regarding effective aperture, how would the APO-TLS plus micro 4/3 body compare to APO-TLS plus DSLR body or a compact digicam with DCB adapter or similar? Would the first one be dimmer than the other setups?
And regarding stability, would the APO-TLS and m4/3 be in any way more sensitive than other setups?
Reading about this APO-TLS adapter, I thought that this plus a m 4/3 would probably provide for one of the most compact and best image quality setups for digiscoping available, so after your critical comments I wonder if I got something completely wrong?
Thanks for some help
Hi Florian, like many others, this new Swaro ATX95 also has me thinking about its digiscoping possibilities. Now that I have had time to study the specs and understand the ATX features I can now appreciate what it has to offer, contrary to my initial negative impressions.
Here is a long summary of the ATX95 digiscoping benefits that I see:
First, aperture is king for digiscoping so the 95mm should give ~1/4 stop+ shutter speed advantage over the 85mm class of scopes and faster shutter speeds are always welcome at our supertelephoto digiscoping magnifications. Faster shutter speeds can mitigate many focus issues when photographing live animal movement, but also mechanical vibrations from shutter releases and sub-optimal tripod support. This last point is especially important now that typical sensor resolution has increased well beyond 6mp.
Second, the APO-TLS adapter is a unique solution to the main problem with using other SLR-type camera adapters in that they don't allow for easy/fast switching between digiscoping and visual use. And, because it basically functions as a GENERIC fl=30mm camera lens used in combination with the built-in 30x-70x zoom eyepiece, it thus turns the scope into a fl=900mm-2100mm/ F10-22 super zoom. This is longest focal length possible with this type of SLR adapter of any scope/brand!
Third, locating the focus and zoom wheels together allows for easier handling typical of a traditional super zoom camera lens. There is an intriguing photo on the Swaro website with the Swaro Euro rep actually handholding/using the straight version ATX on a Nikon dslr much like a traditional camera lens though I am not sure how well this would work in practice.
Fourth, the constant 20mm eyerelief of the zoom eyepiece throughout its range is a benefit not only to visual users but for those choosing to digiscope with a compact digicam as it opens up the system to more compatible compact digicamera possibilites. Moreover, its 30x-70x magnification range should be entirely useful on most 3x-4x lenses too. A possible fl=750mm-7000mm /F2-13 superzoom lens range with an Oly TG-1 or Nikon P310 is just mind boggling!
Finally, the ability to breakdown the scope into smaller components for travelling is certainly useful.
All that gushing said, there are some issues with using the APO-TLS that are camera choice related.
A m4/3 with its 2x crop factor would seem to be the perfect choice, with the Oly OM-D E-M5 being ideal IMO. Unfortunately, at the 16mp sensor resolution on the latest/greatest m4/3 cameras, the effects of diffraction begin to take their toll on IQ when effective lens apertures approach F8 and smaller, i.e. numbers >8.
Keep in mind the aperture range of the APO-TLS on the ATX95 starts at F10 and only gets smaller as you increase magnification maxing out at F22. So with a m4/3 camera, IQ will probably suffer from the the git-go. The effect will probably subtle at F10, especially if you don't print, but by F16 it should be obvious even at screen resolution.
An APS-C sensor camera like the Nikon D7000 or Canon 7D does not do much better, with diffraction effects starting at F11 for pics viewed at 100% onscreen. And even their optical viewfinder begins to get rather dark at these small apertures, particularly in the early morning/late afternoon of lights' "golden hours" making focusing even more difficult.
Only a full frame camera like the new 24mp Nikon D600 will not suffer from diffraction through the APO-TLS F10-22 range. Its larger optical viewfinder should also stay relatively bright.
Finally there is the full-on manual focusing that affects all users of the APO-TLS. I suspect I am not alone when I say I find manual focusing on a live animal very difficult, especially if cannot get close enough to fill the frame with the animal. My hit rate is very low, maybe 1 in 10 as I found even though focus looked good on the LCD in the field, when reviewed on my PC I found it to be ever so slightly off. Quite annoying and was the primary reason I abandoned this method.
This brings me to my preferred digiscoping solution with small compact digicams. Despite their smaller sensors, they give longer focal lengths with larger effective apertures and thus higher shutters speeds than cameras with larger sensors by as much as 2-4 stops, thus somewhat mitigating the high ISO IQ of the larger sensor with the benefit of semi-AF to increase hit rate.
Moreover, using a compact digicam is more in keeping with the Maylasian roots of the digiscoping method as a LOW COST, LIGHTWEIGHT ALTERNATIVE for amateurs compared to the ~US$15,0000 dSLR/supertele lens kits used my most pro wildlife photographers today.
While I have never used it, my hunch is I would prefer the Swaro DCBII universal adapter compared to the similar solutions from Kowa and Nikon. Swinging the camera over the top of the scope just seems more "natural" than out to the side. May have some balance benefit as well. Only concern would be its weight and its obscene cost.
As for the compact camera to choose, the constant eye relief of the 30x-70x zoom makes the Canon S100 or Pany LX5/7 attractive candidates, particularly if you want to shoot RAW format. If RAW is not important, then the Nikon P310 looks to be a good choice. I have been quite suprised by my Oly TG-1's digiscoping compatibility and IQ too.
It puzzles me why Swaro did not launch an iPhone5 adapter. It's pretty clear smartphone cameras are taking over the entry photography niche. Kowa saw this trend and has responded. Of course, they will need a new adapter to fit the iPhone5 now. But these look relatively cheap/easy to produce so hopefully someone can step up if the scope OEMs drop the ball.
Well, these are my thoughts for now until I can actually get my hands on an ATX kit. They should be in shops here tomorrow so I may go take a look.
Hope this helps!
8-P
Last edited:
SjerPlover
Sjerp Weima
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
I wouldn't worry about the technical aspects so much, especially if you do not print larger than A4. And if you are not printing, then there really is no LOGICAL reason to getting a hirez dslr for digiscoping. A modern point and shoot can have more than sufficient IQ for an HD LCD display.
Photography is still an art form and the awards and kudos go to photos that make a subjective impression. For an example of this, look no further than Swaro's own Digiscoper of the Year contests. A photographs technical aspects are interesting, but secondary to the image itself. In the final analysis, most of the iconic pics of our times were taken with equipment far less capable than today's smartphone cameras.
Photography is still an art form and the awards and kudos go to photos that make a subjective impression. For an example of this, look no further than Swaro's own Digiscoper of the Year contests. A photographs technical aspects are interesting, but secondary to the image itself. In the final analysis, most of the iconic pics of our times were taken with equipment far less capable than today's smartphone cameras.
DRodrigues
Well-known member
Don't think a normal DSLR body has any advantage over mirrorless cameras when using the APO-TLS. I use a NEX5 with what can be considered similar to the TLS (both the Nikon FSA-L2 and an APO refractor with the PMW http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=172196 - I prefer the last combo...), and don't have the problems with the lack of light in the viewfinder (the image I see is what the camera takes), and the focus peaking helps a lot on focusing.
Don't know if the APO-TLS will vignette in a full format camera - the FSA-L2 vignettes at lower power...
Don't know if the APO-TLS will vignette in a full format camera - the FSA-L2 vignettes at lower power...
Have done some very simple tests using the TLS Apo and my Nikon D200. This makes a heavy scope/camera combo and needs a carefully balanced sturdy tripod to keep stable. Once the adaptor is in place on the scope, its very easy to slip the camera into place. The image in the viewfinder is adequate to see the subject at any magnifiaction (this camera does not use the LCD screen as a preview) but refocusing the scope might be a problem. The image taken by the camera is heavily cropped from the view through the scope and appears not to use the central part of the image, need to do more tests for this.
Have yet to try in the field or make prints.
Have yet to try in the field or make prints.
Last edited:
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
Well there is that whole sensor dust problem, right?
At least a dslr's sensor is somewhat protected by the mirror when a lens is removed.
Again, its the camera sensor size in combination with the choice of output format that determines how much the diffraction effect affects IQ. The larger APS-C sensor of the NEX cameras will do better than a m4/3 sensor just as a full frame camera will do better than the NEX in this regard. No disputing that. Just a subjective matter of how much blur/loss of contrast one finds acceptable.
I think trying to use the rear LCD screen to focus will be very frustrating under most daylight conditions unless one has the shade of a hide to work from. An optical viewfinder, EVF or Hoodman-type LCD viewer is a digiscoping essential IMO.
I do not think the APO-TLS will vignette on a full format camera since it starts at fl=900mm. And even if there is some corner darkening, it can be fixed in processing.
It's too bad there is no compatible compact system 30mm pancake lens option now. I think the DCBII offers more camera flexibility than the APO-TLS and is a little cheaper too.
Dean Peach
Well-known member
TN Tin Man
Well-known member
Sony alpha a77..It has a translucent mirror technology.
DRodrigues
Well-known member
Well there is that whole sensor dust problem, right?
I was afraid about cleaning the sensor but found that with modern sensor coatings you just need a normal photo hand-blower to solve the issue...:t:
Yes, but after is also less easy to remove the dust...
In this respect, the digiscopy is safer, independent of the camera. However even compact cameras can collect dust - my Panasonic FX150 also had a dust problem in the sensor that I only could solve with a small "hoick" - google translated - don't know if it's the best word...clive ward
Active member
Hi I was thinking of buying the Nikon p310 for my ATX 95mm. Has anyone tried this set up? Also can you buy a shutter release cable for the p310? As you can tell by the last question I am new to digiscoping.
You need this to nikon P310
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-swarovski-dcb-ii-swing-adaptor-for-atx-stx/p1532085
Better system are Nikon 1 V1 + Nikon FT 1 adapter + T2 / nikon ring + TLS APO adapter + Nikon ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control
or
Nikon 1 V1 + T2 / nikon 1 ring + TLS APO adapter + Nikon ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control
Last edited:
I have got the new Swarovski ATX for evaluation purposes. Last Thursday I had the opportunity to do some field tests in the harbour entrance of Scheveningen in the Netherlands.
The first picture (of the Turnstone) was made with my Olympus PL3. the TLS APO adapter and the 90 mm module at 30X. Due to the TLS APO adapter the autofocus of the Olympus doesn't work, so I had to focus on the fliip screen, while using the focusing zoom tool of the camera. Getting the focus right wasn't really a problem. Getting enough distance between the camera and the bird was a bigger issue, because while stepping back I had to stop at the edge of the harbour entrance. Here I was really missing the possibility to zoom out.
The second picture (of the herring gull) was made with the Olympus PL3 and the 45 mm f1.8 lens of Olympus, the DCB II adapter, with the telescope at 30X. The advantage is that the autofucus of the Olympus does the work. But an optic system equivalent tot 2700 mm full frame can be troublesome if large birds are sitting closeby. I made a different picture of the same bird (the winking herring gull) with the Olympus PL3, the TLS APO adapter and the telescope at 45X. I couldn't find much differences between these pictures.
Because it was an unusual bright day I also pressed the limits of the digiscoping system. The portrait of the Herring Gull (fourth picture) was made with the Olympus PL3, the TLS APO adapter and the telescope at 70X (equivalent to 4200 mm on a full frame camera). The picture is on the dark side and needed a lot of sharpening afterwards, but the result is decent enough.
I also tried my old SonyW200 on the DCBII adapter. The camera did just what could be expected from a point and shoot camera, producing a few decent jpegs, but the results were much better with the Olympus PL3.
The first picture (of the Turnstone) was made with my Olympus PL3. the TLS APO adapter and the 90 mm module at 30X. Due to the TLS APO adapter the autofocus of the Olympus doesn't work, so I had to focus on the fliip screen, while using the focusing zoom tool of the camera. Getting the focus right wasn't really a problem. Getting enough distance between the camera and the bird was a bigger issue, because while stepping back I had to stop at the edge of the harbour entrance. Here I was really missing the possibility to zoom out.
The second picture (of the herring gull) was made with the Olympus PL3 and the 45 mm f1.8 lens of Olympus, the DCB II adapter, with the telescope at 30X. The advantage is that the autofucus of the Olympus does the work. But an optic system equivalent tot 2700 mm full frame can be troublesome if large birds are sitting closeby. I made a different picture of the same bird (the winking herring gull) with the Olympus PL3, the TLS APO adapter and the telescope at 45X. I couldn't find much differences between these pictures.
Because it was an unusual bright day I also pressed the limits of the digiscoping system. The portrait of the Herring Gull (fourth picture) was made with the Olympus PL3, the TLS APO adapter and the telescope at 70X (equivalent to 4200 mm on a full frame camera). The picture is on the dark side and needed a lot of sharpening afterwards, but the result is decent enough.
I also tried my old SonyW200 on the DCBII adapter. The camera did just what could be expected from a point and shoot camera, producing a few decent jpegs, but the results were much better with the Olympus PL3.
Attachments
SteveClifton
Well-known member
An excellent first set of images. They look very promising indeed!
Out of interest, how did you find the EPL-3 with 45mm lens compared with the TLS APO adapter. Were similar shutter speeds possible? They both look similar in image quality.
Were the images cropped much?
Out of interest, how did you find the EPL-3 with 45mm lens compared with the TLS APO adapter. Were similar shutter speeds possible? They both look similar in image quality.
Were the images cropped much?
Last edited:
