• 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.

Sirui VA-5 vs Manfrotto MVH500AH (visual comparison) (5 Viewers)

@GrampaTom Nice account of the species over there. I absolutely agree about Merlin Sound ID. Before, I used to go with Birdnet, but the sound ID in Merlin is much more convenient. Sometimes it does funny things and claims to have heard impossible species, but on dense forest is a great help, because it sometimes gives you hints and tips and these in turn tell you what to look for and help pointing your search in the right direction.

Over here we're also in full migration season, and the storm has helped in bringing some interesting species to this island. A couple of days ago I spotted a pallid harrier (Circus macrourus), a lifer, and certainly not the most common this side of the Med (crappy video frame handholding my smartphone against my IS Canon on a whim, really poor quality, but enough for ID record).

AguiluchoPapialbo.jpeg

And in the evening I could enjoy a bluethroat (Luscinia svecica) which is common on migration season, but always a treat nonetheless. It was busy on someone's backyard, so I had the time to set up my scope and enjoy the show for more than 10 minutes. Another smartphone against eyepiece picture (this time handholding it against the ATS; I have an adaptor, but sometimes when in a hurry, I simply hold the phone with my hands).

RuiseñorPechiazul.jpeg

So I can't complain! :)
 
Ah cool. So, wondering about digiscoping with phone. I bird with a pal (the we) who only goes with a camera. There's probably a comedy routine to be written re the back and forth between us, (though prolly not by me). "You cant possibly get it done with that camera thing. You keep walking past stuff and chasing it away...", says I. "Im a photographer. I'm here to take pictures" says he. While there's no shortage of beautiful pictures online. There are times when I see something, confess I would like to take a pic. Can you elaborate? What sort of adaptor have you got. I asked a couple weeks back, here about the Magview. Saw one on a fellow birders scope. She seemed to like, but I have zero experience with any of these.
 
@GrampaTom Now that was funny, the way you explained it I sort of imagined it like a Walter Matthau and Jack Lemmon movie.

Regarding pictures with your smartphone and binoculars/scope. I've always been a big fan of photography (I used to have a B/W lab at home to develop my own pictures, and I do the photographies for the food-related books I write with a chunky Nikon DSLR, tripod, spotlights, etc.). However, ever since smartphones got decent cameras, I simply asume that I carry a camera almost 24/7 with me. It's a great camera in some respect (amazing possibilities for framing, new angles, etc.) and some not so nice drawbacks; lack of image quality, lack of hi mag lens... but wait a minute: don't I carry a magnifying glass with me almost at all times when outdoor? For me it makes total sense to use the "tele objective" that binoculars or scope offer. No, I don't have any "quality" or artistic aspiration whatsoever, it's more a matter of documenting the everyday (and the camera you have with you is certainly the best camera for that... namely the smartphone). So I use the binocular as a tele for my smartphone on a daily basis. And when I'm carrying my scope, this is a big part of the excitement.

On its simplest form, I simply handhold the binocular with one hand while I press the smartphone camera against one of the eyecups. And I've been able to document amazing stuff, like that day we have a very rare visitor over here, a black stork, which is amazing enough, but that day one of the local ospreys decided to chase the black stork, and I could record a video of that with this very rudimentary system.

Ciguena_Aguila.jpeg

These are just frames for the video I took. Yes, they're extremely poor quality, imagine taking a video while "freehanding" binocular and smartphone, but it's doable and these images serve their purpose of documenting and ID. I can't remember which binos I was using that day, probably the Opticron Traveller 8x32 ED.
If you are not following a bird in flight and you can stand still (or even better braze yourself against something, like the car windowsill), then the images are perfectly OK for ID. This siskin (Spinus spinus) allowed me to take a decent level of detail to separate it from a serin or a citril finch). Again, I think this is freehanding a smartphone with the Opticron Traveller 8x32 ED.

Lugano.jpeg

The next step is IS binoculars, which allow a great level of comfort for this, because they take away the shake (especially while singlehanding a binocular), and allow for more detail

This basic technique can be used for taking pictures with your smartphone and a scope. You "freehand" the smartphone against the scope ocular. If the subject is not moving, you can get nice results. However, due to the high magnification of the scope, it's easier to induce vibration, that's why an adapter comes in handy. There are different kinds, top iPhone and Samsung models usually have custom cases so you don't have to lose your time fiddling with your phone (however, should you change your phone, you would have to buy a new one, and they're not cheap). Then there are other "universal" solutions like the Phone Skope, and some optics brands also offer theirs (like Kowa, Swarovski, Hawke, etc.). The one I end up using is 5 dollar cheap metal rig like this.

ScopeAdapter.jpeg

You simply "strangle" the eyecup and the thing stays in place. You then adjust the position. One key thing to remember is that the adaptor has a limited width, so you should measure the eyecup of your scope first, since there are basically big and small. The adapter I used with my Opticron SDLv2 eyepiece does not work with the Swarovksi 20-60 one, the latter is wider. The one I used before was slightly different, and I preferred it, because it blocked "parasite light" coming from behind. It's the one on the right, compared to the one I use now you can see that even at its maximum width, the old one is noticeably narrower.

Adapatadores movil telescopio.jpeg

Mind you, you can also use the adaptor with your binoculars, it's the same principle, with the added bonus that you can use one eye to look through one of the eyecups of the binocular while the other has the adapter with the smartphone. This way you can, for example, follow swifts or swallows in flight and record them or take pictures of them. As a matter of fact, lately I'm using more and more the video function instead of the "camera" function. The rationale is that a video sequence will capture each and every detail, and then you can extract the "good frame" where a detail on the plumage is revealed, while otherwise, you have to shoot photos with the possibility of capturing that detail... or missing it. Bonus point for recording slow-mo. When you start doing that, you realise that you miss many things that your eyesight fails to detect. Many days I come back home from a day of birding and recording and I go over my pictures and movies at home to discover that the movies show things I have not seen on the field. I remember one day I discovered a shrike regurgitating a pellet, so quick that I missed it while observing the bird live.

Needless to say, the best image quality is obtained with the scope and adaptor, especially if you don't abuse the hi-mags. That way you can get pretty remarkable images. This is a hoopoe that has been building its nest in the same carob tree for the last three years. It was around 60 yards away.

Hoopoe.jpeg

Then there are important things to bear in mind while taking the picture. I find it's important to zoom in (at around 1.3 - 1.5) in order to get rid of the field stop, which acts a vignetting. This is not only a visual noise, but can affect the way the camera measures light; if it reads there is a lot of black in the image (because sometimes you can see the a black background around the "circle of image" that your fieldstop creates, especially with the Swarovski or my old Opticron at low mag, when the AFOV is narrower); because of all this black, the camera will make a wrong reading and overexpose, which results in your subject being burnt by the light. So, zooming in is a great way to improve your exposure and focus.

Another interesting advise is to use a remote control. You can get a bluetooh shooter, which is small as a coin and you can carry it in your pocket. This helps in reducing shake, which will naturally occur when you touch your screen to shoot the picture. A nice and inexpensive tip is that "traditional earphones" (the ones with cable connected directly to the phone) can be used for this, since they act as a shooter when you press the control for the volume. This is great, since you probably have one of those lying around.

And finally, an adaptor is a great tool for taking advantage of the big mags of your scope, like in astronomy. No, birding scopes are not ideal astro tools, but I use mine and I'm pretty chuffed with the performance it gives me. Yesterday it was the 8th day of the lunar cycle and you could see the contrasty relief of Rupes Recta (a +60 miles long fault on the Moon). You can see it here on the lower half of the image, a little to the left, before the "terminator" and the shadow area.

RupesRecta_Scope.jpeg

This was taken with the smartphone through the ATS 65 HD at its max 60x, while also cracking the digital zoom of the smartphone to around 8x. I live in a very humid area and yesterday it was a hazy night, so that only makes things worse quality wise, but for me its nevertheless amazing to get such a level of detail. Also in astro I do a lot of video (a pity I can't upload it here), it's easy to get amazing stuff. Again, at 60x. With "difficult" subjects like Saturn (where you have to dim the image in order to get the rings and not a blurb of light) the camera struggles to get a right exposition, so what I do in those cases is get the right exposition I want, and instead of recording or shooting, where I know the camera will struggle to render what I see on the screen, I simply use the "record screen" function on the phone (that's why you see the camera controls on this image).

Saturn.jpeg


Sorry for the lengthy post, I hope I could convey some interesting and helpful ideas to get you going. Since you most likely have your smartphone in your pocket while on the field using your binoculars or scope, simply use them together! :D
 
Yarrelli, Thank you so much for all that. Not sure whether Im Matthau or Lemmon... which was the sarcastic one? Ive sort of been trying not to complicate things as adding photography to scope/bino viewing surely would. There seems no shortage of superb quality photos on the internet, done by folks with equipment and skills it'd no doubt take years to acquire.

Im still getting used to the positive effect of the scope. Visited yesterday a place called Albany Bulb. Its a shortish man made peninsula built over a former dump with all kinds of construction detritus, like busted up concrete slabs and twisted rebar, poking out from the earth among the foliage that was planted. It can produce some of the best viewing this time of year. At mid tide theres hundreds of birds corralled into the emerging mud walled sloughs. Three of us on a built up wooden viewing platform were yakking about the various Green Winged Teals, American Wigeons, Northern Shovelors, Willets, Curlews, Whimbrels, Godwits. All of a sudden at least three large groupings of Sandpipers sprang into the air performing what seems fairly described as murmurations. Immediately in front of the viewing platform there was a dark streak that shot straight up like one of the scenes from Top Gun Maverick, cept it was, we guessed a Peregrine. Dont know what I would've done with a camera for that. Prolly woulda caught the Falcons exhaust. While the scopes played a minimum role, binos obviously the best tool, having both to hand was very darn nice. I can guess why more dont bird with scopes, but once seen, (what they can do), hard to ignore...

That said, I tried to take a pic with my iPhone pressed against my bino, once. Thought, "no way." You seem to have found the way though. The adaptor for phone/scope seems a reasonably priced experiment. The idea the whole is on a tripod appeals to me to.
 
Last edited:
Yarrelli, very interesting post. Can I ask please a couple of practical points when digiscoping. How you go about getting the photos in focus? It seems to me that there are two ways - focusing the scope by eye directly and letting the phone auto focus on this, or setting the phone to a fixed distant focus and focusing the image using the scope while looking at the screen? I struggle to get a focussed image either way. And do you use the phone zoomed (to about 3x?) to overcome the vignetting?
 
@Tiptonian Sure. It's an interesting question. I'll tell you about my experience doing it with some 4-5 different phones.

First, there's the phone itself. Currently I have a Samsung, which lacks a feature I love from other brands (like Xiaomi or Nexus, IIRC), which is the option of being able to point to focus and use that point as a shutter, regardless of the position on the screen. I feel this is an advantage, since it makes focusing and shooting very fast and convenient when dealing with a subject like birds, that don't always stay put in the centre of the image.

Anyway, you are right, you can use the focus wheel on the scope and simply let the phone follow that, which usually works allright (I understand some new phones have pretty sophisticated systems to follow a moving target and keep focus). However there are certain scenarios where this might not work that well. For example, when following a bird in flight over a wide stretch of blank sky. There your phone camera might struggle at times and end up losing focus while it keeps trying to refocus again and again to no avail. Also when using the zoom at higher magnification, where depth of field is very very shallow, or else when watching birds through or surrounded by vegetation, when you need to use the focus to "slice through" the leaves (the same way you do with your binoculars to spot warblers in thick bush). In this kind of situation lock the focus on the phone camera and simply use the focus wheel on the scope. This is also important to get a sharp focus of plumage or get your focus point right at a exact feature of interest, like the eye.

View attachment VID-20231107-WA0002.mp4

When doing astro, like getting Saturn or Jupiter in focus this last technique is crucial. In fact, to avoid shake, what I do is go to the "pro" mode and use the phone camera focus to fine tune focus to the minute detail (and then use a Bluetooth shooter or else the camera auto-timer set at the minimum time, 2 seconds in my case, to avoid touching the screen, which would in turn create vibrations thus hindering focus). Furthermore, for extreme max zoom use or situations of extreme light conditions (blindingly bright sky or dark night sky) sometines a weird problem arises: the phone screen shows you what "you want to see" (like an image darkened by exposure compensation to get the right detail), but when you take the picture/video, the result is simply not like that at all, because the camera fails to capture those subtleties and it's whether burnt or too dark and lacking focus. In those occasions I use an "emergency measure" and simply record the screen, like in the following video (where you can also see how I was fine tuning the focus via the manual focus option in the "pro mode" of the phone camera).

View attachment VID-20231107-WA0004.mp4

As for vignetting, I find it is crucial to get a little zoomed in to avoid the black circle vignette, and this is not only for aesthetic purposes, but also for aiding both in getting the correct exposure and focus.

If you don't zoom in, many times the camera makes an overall light reading and overexposes to compensate for the amount of black on the screen (and then, modern smartphone cameras usually overexpose anyway because people want every inch of their pictures to be bright, which is annoying for the ones like me who understand that in some pictures there are parts of the image that are meant to be dark). In fact, as a general rule, it's usually a good idea to use the exposure compensation to darken the image a bit (also because you are outdoors and sometimes that lovely image you saw on your screen under the Sun turns out to be a bit overexposed when you check it back home later on).
However, 3x is a lot of zoom (bear in mind that what your camera usually does is not actually zooming, but cropping, thus reducing the quality of the image, as in definition/resolution). Anyway, there's two sides to this. On one hand, the video mode is usually already zoomed in by default compared to the photo mode, so you usually need less zooming in to avoid vignetting. On the other hand, the apparent field of view usually increases as you increase magnification with your scope zoom (and then, it depends on the eyepiece, obviously. I've mainly used Opticron SDvL2 and Swarovski 20-60 zoom eyepieces, which have a pretty narrow AFOV at low mags). For pictures at lowish mags I usually get rid of the vignette at about 1,4-1,5 x, and for video even less. In fact, for video at high magnification I can go as low as 1,1 or simply not zoom in at all and get no vignetting. Now that I think about it, the slow-mo mode in my camera has no zoom, it's locked, you just can't zoom in to avoid vignetting. But if I go beyond 40-50x on the scope, I can get a nice clean image.

As a side note, remember how useful slow-mo can be to reveal detail that you might have skipped on the field. Check the goldeneye in the following video. Even though I've compressed the image greatly creating a GIF, and then sent it via WhatsApp (which further compresses it thus heavily losing quality), the slow motion action helps revealing the nictitating membrane working when the bird's head comes out of the water.

View attachment VID-20231107-WA0003.mp4

I would say I only use 3x for extreme ID situations, where the image quality (as in "aesthetic resolution") doesn't matter. In those cases I might also want to boost the exposure to actually burn the image to a point that a hidden feature of the plumage or beak is revealed. For example, if I want to check whether the base of the beak of a bird is actually black (as it seems on an image taken under the Sun and "darkened" by contrast), or it's actually paler, or orange like the lower part of the beak of a female king fisher. But then, this is something you can also do back home with some dedicated apps. I use Snapseed for pictures and Inshot for videos.

I hope this was helpful, but just let me know if you need further clarification. I find phonescoping is really convenient, because of the fact that you always carry a camera in your pocket, and with both your binoculars or your scope you can not only get nice images, but also learn a lot and help you documenting and also exponentially increasing your chances of ID. And finally, this is also a way to share with others something as quintessentially individual and personal as looking through binoculars or a scope. For example, when out and about with children or people who struggle using binos or who just can't get a decent and comfortable image with a scope, it's just so much fun to show them through the screen something that they would have otherwise missed.
 
Last edited:
First, there's the phone itself. Currently I have a Samsung, which lacks a feature I love from other brands (like Xiaomi or Nexus, IIRC), which is the option of being able to point to focus and use that point as a shutter, regardless of the position on the screen. I feel this is an advantage, since it makes focusing and shooting very fast and convenient when dealing with a subject like birds, that don't always stay put in the centre of the image.
Did you try a different camera app? I don't like the Samsung camera app myself, and I use Open Camera. Might be worth a try.

Hermann
 
@Hermann I've always been a great fan of Google phones. I had a Nexus 4 and 5, and then a Pixel 4a (which had the best form factor size/weight ratio ever -I don't like large smartphones, which are the vast majority)... but on the Pixel 4 there was no "Pro mode", so I tried a lot of camera apps, I remember installing the 5 most highly rated (even pricier ones), but all of them were quite disappointing. Some couldn't make use of all the power of the otherwise lovely camera, some showed a very dark image when in use, others were simply poorly design, so I ended up giving the Pixel to my partner and getting a Xiaomi, basically because I need a "Pro mode" and more manual controls. I like Xiaomi's camera app; it's a no nonsense functional app that helps delivering more or less what I look for. In fact, my current Samsung S22 has a much better camera than the Xiaomi 9SE I had before, but I could make the images on the old/worse phone show more of what I want (in terms of ID, magnification, etc.). As for Google, it seems that finally in 2023 Google has regained the sense to bring back a"Pro mode" with their latest Pixel model (and my understanding is that now that app-software can be retrofitted to previous models).

As for the Open Camera. After reading your message last night I installed it, but I'm not 100 % sure if I chose the correct one, because the interface seemed a little dated and for some reason the resolution of the pictures was very poor (I don't know if the Samsung phone has a "limiting software" to make 3rd party camera apps work worse, but the result was quite appalling). As I said, I don't know whether it was the app or something I did. Have a look at this. Left, Samsung camera (as is, native). Right, Open Camera. Both shoot at 10x. No editing.

Samsung_Open.jpeg

Maybe what Samsung does is disabling the powerful post-processing software that helps producing sharp and crisp images, thus feeding the 3rd party app a poorer image that would need further editing and processing afterwards. I don't know what it is, but the difference is shocking.

For me the Samsung camera app is OK (I prefer Xiaomi), but the big thing I miss is the ability to touch-focus-shoot.
 
Last edited:
I have found with both ball heads and tripod legs that the manufacturers' load rating are often exaggerated. With the ball heads the problem has been with flexing between the ball and platform mount. With tripod legs is is either flexing of the leg with weight applied or torsional flexing at the spider where the legs are joined. Only with old Gitzo, Feisol, and RRS legs have the load ratings of the legs been accurate 100% of the time. Only with Kirk and RRS and Arca-Swiss heads has the payload rating proven to be accurate. For these reasons I am sure to buy from a reseller that makes returns easy to do and provides a full refund without restocking charges.

Weight is not all that important as few people carry a tripod and ball head miles on any given outing. If I am going miles from my vehicle I leave the tripod at home and maybe use a monopod but for the most part use my binoculars instead of a spotting scope and shoot with lenses on my camera that are easy to use hand held.
 
@Tiptonian Sure. It's an interesting question. I'll tell you about my experience doing it with some 4-5 different phones.

First, there's the phone itself. Currently I have a Samsung, which lacks a feature I love from other brands (like Xiaomi or Nexus, IIRC), which is the option of being able to point to focus and use that point as a shutter, regardless of the position on the screen. I feel this is an advantage, since it makes focusing and shooting very fast and convenient when dealing with a subject like birds, that don't always stay put in the centre of the image.

Anyway, you are right, you can use the focus wheel on the scope and simply let the phone follow that, which usually works allright (I understand some new phones have pretty sophisticated systems to follow a moving target and keep focus). However there are certain scenarios where this might not work that well. For example, when following a bird in flight over a wide stretch of blank sky. There your phone camera might struggle at times and end up losing focus while it keeps trying to refocus again and again to no avail. Also when using the zoom at higher magnification, where depth of field is very very shallow, or else when watching birds through or surrounded by vegetation, when you need to use the focus to "slice through" the leaves (the same way you do with your binoculars to spot warblers in thick bush). In this kind of situation lock the focus on the phone camera and simply use the focus wheel on the scope. This is also important to get a sharp focus of plumage or get your focus point right at a exact feature of interest, like the eye.

View attachment 1542065

When doing astro, like getting Saturn or Jupiter in focus this last technique is crucial. In fact, to avoid shake, what I do is go to the "pro" mode and use the phone camera focus to fine tune focus to the minute detail (and then use a Bluetooth shooter or else the camera auto-timer set at the minimum time, 2 seconds in my case, to avoid touching the screen, which would in turn create vibrations thus hindering focus). Furthermore, for extreme max zoom use or situations of extreme light conditions (blindingly bright sky or dark night sky) sometines a weird problem arises: the phone screen shows you what "you want to see" (like an image darkened by exposure compensation to get the right detail), but when you take the picture/video, the result is simply not like that at all, because the camera fails to capture those subtleties and it's whether burnt or too dark and lacking focus. In those occasions I use an "emergency measure" and simply record the screen, like in the following video (where you can also see how I was fine tuning the focus via the manual focus option in the "pro mode" of the phone camera).

View attachment 1542066

As for vignetting, I find it is crucial to get a little zoomed in to avoid the black circle vignette, and this is not only for aesthetic purposes, but also for aiding both in getting the correct exposure and focus.

If you don't zoom in, many times the camera makes an overall light reading and overexposes to compensate for the amount of black on the screen (and then, modern smartphone cameras usually overexpose anyway because people want every inch of their pictures to be bright, which is annoying for the ones like me who understand that in some pictures there are parts of the image that are meant to be dark). In fact, as a general rule, it's usually a good idea to use the exposure compensation to darken the image a bit (also because you are outdoors and sometimes that lovely image you saw on your screen under the Sun turns out to be a bit overexposed when you check it back home later on).
However, 3x is a lot of zoom (bear in mind that what your camera usually does is not actually zooming, but cropping, thus reducing the quality of the image, as in definition/resolution). Anyway, there's two sides to this. On one hand, the video mode is usually already zoomed in by default compared to the photo mode, so you usually need less zooming in to avoid vignetting. On the other hand, the apparent field of view usually increases as you increase magnification with your scope zoom (and then, it depends on the eyepiece, obviously. I've mainly used Opticron SDvL2 and Swarovski 20-60 zoom eyepieces, which have a pretty narrow AFOV at low mags). For pictures at lowish mags I usually get rid of the vignette at about 1,4-1,5 x, and for video even less. In fact, for video at high magnification I can go as low as 1,1 or simply not zoom in at all and get no vignetting. Now that I think about it, the slow-mo mode in my camera has no zoom, it's locked, you just can't zoom in to avoid vignetting. But if I go beyond 40-50x on the scope, I can get a nice clean image.

As a side note, remember how useful slow-mo can be to reveal detail that you might have skipped on the field. Check the goldeneye in the following video. Even though I've compressed the image greatly creating a GIF, and then sent it via WhatsApp (which further compresses it thus heavily losing quality), the slow motion action helps revealing the nictitating membrane working when the bird's head comes out of the water.

View attachment 1542067

I would say I only use 3x for extreme ID situations, where the image quality (as in "aesthetic resolution") doesn't matter. In those cases I might also want to boost the exposure to actually burn the image to a point that a hidden feature of the plumage or beak is revealed. For example, if I want to check whether the base of the beak of a bird is actually black (as it seems on an image taken under the Sun and "darkened" by contrast), or it's actually paler, or orange like the lower part of the beak of a female king fisher. But then, this is something you can also do back home with some dedicated apps. I use Snapseed for pictures and Inshot for videos.

I hope this was helpful, but just let me know if you need further clarification. I find phonescoping is really convenient, because of the fact that you always carry a camera in your pocket, and with both your binoculars or your scope you can not only get nice images, but also learn a lot and help you documenting and also exponentially increasing your chances of ID. And finally, this is also a way to share with others something as quintessentially individual and personal as looking through binoculars or a scope. For example, when out and about with children or people who struggle using binos or who just can't get a decent and comfortable image with a scope, it's just so much fun to show them through the screen something that they would have otherwise missed.
Thanks, Yarrellii - that was very helpful!
 
As for the Open Camera. After reading your message last night I installed it, but I'm not 100 % sure if I chose the correct one, because the interface seemed a little dated and for some reason the resolution of the pictures was very poor (I don't know if the Samsung phone has a "limiting software" to make 3rd party camera apps work worse, but the result was quite appalling). As I said, I don't know whether it was the app or something I did. Have a look at this. Left, Samsung camera (as is, native). Right, Open Camera. Both shoot at 10x. No editing.

View attachment 1542379

Maybe what Samsung does is disabling the powerful post-processing software that helps producing sharp and crisp images, thus feeding the 3rd party app a poorer image that would need further editing and processing afterwards. I don't know what it is, but the difference is shocking.

For me the Samsung camera app is OK (I prefer Xiaomi), but the big thing I miss is the ability to touch-focus-shoot.
Open Camera does have a rather steep learning curve because you can change so many parameters. You can, for instance, change the resolution almost at will. And you can tweak the interface so it fits your needs. On all my Android phones over the years (mostly Samsung) we (my partner and me) used Open Camera, and we consistently get better results than with the Samsung camera app.

Hermann
 
@Hermann This sounds very promising, thank you for the clarification. I've already started to tinker with the settings (I've discovered that quality was set to 90 % by default). I'll see how far I can take it 😊
 
Having owned the MVH500AH, the Sirui VA-5 and the Sirui VH-10 i agree with your comments…

More than the weight, i found the Manfrotto oversized bulky. By contrast the Sirui VA-5 is a beautiful little head that balances the tripod well especially when the tripod itself is being carried, AND allows full sized scopes to be used.

some photos below from left to right: Swaro BTX 115mm on the Sirui VH-10, Zeiss Diascope 85mm on the VA-5, Zeiss Diascope 85mm on MVH500AH, Swaro ATS80HD on the MVH500A……

you can probably tell I’m a big fan of Sirui products!!!
safaridreaming, could you please provide a picture with the Swarovski BTX and 115mm on the manfrotto mvh500ah?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top