[kristoffer]

How long did it take you to learn to take good shots using digiscoping? Im gonne start my new digiscope career soon and I am reading lots of tips and suggestions on how to do it. It seems to be almost infinity options when it comes to settings and equipment + methods. So how long did it take you to learn?

[dafi]

I think its more of a skill to learn. The more you practice the more attuned to it you will become. The best thing to do is get out there and take pictures. The basics are reasonably easy to get a handle on.

Enjoy your self.

daf

[rob lee]

[quote=kristoffer;1664193]How long did it take you to learn to take good shots using digiscoping? /QUOTE]

Without sounding big headed (v.hard), about half a dozen shots.
Admittedly i had one of the best current digicams at the time (Coolpix 990). But with a good adapter & set up on a tripod as long as the focus is good it was`nt too hard. I think too much is made of it nowadays. To reiterate, as long as the scope is in focus & the setup is stable most of the modern cameras should be able to produce good results. One of the most important things for me is to keep the ISO low, I dont need a fast shutter speed when set up on a tripod, if the bird is moving to much then you wont get a good shot anyway. Remember P&S limitations.

[RJM]

Well I am of the opinion a fast shutter speed is EVERYTHING at these supertelephoto focal lengths. A fast shutter speed overcomes a lot of mechanical vibration/movement issues that lead to blur. It is the great "equalizer", more than keeping ISO low on current state-of-the art digicams. I can get nice A4 prints even at ISO800 on my Panny FX150. But no amount of processing can fix a blurry pic due to slow shutter speeds.

At 3000mm+ effective focal lengths even a light air breeze will cause problems, either with your gear or with the target, e.g., moving perch branches or feathers. With the camera IS on, you can probably let shutter speed go as low as 1/125sec but anything slower will yield inconsistent results on all but exceptional days.

That said, you really need to practice and LEARN your camera's features, strengths and weaknesses. Bring your manual with you and spend the day dedicated to only taking pics and play with the exposure settings under varying light. Write down what works and what doesn't. The quicker you master the camera, the sooner you will get great results (or come to realize the choice of camera makes you work too hard for them!).

Rick

[BillB]

I totally agree with RJM on the value of intensive practice. In fact, you can learn quickly within your own backyard. Take thousands of shots carefully adjusting each parameter, e.g., focus (scope vs. camera), aperture and depth of field, exposure compensation, ISO, and notate what works and what does not. I found it especially useful to set up a series of targets at different distances, for example, figurines on a picnic table, and trying to focus and shoot at the one in the middle. Apart from the need for fast shutter speeds, it is also necessary to develop the speed in deploying your camera quickly. Not only do the birds move all the time, they usually do not hang around for very long.

Bill

[Sleeper]

Hi kristoffer

For me it took a while as I found the limitations of the various pieces of equipment I used. The bushnell spacemaster was soon the weakest link. Once I found this out I purchased the 85mm Diascope and it was like somebody switched a light on. Then I found the weakness of my Samsung NV3 and again my purchase of the P5100 with a dedicated swing away bracket added to my ability.

I would like to say that technique is always been worked on and all this is bore out from when I look back through my own web pages of trips abroad to the gallery on here. I have to say I have reached a plateau now it seems but I am happy with my overall results. Part of the fun of digiscoping was the road to discovery.
The exact timings of how long is hard as this can be down to, finance, equipment, knowledge of photography, allowed time of practice, PATIENCE, how well you remember things and even the weather in your part of the world.

[SteveClifton]

Kristoffer, just a few points about your question. I took to digiscoping quite quickly as I am fairly technical, and have always been driven to make pictures. It used to be drawing & painting, but now photography has fulfilled that 'need' as I have limited time for my hobbies what with working full time.

Many birders have no interest in photography, whereas others seem to enjoy it as much as or more than I do. We are all different.

Yes, some patience is needed, and a fair bit of practice is called for too. But it is certainly not as difficult as some people would have you believe, and very good (even great) results can be achieved by anyone with decent equipment if you work at it a little. Just look at some of the pictures on BF if you need proof of this.

Regarding shutter speeds, good results can be achieved at low speeds only if conditions are good (low wind and subject still). The attached Hawfinch was taken at 1/15 second F5, ISO 800 at about 1/2-3/4 camera zoom. I haven't posted it as an example of digiscoping excellence, but for me I was happy with it as an example of what you can achieve in terms of a record shot of a bird that is known to be very difficult to see, let alone photograph well, here in the UK.

The other thing to bear in mind is that you will need to learn some post processing skills to get the best out of your pictures. The second shot is straight out of the camera with no pp. I always use Picassa which is a free Google download. If you shoot jpegs then it is a very good introductory tool. Here I cropped, sharpened and tweaked the colours a little, just enough to bring out the best in the picture.

Cheers,

Steve

[kristoffer]

Thanks guys, very helpful! Lets hope I like the combination of my scope and the Nikon P6000 then. Sweden does not see much sunlight at this time of the year so I guess i have to learn how fast shutter and high iso my combination can manage.

Post-processing of images is always a bit scary for newbies like me. I looked at Lightroom and I liked some of it´s functions, like keywords, but the image processing was a bit complicated. I know a few functions in photoshop but I think il take a look at Picassa, it might be the best option for me right now.

[Sleeper]

I quite like photoscape which is easy to use and good for adding a few extras.

http://download.cnet.com/PhotoScape/...-10703122.html

[SteveClifton]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

Thanks guys, very helpful! Lets hope I like the combination of my scope and the Nikon P6000 then. Sweden does not see much sunlight at this time of the year so I guess i have to learn how fast shutter and high iso my combination can manage.

Post-processing of images is always a bit scary for newbies like me. I looked at Lightroom and I liked some of it´s functions, like keywords, but the image processing was a bit complicated. I know a few functions in photoshop but I think il take a look at Picassa, it might be the best option for me right now.

Believe me, Picassa is a doddle, anyone could use it-even a child. I started with it thinking I would later move onto something more 'professional', but so far haven't felt the need,

Steve

[Josef]

Kristopher,

I think its interesting to note that two of the previous submitters that implied its being easy also don’t have galleries to show for it. In contrast, the others whom imply it takes a considerable effort have fine galleries. Now I don’t want to be discouraging, but if you consider that when I started, most pictures on BF were taken through scopes. Today we see the opposite, so one wonders what the best way to go really is. One advantage I enjoy from scope work is the flexibility of range and presently feel comfortable with subject between 15 to 100 feet. With another EP I’m hoping to expand that to 15 to 300 feet.

It took me about a year to get a handle on digiscoping and I’m sure without the help of BF and others I wouldn’t still be trying for the super shot. Remembering back, I can’t believe how far the simple P&S that I first used has progressed (in terms of focus speed, sensitivity and burst), now they are incredible.

When I first started I spent hours in photoshop and other programs compensating for equipment shortfalls and felt lucky to get one good pic from 50 losers, now I get 50 respectible shots and spend the time deciding which one I should develop.

Like the other comments on practice, I agree the more the better. I don’t change cameras often. The last change it took a couple week ends between the back yard and computer to find settings that maxed out the image. Another suggestion I have, to minimize your up time, is to find a BF mentor. When you come across a fellow member with good results using your equipment, write the person and ask for adapter suggestions, etc.

Joe

[SteveClifton]

Originally Posted by Josef

Kristopher,

I think its interesting to note that two of the previous submitters that implied its being easy also don’t have galleries to show for it. In contrast, the others whom imply it takes a considerable effort have fine galleries.
I

Joe

Not sure what you are implying by this Joe. Do you mean that as some of us don't have a gallery that our advice should not be taken seriously?

I take many digiscoped pictures, as well as using a DSLR frequently. I find that the two methods compliment each other perfectly. It's certainly not an either/or situation for me.

As for posting pics in a gallery, personally I feel no need to do this, nor to start by own website as some photographers do. For me the beauty of this forum is that anyone can share experiences and pictures if they wish, without having to belong to some elite clique of proven 'experts'. The day that that happens I don't think I'll bother coming here any more!

For what it's worth, I regularly post my results on Surfbirds as I feel that I am a birder first, and photographer second, and for me that site is a good reflection of what's happening in birding month by month through the year, though on occasions the bias changes to the opposite of this.

Consequently, many of my digiscoped photos are merely (hopefully good) record shots of notable birds, and have little artistic merit, but I would like to think that at least a few of them have some artistic merit beyond the level of a photographic record (the judges of this year's Swarovski Digiscoper of the Year certainly did).

Saying that digiscoping is hard is very subjective, and can lead people to be put off. Personally I find it to be very rewarding most of the time and quite challenging at times too. If I stopped enjoying myself digiscoping I would soon pack up!

Steve

[Josef]

Steve,

My apologies, your Hawfinch represents a skill you have developed. I also agree we should all have a say. Just did not want to give a beginner the impression it would be easy.

As far as shutter speed goes your Hawfinch is a good example of controling the parameters with a motionless bird. One way of seeing if it is not in focus or caused by motion is to examine the image closely to see if there is a direction to the pixels. Direction, increase shutter speed.

Joe

[kristoffer]

Very interesting thread and I think I understand that it´s not hard to photograph a motionless bird, 20 meters away but to manage during harder circumstances require skills and practice. And practice I shall :)
By the way, SteveClifton is one of the nicest guys here on bf, he has helped me alot with different questions regarding digiscoping. BF seem to attract friendly people, unlike other forums.

[SteveClifton]

Originally Posted by Josef

Steve,

My apologies, your Hawfinch represents a skill you have developed. I also agree we should all have a say. Just did not want to give a beginner the impression it would be easy.

As far as shutter speed goes your Hawfinch is a good example of controling the parameters with a motionless bird. One way of seeing if it is not in focus or caused by motion is to examine the image closely to see if there is a direction to the pixels. Direction, increase shutter speed.

Joe

No problem Joe. We're all friends on here and hopefully we can all learn a thing or two from each other.

You have some very nice shots on your gallery BTW, and most of them are very sharp with lots of feather detail which is desireable but very hard to get here in the UK, as birds here are usually very wary and difficult to approach closely.

The Hawfinch certainly lacks in ultimate sharpness, but I wanted to show Kristoffer how it's possible to 'rescue' an average shot quite easily with basic pp skills. Something that's not always possible over here in a northern european winter, is the ability to up the shutter speed. That shot was already taken at ISO 800 and max aperture f5, so there was really no other way to go except to fail! Increasing the ISO to 1600 isn't really adviseable on most digicams, though the Fuji F31 gives surprisingly clean images at ISO 800.

Steve

[SteveClifton]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

Very interesting thread and I think I understand that it´s not hard to photograph a motionless bird, 20 meters away but to manage during harder circumstances require skills and practice. And practice I shall :)
By the way, SteveClifton is one of the nicest guys here on bf, he has helped me alot with different questions regarding digiscoping. BF seem to attract friendly people, unlike other forums.

Hi Kristoffer, you're not such a bad bloke yourself mate

Has that camera arrived yet, or is it still winging its way over to you?

My implication that digiscoping isn't all that hard to pick up assumes you already have some understanding of the basic principles of photography, such as aperture, shutter speeds & ISO. Then you just need the will to practice, learn & get better, and you seem to have all of these in abundance!

All the best,

Steve

[kristoffer]

It is on the way, the wait for it is agonizing

Yeah, I have taken quite a few shots with my longzoomer, so on the way Ive picked up a few things, but I think i might will try to spend some more time learning photo theory, maybe I will be more comfortable using manual modes then. Thanks again for all help!

Originally Posted by SteveClifton

Hi Kristoffer, you're not such a bad bloke yourself mate

Has that camera arrived yet, or is it still winging its way over to you?

My implication that digiscoping isn't all that hard to pick up assumes you already have some understanding of the basic principles of photography, such as aperture, shutter speeds & ISO. Then you just need the will to practice, learn & get better, and you seem to have all of these in abundance!

All the best,

Steve

[rob lee]

Have only recently got back on line & checked back here. Firstly i must apologise as i didnt realise you had to have proof of your ability to digiscope before making any comments. However like Steve, i dont feel the need to have a gallery. I am also sorry if i implied it was easy, but what i actually said was that if you have a good set up on a stable tripod it "ISNT TOO HARD". Of course we all know practice makes perfect & it takes time to get to know how to get the best out of the equipement but as i originally said its not as hard as some people make out.

[rob lee]

Originally Posted by Josef

I think its interesting to note that two of the previous submitters that implied its being easy also don’t have galleries to show for it.

Heres a slightly more festive one for you Joe. Happy Christmas.

[kristoffer]

Wow, I really really like your photos rob lee. Amazing detail and sharpness. You took these shots with the 990 CP?

[rob lee]

Hi Kristoffer,
All of these were taken with a Sony P200, a 7 mp model thats about 4 years old now but to my eyes is still as good as the newest cameras image wise, if i could buy another new one i wouldnt hesitate to. The 990 was my first digicam.

[SteveClifton]

Originally Posted by rob lee

Have only recently got back on line & checked back here. Firstly i must apologise as i didnt realise you had to have proof of your ability to digiscope before making any comments. However like Steve, i dont feel the need to have a gallery. I am also sorry if i implied it was easy, but what i actually said was that if you have a good set up on a stable tripod it "ISNT TOO HARD". Of course we all know practice makes perfect & it takes time to get to know how to get the best out of the equipement but as i originally said its not as hard as some people make out.

Hi Rob, very nice photos. These certainly represent enough evidence of 'qualifications' for me. I like the shrike and DW especially, and the Waxwing is a cracker too-very seasonal!

Best wishes and happy digiscoping in the New Year,

Steve

ps. Kristoffer, got any 'emergent' digiscoped pictures yet? I assume the new camera is now nestling safely in your capable hands...

[rob lee]

O.K. I know im getting carried away now so heres the last 3.
Hey, i might even start a gallery.
On another note, like Steve i find Picasa more than sufficient for my pp needs, note the left wing of the Swallowtail, i (mostly) removed a blade of grass that was right across it. I could have spent more time & done a better job but felt that the current result was good enough. This is another area that a lot of people can get awfully anal about. I recently took a pic of a R.N.Phalarope that a friend of mine asked me to send him the original file of, he processed it through CS3 & sent it back. I prefered my Picasa version. I guess what im saying is that if you get the shot good enough in the first place then you shouldnt need to do to much to it. My style of digiscoping is more to wait for the moment rather than rattle off a load of shots in burst mode, another reason why i prefer a low ISO so as to try & get a cleaner looking image rather than a faster shutter speed to freeze motion. Horses for courses.

[kristoffer]

Hi Steve. No, not yet. I have the camera and adapter, but not the DCA yet. And I have had really a lot to do at work now and over the holiday, and its freezing cold here in Sweden too. But I expect to start practising in mid January. It´s gone take time before I can take pictures near the quality of you guys, but thanks for the trust in my newbie-skills :)

Originally Posted by SteveClifton

ps. Kristoffer, got any 'emergent' digiscoped pictures yet? I assume the new camera is now nestling safely in your capable hands...

[Josef]

Well lets see if I can say something else that will perk everyone up so we can keep this thread rolling – Nah. Or how about if it is so easy why have so many people moved from scope/camera to the dslr thing. Ease of use or superior sensors? Probably both.

Actually I’ve been away for awhile and glad to have checked back and viewed your very nice pics – wish you would start galleries so I could see more, and have a
Merry New Year.

Joe