[rb_stern]

I'm thinking of going digital SLR to supplement my digiscoping (birds in flight, warblers whizzing around in a nearby bush etc.) - I've been very impressed with results posted here and on Birds-Pix. I'd like an image-stabilized lens for hand-holding. Possibilities within my price range are Nikon D70 with 80-400VR, Canon 10D or 300D with 100-400IS, or either body with Sigma 80-400OS. Any comments or suggestions?

Thanks,

Richard

[Cubbsy]

Hi Richard, I became hooked the same way as you, and I am about to take delivery of the Canon EOS 10D (after a 5 week wait) but have also ordered the Sigma 50-500, take a look at scottishdude's gallery pictures, he he uses this combination as do a few other birder's

Good luck, Cubbsy

[Glen Tepke]

I've been happy with my 10D and 100-400, but I haven't really compared to anything else -- bought it based on recommendations of others and pics I had seen posted. My wife has a Digital Rebel/300D. The image quality is the same as the 10D, but I think the smaller buffer and slower write time would be frustrating if you are as trigger-happy as I am. Glen

[Raydes]

Hi Richard,

As a newbie to photographie I started with digiscoping last year around september before that I was at experimenting stage :) even not much photographing att all.

Now recently begin March I got my Eos10d and 100x400mm IS ... I am now hooked on it because I love to capture action (flight shots) of birds.
But even the versatile use of the 100x400 dragonflies etc. made me an DSLR lover, even the amateur approach from me to this fantastic hobby gave me very much joy.

And here's a thank you to all our forummembers or fellow enthousiastics (don't know if this is spelled right) to bring me back to nature much more than ever :)

Sorry for the long and a bit off topic going reply.

[JonB]

I've had it over a year, and I've been extremely happy with my D100 and 80-400 VR. Word on the D70 is that it's pretty close to the D100, and even has some advantages in some areas. I regularly make 19x13 prints that are just as good or better than 35 mm film prints at that size.

[Andy Bright]

I don't think you'd be going wrong with any of those combinations, Richard. I've seen cracking shots (the full images, not webshots) taken by all of these, except the Sigma OS lens (although I hear it's very sharp).
Btw: happy birthday.

[peteh]

There was a group review of DSLRS in the last Practical photographer.

Canon 10d got top with testers choice
and the Nikon D70 got best value.

The bottom line was "Despite the rush of young pretenders, the EOS 10D is still the benchmark digital SLR".

(This is for the under £1200 range.)

Hope that helps.

PS. the 100-400L IS lens is absolutely brilliant. The image stabilising is invaluable. I have quite shakey hands so I doubt I would get any sharp handheld shots without it.

Pete.

[dylan]

Go for it.
I got into digiscoping & then went on to buy a Canon D60 and 100-400 zoom. I love both setups, each having its own benefits.

The only drawbacks as far as I'm concerned are:
1/ Choosing which setup to lug around for the day! I've carried both setups on a couple of occasions, but really regretted it later when the pain kicked in!
2/ after a few DSLR sessions, going back to the Coolpix can be quite frustrating as it seems really slow in comparison.

Good luck Richard,
Dylan.

[christineredgate]

Originally Posted by dylan

Go for it.
I got into digiscoping & then went on to buy a Canon D60 and 100-400 zoom. I love both setups, each having its own benefits.

The only drawbacks as far as I'm concerned are:
1/ Choosing which setup to lug around for the day! I've carried both setups on a couple of occasions, but really regretted it later when the pain kicked in!
2/ after a few DSLR sessions, going back to the Coolpix can be quite frustrating as it seems really slow in comparison.

Good luck Richard,
Dylan.

Dylan ,I have been trying out a 300d with a 28-200mm lens,and today used both digiscoping and the SlR,and I still obtain the best results from Digiscoping.I know it would help if I understood camera settings,but I do still enjoy digiscoping the best.

[dylan]

Hello Christine, I am curious what you mean by "best results"?

The DSLR undoubtedly gives better quality results and is a lot more versatile than digiscoping, in terms of being able to achieve shots of birds in flight and subjects that are close up or quick moving. But, there's no way I'm parting with my digiscoping setup, well not until I can afford a 600mm lens and a teleconverter to go with it

Digiscoping is still the best way to get incredible close ups of small birds, or birds at extreme distances (providing they stay still long enough).

I still love digiscoping

Dylan.

[foto_wombat]

Hi Richard

The 10D plus 'L' series lens combination is an excellent choice for bird photography. I prefer primes to zooms but the 100-400mm is a good alternative to a prime. I'd stick with the Canon lenses if possible, as Canon arguably produce some of the best telephotos available and I have heard of people having trouble with the electronics when using different brand lenses with Canon bodies.

I believe that the Canon 10D coupled with the EF 300mm 1:4 L IS and the EF extender 1.4x II to be an excellent starter kit for digital bird photography.

When I want to move easily and quickly, with minimal weight and handhold ability, then this is a great outfit to use.

I've attached three images of very small birds, taken recently with this lens and with the 10D-300mm and with the 10D-300/1.4x combination.

I think all your choices would produce good results but I'd go with the Canon system.

Hope this helps with your decision

Kind regards,
Peter

www.peter-brown-photographer.com
www.wilderness-images-gallery.com

[Geoff Brown]

Have to agree with PhotoWombat I get much better results with Canon 10D + telephoto than I do with digiscoping with a Nikon 4500 + Nikon spotterscope.

[Raydes]

I agree fully with the above, only minor point against DSLR is that you need to get much closer.
But this doesn't weight against lot's of benefit's.

[Andy Bright]

As a brief defence of 'digiscoping' it is a method of compromise aimed at birders rather than those with more artistic ambitions... In terms of the quality of the results, unless you require prints of A4+, then there's little to seperate the two... A good digiscoped 10x8 will look almost identical to a good dslr/35mm 10x8. Dynamic range and general colour reproduction will be better from a dslr, but even that isn't particularly noticable after a few minutes in Photoshop.
Still, you'll get far greater percentage of 'keepers' from a dslr and obviously the many benefits already mentioned.

[christineredgate]

Regarding my comments re the fact I obtain better results re Digiscoping than from an SlR.As has already been mentioned the distance is the main factor,especially with a good scope.I have some really good A4 pics from Digiscoped images,I think to achieve the same with an SlR(digi) one needs an excellent lens,and also one needs to understand the ins and outs of camera settings,etc.For the less well informed amongs't us,we can achieve (sometimes) a lovely clear picture,very well enlarged from the scope and a simple camera such as the 4500.But,and it is a big but,when one sees the images on the gallery from DigiSLR's using the 500mm lens,and indeed the fantastic one from Nigel(Blake) he used a 100-400mm well yes DigiSlr's are perhaps catching up with digiscoping.It could be that I am not an expert photographer and my 28-200mm lens coul;d not compete with the 300mm to 400mm and above,which is why I find that digiscoping ,to me produces better results.But I have now a larger lens ,with a converter,so will be experimenting soon,and then I can draw my own conclusions.
But as I have already mentioned for the ones of us who cannot afford the high powered lenses,or do not have the technical know how to produce the best from a DigiSLR,then digiscoping is a good option and does produce stunning results.Just to be able to print in a photo the image one sees through ones scope says it all for me.

[Kiki]

Hi Richard,

We have the Canon 300D with the 135-400 Sigma lens and we are getting some good results. Though it does have a smaller buffer than the 10D, we are both a little 'trigger happy' (think nothing of going out and taking 200 pics in a morning) but don't find the buffer a problem. We have had a few flight shots that we've managed to get fine, despite me by no means being an expert at bird photography. My hubby (CJW) is much more experienced than I am and has had some really good results.

It seems there is not much to choose between all these cameras - Chris often goes out with Peteh and they get identical shots.

Regards Keren

[alan_rymer]

Originally Posted by Kiki

Hi Richard,

We have the Canon 300D with the 135-400 Sigma lens and we are getting some good results. Though it does have a smaller buffer than the 10D, we are both a little 'trigger happy' (think nothing of going out and taking 200 pics in a morning) but don't find the buffer a problem. We have had a few flight shots that we've managed to get fine, despite me by no means being an expert at bird photography. My hubby (CJW) is much more experienced than I am and has had some really good results.

It seems there is not much to choose between all these cameras - Chris often goes out with Peteh and they get identical shots.

Regards Keren

Your Gannet is excllent!. I wish I could get one half as good!.

[Kiki]

Thanks for that Alan. I think it probably illustrates that with a bit of patience that an amateur like myself can get some half-decent results.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by Kiki

Thanks for that Alan. I think it probably illustrates that with a bit of patience that an amateur like myself can get some half-decent results.

Patience? You?