Digiscoping with a DSLR & Swaro AT 80HD angled 'scope (1 Viewer)

I have been digiscoping for some time now with my Swarovski AT 80HD 'scope with angled 20-60 zoom eyepiece, using a conventional CP995 & then more recently CP4500.

I am now interested in the option of upgrading the camera to a DSLR, probably the Canon EOS 20D (or the similar Digital Rebel).

I read an interesting older thread (from 2004) about exactly this issue for the Digital Rebel and a Swarovski AT 80HD 'scope. The contributer (PWR) had clearly got this to work, but the example shown was for the straight eyepiece version of the 'scope, and involved a seemingly complex combination of the Zeiss quick adaptor, a Manfrotto sliding plate etc etc. Clearly this won't work for the angled version of the scope.

Does anyone have some advice about this? Is this a route worth taking? - these DSLRs are not cheap, and neither are the adaptors. Is the extra cost going to give me worthwhile improvements over my present CP4500.

Thanks in advance for any comment

Some members have suceeded in marrying the two, the best option seems to be to use the 50mm f1,8 lens connected to the Swaro DCA adaptor as this combo still utilises the scope eyepiece.

The alternative is to use the camera body with an SLR photo adaptor straight onto the scope body - the disadvantage being you lose all that extra magnification as no scope eyepiece is used.

That's in addition to the viewfinder being at an awkward angle and rather small and dark which doesn't aid focusing.

I'm still not convinced it's a worthwhile technique as with either method there is no added camera zoom. Every compact camera used in digiscoping adds at least 2-3x optical zoom in addition to the eyepiece magnification.

Stay with the 4500,it produces good results.There is no zoom when using an SLR.

Thanks very much to the two respondents above. I hadnt considered the lack of the zoom with a DSLR before - and I certainly use that with my CP4500.

I wonder if any users of the DSLR/Swarovski AT 80HD 'scope combo mentioned by IanF above would like to comment on how they have got on? Seeing some results would be interesting...

Incidently, is there any easy way of comparing the magnifications quoted for digital cameras (x2, x3 etc) with the focal lengths of DSLR lenses? The units are clearly different, and a true comparison would appear to need knowledge of the respective CCD chip sizes etc

stephenB said:

I have been digiscoping for some time now with my Swarovski AT 80HD 'scope with angled 20-60 zoom eyepiece, using a conventional CP995 & then more recently CP4500.

I am now interested in the option of upgrading the camera to a DSLR, probably the Canon EOS 20D (or the similar Digital Rebel).

I read an interesting older thread (from 2004) about exactly this issue for the Digital Rebel and a Swarovski AT 80HD 'scope. The contributer (PWR) had clearly got this to work, but the example shown was for the straight eyepiece version of the 'scope, and involved a seemingly complex combination of the Zeiss quick adaptor, a Manfrotto sliding plate etc etc. Clearly this won't work for the angled version of the scope.

Does anyone have some advice about this? Is this a route worth taking? - these DSLRs are not cheap, and neither are the adaptors. Is the extra cost going to give me worthwhile improvements over my present CP4500.

Thanks in advance for any comment

Click to expand...

Not the same scope but I use my 300d with my Nikon ed78 scope together with the FSA adapters that I had when I had a 4500. I gave up with the 4500 because I found it such a pain to get quality pictures. When I got the 300d last summer it was pure coincidence that the adapter just screwed to the 18-55 kit lens that came with the camera. At full zoom there is virtually no vignetting and because the view you get through the viewfinder is actually what you get through thelens and is also very clear and concise I find that now I take a picture throuh the scope and I get superb quality every time, no throways. Mind you I have now bought a longer zoom lens for the camera and I think that will take the place of digiscoping. I have attached a couple of them just cropped and a little unsharp mask.

bill lord said:

Not the same scope but I use my 300d with my Nikon ed78 scope together with the FSA adapters that I had when I had a 4500. I gave up with the 4500 because I found it such a pain to get quality pictures. When I got the 300d last summer it was pure coincidence that the adapter just screwed to the 18-55 kit lens that came with the camera. At full zoom there is virtually no vignetting and because the view you get through the viewfinder is actually what you get through thelens and is also very clear and concise I find that now I take a picture throuh the scope and I get superb quality every time, no throways. Mind you I have now bought a longer zoom lens for the camera and I think that will take the place of digiscoping. I have attached a couple of them just cropped and a little unsharp mask.

Click to expand...

Bill,
I've gone back and read several of your posts on this issue, and I was struck by how you didn't get much response from other expert digiscopers. I seem to have read 100 times on here and elsewhere that digiscoping works much better with compact digital cameras than DSLR's. The quoted reasons are: large lens size, large sensor size, mirror slap etc. Results are normally suggested to be dark and fuzzy. I'm curious: do you think that other people just weren't persistent/lucky enough to get this to work well? WRT your experience with the Nikon 4500, is it that you get better images with the DSLR than the compact, or more that you didn't like the handling/performance of the compact camera set-up? Finally, following up on one of the earlier questions: can you use your camera at all zoom levels? I'm just ordering a Nikon 82 ED so would really like to know!
Cheers,
ROb

bill lord said:

Not the same scope but I use my 300d with my Nikon ed78 scope together with the FSA adapters that I had when I had a 4500. I gave up with the 4500 because I found it such a pain to get quality pictures. When I got the 300d last summer it was pure coincidence that the adapter just screwed to the 18-55 kit lens that came with the camera. At full zoom there is virtually no vignetting and because the view you get through the viewfinder is actually what you get through thelens and is also very clear and concise I find that now I take a picture throuh the scope and I get superb quality every time, no throways. Mind you I have now bought a longer zoom lens for the camera and I think that will take the place of digiscoping. I have attached a couple of them just cropped and a little unsharp mask.

Click to expand...

Bill

I like your examples! Maybe there is more to this route than some suggest..
Can you clarify what the FSA adapters are that you use? Are these Nikon products for their 'scope? Also, the previous two replies indicated problems with lack of zoom with a DSLR. Do you find this an issue?

Stephen

lachlustre said:

Bill,
I've gone back and read several of your posts on this issue, and I was struck by how you didn't get much response from other expert digiscopers. I seem to have read 100 times on here and elsewhere that digiscoping works much better with compact digital cameras than DSLR's. The quoted reasons are: large lens size, large sensor size, mirror slap etc. Results are normally suggested to be dark and fuzzy. I'm curious: do you think that other people just weren't persistent/lucky enough to get this to work well? WRT your experience with the Nikon 4500, is it that you get better images with the DSLR than the compact, or more that you didn't like the handling/performance of the compact camera set-up? Finally, following up on one of the earlier questions: can you use your camera at all zoom levels? I'm just ordering a Nikon 82 ED so would really like to know!
Cheers,
ROb

Click to expand...

Perhaps I have been lucky, but my efforts at digiscoping with both my earlier Olympus 960Z and then the Nikon 4500 ended up with me spending ages setting things up struggling to be able to see the monitor on the back clearly ( and having to juggle between reading glasses and no glasses in the process) and then getting results of which I was less than pleased, plus one or two absolutely superb pictures.
Then last summer I decided that I would give up trying to digiscope and just go back to viewing and having been seduced by the price from Ebay of the Canon outlet Eos 300d's and enchanted by how easy taking pictures with one was, I bought my DSLR. When I got it I looked at the thread on the front of the lens and looked at my Nikon FSA1,2,3 adapters, took off the step ring that attached it to the 4500 and found it screwed directly to my EOS. So I tried it. It worked like a charm, and so much easier, no juggling my glasses, a clear view through the viewfinder to be able to focus properly with and quality pictures every time. Mind you I still have difficulty with little birds and moving birds that aren't patient enough for me to get set up and take their picture.
Drawbacks. I have an angled scope so I have to rotate the scope through 90 degrees to allow me to mount the camera horizontally so that I can set the zoom at it's fullest extent to get rid of the vignette, I am not prepared to allow the plastic body of the lens and the eyepiece to support the relatively heavy weight of the camera and lens, and holding it so that the zoom doesn't reduce is not particularly easy.
This almost amounts to handholding but the FSA adapters hold the camera quite still on the Scope, when I have taken a picture I can pull the camera straight off the eyepiece and use the scope, and because the DSLR produces images where noise is not a problem at high ISO figures I can use an ISO of 800 and even on occasion 1600 to get shutter speed approaching 1/1000 sec at f/8 which eliminates virtually all possibility of shake in the picture. The other plus is that when I press the button it takes a picture, no lag I get what I have just seen.
I'm not enough of a photographer to know much about mirror slap, the lens that came with the camera just happens to fit, if the lens is not at full zoom the image shows vignetting, but at full zoom it is sharp and clear, and the pictures I get from it whilst digiscoping are all clear and bright, those that are not as good are down to me not the camera or the setup.To be honest for some reason me and the 4500 just didn't get on I can't say why.
I went to Bempton cliffs last June just after I had got the camera and my first attempts at digiscoping were there. I can remember standing in one bay overlooking the cliffs where there were already several digiscopers with Nikon 4500 setups connected to scopes, and they like I had were squinting at the screen on very bright day. I setup, connected my camera found the puffins took several pictures and those there were quite surprised at the ease with which it was done and the quality of the results.
I have attached some more images, the Oystercatcher was with the 4500 and I spent ages trying to get it But I am pleased with it. All it has had is to be reduced in size to post here. The kingfisher is now uncropped just reduced in size for posting. Then I have included a picture of Bempton cliffs taken at full zoom from the EOS no scope just setting the scene for the other two. The puffin you can just see off the centre of the picture at about 10 o'clock and in the shade, the gannets were way down at the bottom of the cliffs about as far away as you can see. None of these pictures has been touched apart from reducing in size for posting. Once I had taken these pictures with the ease that I had as I have kept saying it was no contest.

stephenB said:

Bill

I like your examples! Maybe there is more to this route than some suggest..
Can you clarify what the FSA adapters are that you use? Are these Nikon products for their 'scope? Also, the previous two replies indicated problems with lack of zoom with a DSLR. Do you find this an issue?

Stephen

Click to expand...

If you go to the Warehouse Express site, select photography and the digiscoping and then Nikon very near the top you will find the Nikon FSA1 FSA2 and FSA3 section all three for £69.99. this is what I have. I bought a Nikon 4500 camera from Scampo and the adapters came with it. These are designed by Nikon for their scopes and I use them on My Nikon ED78 with the 25-75 zoom, always with the zoom at it's lowest setting. As I have said I'm not that much of a photographer and I have always used just enough zoom to get rid of any vignetting indeed I found that too much zoom used on the 4500 gave me very soft focus on the images. So no I don't miss the zoom. Mind you as I have also said somewhere recently, I have just bought a not expensive Sigma 28-300 lens for the Eos and having been out with that I am much more likely now to use that than digiscop, plus I have 2X converter arriving tommorow. So with a combined maximum lens of 960mm I think that most things will be in reach. For those that are not I will digiscope.

Smaller scope and DSLR or larger scope with no DSLR?

Hello everyone! I have a big dilemma and I need some advise from people that know a lot about this stuff. I have a Nikon D70 and I wanted to buy a Nikon spotting scope. Unfortunately I have just found out that you cannot attach the two, not even with the new FSA1, so I need to go for a fieldscope. The Nikon ED 82mm one is a bit expensive for my pockets, do you think it's worth going for a 60mm fieldscope and my D70, or would it be better to go for a better spotting scope and buy another digital camera (i.e. not a DSLR?). I am primarily a bird watcher, so I thought that a better scope that gives me more light and a clearer image would be better for me, but I would also really want to try digiscoping. Any advise? Thank you!

bill lord said:

Drawbacks. I have an angled scope so I have to rotate the scope through 90 degrees to allow me to mount the camera horizontally so that I can set the zoom at it's fullest extent to get rid of the vignette, I am not prepared to allow the plastic body of the lens and the eyepiece to support the relatively heavy weight of the camera and lens, and holding it so that the zoom doesn't reduce is not particularly easy.
This almost amounts to handholding but the FSA adapters hold the camera quite still on the Scope, when I have taken a picture I can pull the camera straight off the eyepiece and use the scope, and because the DSLR produces images where noise is not a problem at high ISO figures I can use an ISO of 800 and even on occasion 1600 to get shutter speed approaching 1/1000 sec at f/8 which eliminates virtually all possibility of shake in the picture. .

Click to expand...

Hi again Bill

I see you have expanded your original reply. The bit above really interests but also puzzles me. You say you have to rotate your angled scope through 90 degrees to get the camera horizontal. So how do you support the camera in this position? By hand?

Stephen

stephenB said:

Hi again Bill

I see you have expanded your original reply. The bit above really interests but also puzzles me. You say you have to rotate your angled scope through 90 degrees to get the camera horizontal. So how do you support the camera in this position? By hand?

Stephen

Click to expand...

The adapter holds the camera quite securely on the eyepiece, but I am reluctant to allow the eyepiece to support the complete weight of the camera, nor am I happy about allowing the plastic case of the camera lens to do the same, so I leave some support for the camera on my hands. When I can get at the camera and the adapter and the scope I will try to photograph the setup and post it but the equipment is at a different location at the moment.

Daria said:

Hello everyone! I have a big dilemma and I need some advise from people that know a lot about this stuff. I have a Nikon D70 and I wanted to buy a Nikon spotting scope. Unfortunately I have just found out that you cannot attach the two, not even with the new FSA1, so I need to go for a fieldscope. The Nikon ED 82mm one is a bit expensive for my pockets, do you think it's worth going for a 60mm fieldscope and my D70, or would it be better to go for a better spotting scope and buy another digital camera (i.e. not a DSLR?). I am primarily a bird watcher, so I thought that a better scope that gives me more light and a clearer image would be better for me, but I would also really want to try digiscoping. Any advise? Thank you!

Click to expand...

Have a look at the warehouse express site and look in the photographic/digiscoping/nikon section. There you will find a set of adapters to fit the Nikon RA1. RA2 Ra2a 80 and 80a series scopes. The adapter is labelled the SSA1 SSA2 and SSA3 for £49.99. If it is basically similar to the FSA adapter the external diameter thread on the SSA3 will be 58mm. All you would then need would be a step ring to convert the filter thread on your D70 to the 58mm for the adapter. I was lucky with my Canon 300d in that the 18-55 kit lens comes with a 58mm filter thread.

bill lord said:

The adapter holds the camera quite securely on the eyepiece, but I am reluctant to allow the eyepiece to support the complete weight of the camera, nor am I happy about allowing the plastic case of the camera lens to do the same, so I leave some support for the camera on my hands. When I can get at the camera and the adapter and the scope I will try to photograph the setup and post it but the equipment is at a different location at the moment.

Click to expand...

Photographs as promised. The first one is of the FSA1 attached to the scope, it lives here permanently, the second one is of the FSA screwed onto the FSA1 as you can see it prevents access to the zoom, picture 3 is of the FSA3 Picture four is of the FSA3 attached to the Eos, and picture 5 shows the EOS attached onto the scope. However, when the lens is zoomed out there is a movement where the tube comes out of the lens and I am very reluctant to allow the camera to hang on this, which is why I give it some support under the camera body. By using relatively high ISO speeds I get shutter speeds of approx 1/1000 at f/8 and so far no camera shake. It might be a different matter in poorer light, but I am a fair weather birder and hence a fair weather digiscoper.

bill lord said:

Photographs as promised. The first one is of the FSA1 attached to the scope, it lives here permanently, the second one is of the FSA screwed onto the FSA1 as you can see it prevents access to the zoom, picture 3 is of the FSA3 Picture four is of the FSA3 attached to the Eos, and picture 5 shows the EOS attached onto the scope. However, when the lens is zoomed out there is a movement where the tube comes out of the lens and I am very reluctant to allow the camera to hang on this, which is why I give it some support under the camera body. By using relatively high ISO speeds I get shutter speeds of approx 1/1000 at f/8 and so far no camera shake. It might be a different matter in poorer light, but I am a fair weather birder and hence a fair weather digiscoper.

Click to expand...

Bill

Very interesting. The pics are useful, but could I check a couple of points? Firstly, can you confirm you are using the normal 'scope eyepiece? - I am not familiar with the Nikon eyepiece.

Secondly, I think I recall reading somewhat on this forum that the DSLR lens rotates when it focusses (or zooms?). Is this true, and if so how do you cope with it?

Stephen

stephenB said:

Bill

Very interesting. The pics are useful, but could I check a couple of points? Firstly, can you confirm you are using the normal 'scope eyepiece? - I am not familiar with the Nikon eyepiece.

Secondly, I think I recall reading somewhat on this forum that the DSLR lens rotates when it focusses (or zooms?). Is this true, and if so how do you cope with it?

Stephen

Click to expand...

The eyepiece is the MCII 25-75 zoom with the turn up eye mounts. The zoom moves the front of the lens in and out but only by a small amount and I use it at full zoom anyway. Focussing with the scope attached I always use manual focus and yes the this is achieved by turning the end of the lens, but there are lenses that this is not the case for. Focussing is not a problem since I have found that once the camera is focussed then it stays in focus and I have to adjust the focus on the scope if I move it at all or the subject moves. Again this is not a problem because of the clear image seen in the viewfinder.

bill lord said:

The eyepiece is the MCII 25-75 zoom with the turn up eye mounts. The zoom moves the front of the lens in and out but only by a small amount and I use it at full zoom anyway. Focussing with the scope attached I always use manual focus and yes the this is achieved by turning the end of the lens, but there are lenses that this is not the case for. Focussing is not a problem since I have found that once the camera is focussed then it stays in focus and I have to adjust the focus on the scope if I move it at all or the subject moves. Again this is not a problem because of the clear image seen in the viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Thanks Bill for all the info. I might well give it a go, though it doesnt sound that easy to me! I wonder about whether something like the Avian Digimaster might provide a more robust solution, and will now look through these forums for info on it.

stephenB said:

Thanks Bill for all the info. I might well give it a go, though it doesnt sound that easy to me! I wonder about whether something like the Avian Digimaster might provide a more robust solution, and will now look through these forums for info on it.

Click to expand...

Looking at the avian digimaster it would certainly be a lot more robust and probably more use to someone who wanted to digiscope a lot more than I do. As I keep saying I was lucky that I had the Nikon adapter for a Nikon scope that just happened to fit my camera. Looking back up the thread you would be wanting to use it on a Swarovski scope and I do not know wheter there is a comparable swarovski adapter. In my case it just happened to be right, I would not have worried if it hadn't been, and I probably wouldn't have invested the money for the adapter just to try it. As it is I have recently bought a Sigma 28-300 lens for the camera for £90 and I'm getting some good pictures from that I shall probably concentrate on that rather than bother with much digiscoping.