-
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.
spotting scope for Canon 10D ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter szybszy
- Start date
If money is no object, look into the Teleview 85 or 76. Both can be used as telephoto lenses, or with the eyepiece in for higher magnification. You have to buy adapters, of course, but they are available at Teleview also. Both scopes are rated at the top by the Norwegians and by the Americans. I admit to some bias as I have the 85, but only after trying a Celestron C5 and a Swarovski ST80. I'm sure you will get other suggestions also.
scampo
Steve Campsall
I don't digiscope, but I believe that several birding scopes could be used and a 30x wide angle objective seems to be the most popular - in increasing cost:
Opticron ES80
Kowa 823
Nikon ED82
Leica Apo-Televid 77
Zeiss 85T*
Swarovski ED80
All of these use multicoated "ED" or "APO" objective lenses that are required to give minimum flare and colour aberrations.
Opticron ES80
Kowa 823
Nikon ED82
Leica Apo-Televid 77
Zeiss 85T*
Swarovski ED80
All of these use multicoated "ED" or "APO" objective lenses that are required to give minimum flare and colour aberrations.
Jay Turberville
Well-known member
szybszy said:
I don't use a DSLR for digiscoping and while a few people have experiemented with it, I don't really know of anybody who uses a DSLR regularly for digiscoping. Mirror slap is apparently a problem and so too is the optical SLR view through the scope. F-numbers for digiscoping setups tend to be high. For instance, you are looking at f-21 when using an 80mm scope at 20x. I'd imagine that the view on the focusing screen would get pretty dim pretty quickly. Such f-numbers may also make it necessary to bump up the ISO sensitivity which could negate some of the benefits of the low noise sensors found in DSLRs.
If you do give it a go, then larger apertures would matter - though the difference between 80 and 85 is slight. It will also be important to match eyepieces to lenses in order to get a good result. Trial and error or testimonials from others are the best route on that front.
All in all, I'd expect you would find it easier to simply mount the scope as a lens and to look for a scope based on which one has the best reputation when used in that way.
Jay Turberville
Well-known member
scampo said:
Well yeah. That's why I suggested that type of use rather than digiscoping. Perhaps the way I put it wasn't clear.
The traditional method is to attach the scope as a lens to the camera body - focally. Often times an adapter is used that has a telenegative lens in it for additional magnification.
Digiscoping (afocal coupling - using a camera lens, eyepiece and scope) typically introduces a greater amount of magnification and consequently a larger f-number. You could digiscope with lower magnification and reduce the f-number, but to get the f-number low enough you may as well attach the scope directly as a lens and simplify the optical path.
This is overly simplistic, but I think it makes the general point. Digiscoping tends to work well with "digicams" because the small sensors (8.93mm diagonal) and smaller lenses more closely approximate the human eye than the larger lenses and sensors of SLRs. Spotting scopes were designed to work well with the human eye or the human eye with glasses. When you add the continuously on and amplified LCD monitor and super low vibration shutters typically found on a digicam, you have a matchup - unintended by the various manufacturers - that happens to work out pretty well.
DSLRs are superior to "digicams" in many ways. But afocally coupling to a spotting scope is not really one of them. Its probably best to attach your scope to a DSLR the way people have been attaching them to SLRs for years. And yes, I'd expect DSLRs to work even better. You certainly can afocally couple to a DSLR if you want to. I just don't think many people will find the combination satisfactory.
Victor Meldrew
Well-known member
Is the adapter (that mounts the camera minus its lens to a scope) a camera accessory or a scope one?
I'm considering buying a 300D and wondering whether I'd be better trying to digiscope with it or to save up for a long lens instead. How do I work out the magnification of a camera lens in scope terms?
I'm currently using a Canon G2 with a Zeiss 85 for digiscoping. I haven't invested in a proper adapter yet as I've had some reasonable results just hand holding. However if I know that I'll be able to use the 300D (which I'll probably be buy for landscape work anyway) I'd rather spend my money on adapters for that.
Any advice appreciated.
I'm considering buying a 300D and wondering whether I'd be better trying to digiscope with it or to save up for a long lens instead. How do I work out the magnification of a camera lens in scope terms?
I'm currently using a Canon G2 with a Zeiss 85 for digiscoping. I haven't invested in a proper adapter yet as I've had some reasonable results just hand holding. However if I know that I'll be able to use the 300D (which I'll probably be buy for landscape work anyway) I'd rather spend my money on adapters for that.
Any advice appreciated.
Jay Turberville
Well-known member
Your Zeiss 85 has a focal length of around 500mm. The Zeiss Photo Adapter turns this into a 1000mm focal length lens. The smaller than 35mm sized CCD of your 300D give you 1.6X "multiplication" factor, so the scope will give the same field of view as a 1600mm lens on a 35mm camera. Given the scope's 85mm objective size and 1000mm actual focal length with the adapter, the effect will be that of using a 1600mm lens with an f8.5 fixed aperture.
This would fall squarely in the low to mid end of the digiscoping range.
This would fall squarely in the low to mid end of the digiscoping range.
GR Triever
Well-known member
scampo said:
Steve,
A little OT for this thread, but I have to ask... can you really buy a Televid 77-APO for less than a Zeiss 85? Here in the states, the Leica was several hundred dollars higher.
Regards,
GR
scampo
Steve Campsall
Indeed it's so. Here are today's typical prices, all with zoom:
Zeiss 85T*: £1128-00
Swarovski ATS80HD: £1399-00
Nikon ED82: £1078-00
Leica Apo Televid 77: £928-00
Kowa 823M: £858-00
Opticron ES80: £529-00
I hadn't realised the Kowa was that low - that makes it a very attractive deal, although, for me, the super-bright but compact Nikon, with its 82mm objective, is still very much the front runner.
Zeiss 85T*: £1128-00
Swarovski ATS80HD: £1399-00
Nikon ED82: £1078-00
Leica Apo Televid 77: £928-00
Kowa 823M: £858-00
Opticron ES80: £529-00
I hadn't realised the Kowa was that low - that makes it a very attractive deal, although, for me, the super-bright but compact Nikon, with its 82mm objective, is still very much the front runner.
GR Triever
Well-known member
Wow... what a difference geography makes! The latest prices from B&H in the US are:
Leica Televid77-APO $1894.00
Swaro ATS80HD $1918.00
Zeiss 85T*FL $1629.00
Leica Televid77-APO $1894.00
Swaro ATS80HD $1918.00
Zeiss 85T*FL $1629.00
scampo
Steve Campsall
At current rates (~$1.82 = £1-00, amazingly!)....
Leica: £1040-00
Swaro: £1053-00
Zeiss: £895-00
Nikon = £732-00
So only Leica are playing fair! Swaro, Nikon and Zeiss are playing the far more usual, "Let's charge the Brits the most, game...". I'm impressed now with Leica, but I'd be buying Nikon or Zeiss on that basis; indeed, at those prices, the Zeiss and Nikon are a "steal".
Leica: £1040-00
Swaro: £1053-00
Zeiss: £895-00
Nikon = £732-00
So only Leica are playing fair! Swaro, Nikon and Zeiss are playing the far more usual, "Let's charge the Brits the most, game...". I'm impressed now with Leica, but I'd be buying Nikon or Zeiss on that basis; indeed, at those prices, the Zeiss and Nikon are a "steal".
GR Triever
Well-known member
...exactly the reason I ended up going for the Zeiss. The vendor's price at the time was $1500USD, which was approx. $300USD less than the Leica and $600USD less than the Swaro. Plus with Zeiss' "special, buy the scope, get a free tripod (Manfrotto 055/128RC)" it was a great steal.
GR
GR
Victor Meldrew
Well-known member
Jay Turberville said:
Are you referring here to the range of usable shutter speeds?
I've just returned to this thread as I'm still unsure whether I'd have the same flexibility that I currently have digiscoping with my Canon G2 compact.
Fixed lens vs 10D or other SLR
From what I can learn from this subject, fixed lens cameras are better to use than SLR.
I have a 10D and am trying to set it up with a Kowa TSN-821M scope, TSN-PA2C photo adapter and T-mount. I need an adpater to go between the T-mount and photo adapter since both those parts have inside threads and won't fit. I've contacted some companies online and waiting for answers. I'm thinking now that maybe I should drag out the old CoolPix 950 and have a go with that with an appropriate adapter. How about using the new Canon Power Shot 1 with fixed zoom lens? Would that work with a scope?
From what I can learn from this subject, fixed lens cameras are better to use than SLR.
I have a 10D and am trying to set it up with a Kowa TSN-821M scope, TSN-PA2C photo adapter and T-mount. I need an adpater to go between the T-mount and photo adapter since both those parts have inside threads and won't fit. I've contacted some companies online and waiting for answers. I'm thinking now that maybe I should drag out the old CoolPix 950 and have a go with that with an appropriate adapter. How about using the new Canon Power Shot 1 with fixed zoom lens? Would that work with a scope?