[Shell]

Can anyone tell me if digiscoping will work on sequential shooting for action shots , or is the digiscoping mainly for those "oh - hey birdie, thanks for sittin' there so long and posing for me" shots ? I don't want to do digiscoping if my camera isn't good enough "without a scope" , or if I can't add another lens to the camera,and don't want to do it if I can't get flight shots or shots of the wings , etc. if I can't do this with the scope on. So can anyone give me some advice on maybe using the sports or action mode with digiscoping?

[Andy Bright]

Hi Shell,
I think you may be better off saving for a digital slr camera and a longish lens.... I really feel that you want too much from digiscoping and/or 'pro-sumer' type digital cameras. It's a fine method for birders, but maybe not ideal for those more interested in traditional bird photography.

Action shots require fast auto focus operation, fast shutter-speeds and camera's without significant shutter-lag (the time delay between pressing the shutter and capturing the shot). Besides, digiscoping is a manual focus method so you're at an immediate disadvantage for most traditional bird photography compared to an slr with AF lens.

Regards,
Andy

[Shell]

Thank you Andy ! That is exactly what I wanted to know. I guess I am asking for too much . I guess it will just have to be a good camera with what I want then, and that digiscoping thing must wait :) Thanks so much for the help !

[Steve J - Darlo]

I agree with Andy. i dont think the two should be confused. Bird photography with the camera. Record bird shots with the digiscoping.

Steve j - Darlo

[Shell]

Thank you Steve, you are so right ! I do want too much at one time :)

[Paulyoly]

Just a bird flapping it's wings isn't a problem unless it's in a shaddy area, but a bird in flight is almost impossible, i say almost because i have done it several time, but it can't compare to a digital slr.

http://www.pbase.com/image/16661583

http://www.pbase.com/image/16661579

http://www.pbase.com/image/16661582

If the bird is large and far off you can pan with the scope/camera and get some decent shots like this one.

http://www.pbase.com/image/16661588

all these were taken with the pentax 80ed and cp990, but i agree with andy, you would benefit from a canon 10d with a 400mm lens.

[Shell]

WOW ! Those photos are beautiful ! Thank you for the input, I will certainly check out more info on the canon 10d . I appreciate the help !

[Paulyoly]

Originally posted by Shell
WOW ! Those photos are beautiful ! Thank you for the input, I will certainly check out more info on the canon 10d . I appreciate the help !

I mentioned the canon 10d because it is one of the cheapest digital slr bodies on the market today, i think it cost around $1500usd, which is the price of the swarovski 80hd scope, of course you still have to purchase the lens and storage media. I think the real disadvantage of digiscoping over traditional photography has to be the limited depth of field( how much of the subject is in focus)

[Shell]

Oh yes, I just looked at the price of camera, lens I ''wanted'' and the other ''necessary'' items , and that deal will have to wait. That's alot of money . So it looks like I'm back to looking at digital cameras again . Thanks alot for your help !

[stevo]

Hi Shell

Have you considered something like a Nikon cp4500 & their 3x teleconvertor lens?At full zoom this would give you 456mm.Plus if you decided to have go at digiscoping you would just have to buy the adapter(assuming youve already got a scope).

Regards Stevo.

[Shell]

Oooh - no Stevo , I haven't considered that. But I do thank you for the info. That is not a bad idea at all. I don't have a scope, but if the camera with the 3x teleconverter can take great, quick action shots, then I can surely wait on the scope. I will go look up the specs on the nikon cp4500. I guess it depends on the shutter speed and if there is any lag on that. And also, with the olympus, without a teleconverter lens, I get up to 380mm. But I do already have a 1.7x tele. So I'll have to see what the extra 3x lens will be too. Kind of compare the total packages . But I sure will look at cp4500 and see what the 3x lens will cost. Thanks so much for giving me the tip !

[stevo]

Hi Shell no problem with the info,one word of caution I read several pieces about the Olympus 7 series cameras on this forum where people had experienced big problems with them.I think the thread is under the Olympus section,the problems only apply to the 7 series ultra zoom cameras & not any others!!

Hope this helps Stevo.

[Shell]

Oh yes, I am VERY aware of the problems. I have (currently) the C-2100 ultra zoom and I MUST buy another camera before sending this one in to get repaired. It quits on me and works for me WHEN IT WANTS TO ! But in order to have it repaired, I have to buy another first because I can't go without a camera while this one is getting repaired. I have just 2 months left on my warranty, and CompUSA (where I bought the camera) will replace my camera or give me store credit for another if they can't fix it. So we worked a deal with the management that we could buy another camera 1st then they would reimburse us the difference, when I get my camera back (or not). They will not give me a ''LONER" camera while mine is getting repaired, so that's why I'm going to buy another, so I won't have to be without one. Yes, it's an addiction , this photography thing :)

[Ido]

[/font]
These pictures are not in a very high quality, but considering the long distance, my lack of experience and the fast movment of the objects, I think they show that digiscoping can be used for action photos in amateurish level, yet not as good as digital SLR and a good lens.
The picture of the Vulture was taken from ~300m.
The picture of the Cranes was taken from ~200m.
I guess that the experts from the forum can significantly improve the quality by digital processing.
[IMG][font=Arial]

[nigelblake]

Sadly it is a common misconception that digital processing can significantly improve an image that does'nt quite make the grade. Unfortunately if the image is lacking the recorded detail needed, then no amount of processing will add feather detail, and quality etc to the picture.

[Ido]

And this Heron was not flying, but its head was moving fast.

[Ido]

Originally Posted by nigelblake

Sadly it is a common misconception that digital processing can significantly improve an image that does'nt quite make the grade. Unfortunately if the image is lacking the recorded detail needed, then no amount of processing will add feather detail, and quality etc to the picture.

Thank you Nigelblake,
I'm sure I still have much more to learn (that's my main reason for being here.)