to scope or long lens (1 Viewer)

Hi
I only joined the forum today and I have been reading many posts trying to come up with a definitive answer-- is there such a thing? - -I have been into photgraphy for some 40 years and have been into digital for about as long as it has been out there for the masses.
Recently we moved to Tasmania and now live in a mountain cabin with land and forest all round and it has stirred my interest in bird photography. Now from what I read and observe I am starting to gethe idea that digicsoping is a great way to get value out of a scope -- but that if you are in my situation -I own a small pair of Schneider binoculars and a couple of modest cameras FZ50 and Sony R1 - then I am faced with a considerable cost to get an improvement.

Which way to go -- A new DSLR - Canon for low noise? plus a good long tele lens- and that is a number I have not worked out yet but I know from my little FZ5 with its 35 to 420 mm equivalent lens I am going to need considerably more reach so at least 500-600 mm lens-- ? Cost - choice ?

OR I buy something like a Leitz trinovid and slap a compact on it - problem is I don't own anything in that area beyond a good Manfrotto tripod -so again the digits add up quickly -and the question rises -how easy is it to use? I cannot help but feel putting a compact on something as good as a Leitz (or its equivalent) is like putting a cheap piece of bottle glass on a good DSLR - it seems to negate all those beautiful optics- or am I wrong?

I have been driving my friendly camera dealer in SA (long term relationship) mad with questions- the alternatives- Apo or televid -62 or 77 version fixed eyepiece (not zoom I gather from messages read) the adapter --yikes $380Aus for a bit of plastic that makes me weep -

so should I put my limited cash towards a new DSLR and long lens - I am notlocked into any brand - or into the scope (dual purpose just watching through the windows plus occasional photos when the opportunity rises)

I think I know which method gets better results but i am open to suggestions - does one really need top optics for digiscoping if combining it with a compact camera?- I do not know of any places locally yet but I hope to explore Hobart soon -for optical treasures that is

sorry about the long winded waffle- it has been one of those days trying to get my ideas sorted

I havesome pics up on my flickr site including a few attempts at birds which will show why I want to get better results

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33361437@N00


regards
Ron Co from Yarlington (60-70 km north of Hobart on Mt Quoin) tasmania

Hi Ron,

Welcome to BirdForum! :t:

Have you read this http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=46673 excellent thread about the subject?

In my experience people who have previous experience on photography are usually not happy until they get a DSLR kit. People, who use a spotting scope for birdwatching may prefer the ability to take pics through their existing optics, but often they too get a DSLR eventually. As a non-serious digiscoper myself I would say: get an inexpensive DSLR body and an expensive lens (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony...). This way you will get the best pics and you will have the best control & feedback with your photography. Digiscoping is always lottery to some extent.

If you then wish for a super-powerful (1500-2500 mm), but relatively compact system (compared to a DSLR-supertele), high end digiscoping rig (like the Leica APO 77 + 20x/32x ep + a small compact digicam) will be a tried-and-true choice.

Best regards,

Ilkka

thanks Ilkka

Have you read this http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=46673 excellent thread about the subject?

I found this message shortly after posting my own question and you are right it is an excellent explanation and has helped me too- I am basically (at this stage) a photographer who wants to take bird photos- I do not know most birds from their eggs

So I am thinking of getting a scope for viewing only - leaning towards the Televid -not sure whether the Apo 62 for lightness or the 77 for its greater light ability (I assume the 77 mm is brighter than the 62) I was offered a 77 for about $2700Aus or the Apo 62 for $2300 but I really am uninformed - haven't seen or handled either and the shop I am talking to is across the Bass Strait back in Adelaide about 1500 km away- I also keep reading that the Swarofsky(spelling?) is an excellent scope but have not sourced one in Australia yet - no idea of price but I imagine similar to the Leitz offerings


As a non-serious digiscoper myself I would say: get an inexpensive DSLR body and an expensive lens (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony...). This way you will get the best pics and you will have the best control & feedback with your photography. Digiscoping is always lottery to some extent.


I am thinking of the Canon 400D although I have no real preference until I see and handle a camera- I bought an Olympus E10 years ago by touch - loved it - but rejected the E1 (although it is an excellent camera from the same maker) because it did not feel right in my hands- so I know I will decide which camera only after handling and testing it myself- I usually take a few memory cards along to test cameras and check the results .
My biggest doubt about the Canon is a choice of lens - anything worth having in Canon lenses costs an arm and a leg and I know I will not be happy with a cheap lens so I am also looking at the Alpha with possibly a 50-500 or similar monster I read about - but that also wil be determined if/when I can handle one. Many years ago I had a huge Tamron 200-500 and a Vivitar 800 mm catadioptic and neither was usable-one was too heavy for me (and that was 30+ years ago!) and the other was just too darn hard to hold steady even on a tripod

If you then wish for a super-powerful (1500-2500 mm), but relatively compact system (compared to a DSLR-supertele), high end digiscoping rig (like the Leica APO 77 + 20x/32x ep + a small compact digicam) will be a tried-and-true choice.

1500-2500 wow how hard to hold those steady? The Apo 66 I was offered has a zoom lens -I gather the fixed lens is a better choice --more decisions -and an angled viewer ( eyepiece?)

I'll slowly muddle my way through -I hope - just hope I get it right as the costs means it will be a one off choice - or does that qualify for "famous last words" in the field of bird photography?
thanks again
Ron

The newer Tamron 200-500 is one of the lightest of the "500" zooms, and reasonably compact.

rezMole said:

The newer Tamron 200-500 is one of the lightest of the "500" zooms, and reasonably compact.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that info - the old one was good but oh so heavy - I'll put it back on my list of lenses to look at -if i ever get time - still moving into the new place and there is a lot of work to do-- and this is retirement???

Ron

Tough call as to which way to go... digiscoping has the big advantage of higher magnification you really can't get near that level with a dslr. If you do decide on the digiscoping route you do need to invest in a top quality scope, the Leicas are excellent for this. Personally I'd go for the 77 over the 62 (either way make sure it's an APO), I've owned both and found that the extra light gathering of the 77 is a big advantage. The disadvantage of the 77 is the extra weight, it's a lot heavier than then the 62.

I've now moved over to using a dslr for most of my bird photography, you don't get quiet as much magnification as with digiscoping, but it's easier to use and the percentage of keepers is much higher. It can however be a real drain on the bank... I started with a cheap dslr and long zoom set up, but soon found I wanted to upgrade to a decent prime lens. Then of course you find you want a marco lens, and a wide angle... it goes on and on. The weight can add up too, my camera bag full of kit weighs in at over 11kg, so you know you've been carrying it.

Good luck with it which ever way you go.

If I may add from my experience in Australia if you are living in forest then for photos has to be a DSLR with a good lens. As for the camera suggest you read the threads to help you make your choice, the same for the lens. As to the scope, is Leica the only one you can source, Swarovski has a good rep for customer service and the Zeiss 85 with its zoom could be an excellent choice. But if the scope is just for birding save some money and get the Kowa 823/824 and the money saved can go towards the camera and lens. Don't forget you may also find a teleconverter useful.

Good luck

Robert

Robert L Jarvis said:

If I may add from my experience in Australia if you are living in forest then for photos has to be a DSLR with a good lens. As for the camera suggest you read the threads to help you make your choice, the same for the lens. As to the scope, is Leica the only one you can source, Swarovski has a good rep for customer service and the Zeiss 85 with its zoom could be an excellent choice. But if the scope is just for birding save some money and get the Kowa 823/824 and the money saved can go towards the camera and lens. Don't forget you may also find a teleconverter useful.

Good luck

Robert

Click to expand...

Hi again and thanks for the words of advice - I have been diving deep into the research on this forum and any other info I can glean from the internet - one of the tricky things I keep getting caught by is I will read a review of a scope say and then realise it was written in the tear 2000 or such - makes it even more difficult if there is no date on an article - and why is it every review tells you "this is the ultimate scope!" surely they cannot all be the best?

I am hoping to check out a few scopes when I go into Hobart next time - probably next week now - but at this stage I am applying the idea that I am primarily a photographer who wants to take bird photos and not a bird watcher as such - so I am inclined to look for a more modest scope purely for bird watching and put more money towards the eventual purchase of a good long lens DSLR combo --no rush . I still intend to check out the Leitz as it the only top scope in the city - the other places I have phoned have a variety of $500 range scopes so I will look at those but if the Leitz is easier to use etc I will probably bite the bullet and break the Visa card out still - no point saving up for my old age- it's here!! Heck if one cannot indulge oneself now then when? One shop has a Kowa but it is a 20-40 zoom and about $600 -sounds like it might be a pretty low end one from the prices I saw on the internet - most of them were well over $1000 for body only -- unless I am misreading things -they did not say which model it is

ah the joy of the hunt -- sometimes looking for an item is more fun than getting it - part of the reason I like to spend time on it and try to get it right- my last camera (Sony R1) was bought solely on reviews , I committed to it without seeing it - luckily I like it -the next one I have to be more careful with as it will involve matching it up with expensive glass - -sorry for the long windedness-I am in full waffle mode!
I'll get back when I have something - scope or camera - in hand

Ron

Ron Co said:

sorry for the long windedness-I am in full waffle mode!

Click to expand...

In which case you'll fit in just fine, Ron!

first image

Keith Reeder said:

In which case you'll fit in just fine, Ron!

Click to expand...

Thanks Keith

I am not sure if I know how to do this but - I'l ltry to attach a photo I took this afternoon which illustrates the sort of problem i am facing when deciding what to buy-- I was standing on a log surrounded by mud using my little Panasonic FZ5 at maximum zoom (equivalent to about 420 mm on 35 mm camera) mixed light -deep shade and direct sunlight , the black-headed honeyeaters were flitting in and out in their usual mad way pausing only momentarily once in a while - by watching them I was able to concentrate on a spot I saw them land and try to prefocus on it - but the spot focus is so inconsistent this was the only image out of a dozen that was even near focussed . As poor as this is I was trying to envisage myself with a big heavy lens on a DSLR or even more unlikely a scope -I was about 10 metres from the site but had to be that close as the weeds and reeds around the pond meant I could not be much further away

now how to attach an image???

I am not sure this is going to work so I'll put it on my flickr site also - it can be seen at
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=267603629&size=o
or
http://static.flickr.com/81/267603629_94c1212088_o.jpg

Ron

Ron
First up the combo of dslr and good lens might surprise you in that it may not be as heavy as you imagine. Check out www.warehouseexpress.com on the lenses which will give the specs, ie length and weight and check out the specs similarly on the DSLR bodies.

In the situation you had for the Honeyeaters a DSLR + Lens would have scored far more than a scope and compact. With the dslr it would have been quick enough to freeze any bird movement.

Good hunting and let us know how you got on.

Robert

Ron Co said:

...I am inclined to look for a more modest scope purely for bird watching and put more money towards the eventual purchase of a good long lens DSLR combo --no rush . I still intend to check out the Leitz as it the only top scope in the city - the other places I have phoned have a variety of $500 range scopes so I will look at those but if the Leitz is easier to use etc I will probably bite the bullet and break the Visa card out still

Click to expand...

Ron,

Sounds like you are having fun with your project :t:. It surely helps to have knowledge and experience on photography like you do.

If I may (again) list some features of the "top gun" spotting scopes with regard to digiscoping - that may or may not help in decision making.
- 77-85mm scopes are IMO much better in digiscoping than the 60-65mm ones. You can use the smaller, but you get better pics with the larger. It is unlikely that you will ever carry both the digiscope and DSLR/tele systems at the same time, so I doubt there is any advantage in a compact scope (unless you get the ultra-tiny Nikon ED50).
- The ED/HD/FL/APO Leicas, Swarovskis, Zeisses, Nikons and Kowas are optically so close to perfection and each other that you could just toss a coin and not make a mistake. Don't buy a "modest" scope if you ever think you *could* use it for digiscoping. Delay the purchase if necessary, but get the one you really like (=the best).
- Leica and Kowa have a 20x wide angle with good eye-relief. They are VERY good digiscoping eyepieces, which work with several good cameras.
- Zeiss, Swarovski and Nikon are very compact and lighter in weight than the Leica & Kowa.
- Zeiss has a VERY good wide-angled zoom eyepiece, which works both for birdwatching and digiscoping (but you have to pay more attention to the camera).
- Ergonomics are very important. Make sure you feel comfortable with focusing wheel, focusing speed, how easy it is to find the target, eye-relief, eyecups etc. Minor annoyances may become major during the years.

There is no ultimate scope, but here are the ultimate reviews of birding optics http://www.alula.fi/gb/optics.htm

Best regards,

Ilkka


ps. I agree with Robert that such rapidly moving birds practically can be photographed only with a DSLR. A scope + compact focuses just as inconsistently as your FZ5 - and is even more difficult to frame the bird.

the search continues

iporali said:

Ron,

Sounds like you are having fun with your project :t:. It surely helps to have knowledge and experience on photography like you do.

If I may (again) list some features of the "top gun" spotting scopes with regard to digiscoping - that may or may not help in decision making.
- 77-85mm scopes are IMO much better in digiscoping than the 60-65mm ones. You can use the smaller, but you get better pics with the larger. It is unlikely that you will ever carry both the digiscope and DSLR/tele systems at the same time, so I doubt there is any advantage in a compact scope (unless you get the ultra-tiny Nikon ED50).
- The ED/HD/FL/APO Leicas, Swarovskis, Zeisses, Nikons and Kowas are optically so close to perfection and each other that you could just toss a coin and not make a mistake. Don't buy a "modest" scope if you ever think you *could* use it for digiscoping. Delay the purchase if necessary, but get the one you really like (=the best).
- Leica and Kowa have a 20x wide angle with good eye-relief. They are VERY good digiscoping eyepieces, which work with several good cameras.
- Zeiss, Swarovski and Nikon are very compact and lighter in weight than the Leica & Kowa.
- Zeiss has a VERY good wide-angled zoom eyepiece, which works both for birdwatching and digiscoping (but you have to pay more attention to the camera).
- Ergonomics are very important. Make sure you feel comfortable with focusing wheel, focusing speed, how easy it is to find the target, eye-relief, eyecups etc. Minor annoyances may become major during the years.

There is no ultimate scope, but here are the ultimate reviews of birding optics http://www.alula.fi/gb/optics.htm

Best regards,

Ilkka


ps. I agree with Robert that such rapidly moving birds practically can be photographed only with a DSLR. A scope + compact focuses just as inconsistently as your FZ5 - and is even more difficult to frame the bird.

Click to expand...

Well the biggest surprise for me was when I finally got my hands on the Leitz Televid 77 plus an assortment of other scopes- I just could not get comfortable with any of them - first it took me forever to work out distance from the eyepiece and placement - at one stage I reached forward to check if the lens cap was still on the scope- it wasn't - -I had a similar problem some time ago when I tried my skills at rifle shooting (target only) using a club gun and scope - I was hopeless at it - I can shoot quite well with peep sights and open sights but I just could not come to grips with a scope- never did work out why - all sorts of talk about eye relief and such - ...
Long and short I have to do a rethink about the scope side of things - or go to a good optometrist ( i am long sighted with four sets of glasses for various distances- had a cataract op in my left eye last year -- but I am sure other folks with similar eyesight cope - perhaps it is a matter of conditioning oneself?)

In the meanwhile I am back on the hunt for the camera lens combo and after reading what has been said here and eleswhere I am 90% set on the Tamron 200-500 -IF I can get it in the appropriate fitting- just to be difficult I want it in the Pentax fitting ( for the soon to be released Pentax K10 which really appeals to me ) at this stage it seems it is only in Canon , Nikon and Sony/Minolta mounts- hopefully that might change. Maybe?

I tried the Canon 400D and 30D plus the Nikon D200 and 80 and the new Sony Alpha A100 - loved the handling of the Sony - very user friendly - no need to read a manual everything is easy to understand and use (but the noise at higher ISO is too much compared to Canon) - the Canon was OK but I did not like the metering (lack of true spot metering on the 400 ) and the Canon 30D is now "old" - no stabilisation or dust removal - the Nikon are good solid machines but nothing worked for me -I did manage to use a Sigma 50-500 on a D200 -- but the weight!!! No way I will be carrying that around the hills on my walks

So at this stage I am hoping the Pentax K10 will fit as a camera body but if i cannot get a Tamron 200-500 to use with it I may have to compromise and opt for one of the Canons - probably the 400D - dust removal and lighter -and cheaper or find an alternative lens for the Pentax if it is really appealing

- as for the scope issue I tried some Ultravids or some such (Leitz again) and they were great binoculars - I have a small pair of walk around Steiners ( little 8 x 22) so I may opt for a more powerful pair of Leitz for use from the house - for some reason I can fit binoculars much more naturally in spite of my mismatched eyes )

thanks for all your advice and help

Ron

I just responded to a very similar question on the Forum, so let me copy you with the same comments.

The sharpness or definition of decent scopes is limited by their diameter, a direct linear relationship. They do not have to be expensive to be good. Both my 100 mm and 74 mm f-8 scopes are fabricated. They both test to the limit of optical resolution, which means they could not be any sharper even if they were Apos. and cost a zillion. Although they are achromats, I see no false color and they have good contrast. The lenses cost $125 and $10 respectively.

The weak link in my system is trying to use the scopes in the prime focus mode with a SLR camera. The mechanical shutter in the E-300 jars the scopes so that sharp photos are not possible, even though the mirror is locked up and a 6 second delay is used with a pod. This problem is also reported on Birdforum. The severity of the problem is probably limited to long focus scopes. The 102 mm f-8 of course is an actual 875 mm scope, or 1750 mm in 35 mm equivalent. I will also be digiscoping with my 10 inch diameter 1200 mm reflector. The unsharpness caused by SLR vibration is a decades old charge even with conventional lenses.

I agree with Texun concerning the quality of the Canon A540 digicam for use in digiscoping. I just tried to buy one and had to get the new model A550. The optics are supposed to be the same. Initial tests show improved sharpness over the Oly SLR.

There are two primary concerns in choosing a camera for digiscoping:

#1. Is the camera sharp? There is a lot of old advice on the net. Check this out for yourself and go to Steves-Digicams, down-load the sample photo of the brick school house, and blow up the street sign wording and the number on the trash bin below it. The old Coolpix cameras now seem to be toast. Note also that the later cheapened SLR kit lenses (with and without plastic ELEMENTS) are not so great either.

#2. Is the lens system small and compact enough to fit within the optical image cone of the scope and eyepiece? Eyepieces with long eye relief are desirable. I confirm that the A550 works fine with an Orion Expanse 20mm eyepiece that is supposed to have a 17mm eye relief.
This should give you full frame without the use of zoom, or at least with a very minimum.

You can see some of my photos and scope data on the link below. Look for my name on the three pages. I like the eagle, cadinal, and grosbeak pictures.
http://www.ohiobirds.org/forum/viewforum.php?id=8

Gene Smith

Wait for another MONTH as Sony is bringing out a Semi-Pro camera..The Sigma 50-500mm is an excellent lense and far better than the 170-500 or the Tamron 200-500...The later is a bit better than the 170-500.
If the New Sony is not upto scratch then I would go the Canon 30D..Use them on a Tripod or BeanBag or Ergo Rest.
There again, the Nikon200 is quite good to.
The Choice is yours.

Smithhill said:

I just responded to a very similar question on the Forum, so let me copy you with the same comments.

The sharpness or definition of decent scopes is limited by their diameter, a direct linear relationship. They do not have to be expensive to be good. Both my 100 mm and 74 mm f-8 scopes are fabricated.

---. The unsharpness caused by SLR vibration is a decades old charge even with conventional lenses.

I agree with Texun concerning the quality of the Canon A540 digicam for use in digiscoping. I just tried to buy one and had to get the new model A550. The optics are supposed to be the same. Initial tests show improved sharpness over the Oly SLR.

There are two primary concerns in choosing a camera for digiscoping:

#1. Is the camera sharp? There is a lot of old advice on the net. Check this out for yourself and go to Steves-Digicams, down-load the sample photo of the brick school house, and blow up the street sign wording and the number on the trash bin below it. The old Coolpix cameras now seem to be toast. Note also that the later cheapened SLR kit lenses (with and without plastic ELEMENTS) are not so great either.

#2. Is the lens system small and compact enough to fit within the optical image cone of the scope and eyepiece? Eyepieces with long eye relief are desirable. I confirm that the A550 works fine with an Orion Expanse 20mm eyepiece that is supposed to have a 17mm eye relief.
This should give you full frame without the use of zoom, or at least with a very minimum.

You can see some of my photos and scope data on the link below. Look for my name on the three pages. I like the eagle, cadinal, and grosbeak pictures.
http://www.ohiobirds.org/forum/viewforum.php?id=8

Gene Smith

Click to expand...

Thanks for that Gene -amazing place this forum I put the original note up on my first post nearly 10 months ago - needless to say ten months on I am still searching for the holy grail of photography )
Only last week i picked up a cheap 500mm f8 lens on ebay --- I am now waiting impatiently for an adapter to use it on the camera but even hand held - lens against the camera mount -- it shows promise far better than I should expect of a cheap thing like this - I also tried to get my hands on a 400 Telyt but the owner will not playthe game and we have come to a stale mate - I won't buy it without trying it and he won' t get it modified to use on a Pentax(I have the K10 ) - at $750 I am unwilling to take it on trust -- maybe
Your birds shots are impressive - I do have a spotting scope I brought along to try but so far have not got a suitable camera - my FZ5 should be here next wwekk -I loaned it to a friend fora few months -so who knows i may be able to combine them and get some sort of results --I had thought of picking up a lower price device just for the exercise -the Leitz at $250Aus is a bit much just to try it out
I have the odd bird pic on my flickr site using my current set up of K10 and Tamron 70-300 -soon to include the 500mm I hope
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ron-alenka/

- the lad I loaned the FZ5 to has recently picked up a 1000mm MTO lens on ebay ($56!!) and is getting resonable results from that but it is a real beast to handle and control - it needs a lot of light !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/charles__and__victoria/

thanks for replying
Ron

MrScarecrow said:

Wait for another MONTH as Sony is bringing out a Semi-Pro camera..The Sigma 50-500mm is an excellent lense and far better than the 170-500 or the Tamron 200-500...The later is a bit better than the 170-500.
If the New Sony is not upto scratch then I would go the Canon 30D..Use them on a Tripod or BeanBag or Ergo Rest.
There again, the Nikon200 is quite good to.
The Choice is yours.

Click to expand...

LOL - Hi Mr Scarecrow - that is what I seem to be always doing -waiting for the next event in photography - but i appreciate and know what you mean - I have tried both the 50-500 and 170-500 -got "this close" to committing but when I reviewed my test photos I was not satisfied with what i was getting - probably user error as I see lots of great shots with both lenses - unfortuantely the Tamron is not available with the K10 mount -I like most things about the K10(Pentax) as a camera but admit i have been very frustrated in not being able to get much choice in the long lens department for it .The idea of another marque has been creeping up on me for some months now - just to get the long glass choice - I only read rumours of the next Sony in the last 24 hours - it sounds interesting an opens up a few more lens options - but I think next time I will tyr tyo find thelns and then get a body to fit it instead of the other way round first to find the perfect lens)
now we are off to Oatlands to check out the wetlands for birds - beautiful sunny day too good to be indoors

thanks for replying

Ron

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ron-alenka/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/charles__and__victoria/

MrScarecrow said:

The Sigma 50-500mm is an excellent lense and far better than the 170-500 or the Tamron 200-500...The later is a bit better than the 170-500.

Click to expand...

Where on earth did you get the "Far Better" From? ... It's better but only just
and that's in the right Hand's ... I'd enjoy seeing your proof on the Far better
please ... Thank's and Take care,
John,
By the way i used the 50-500 and Bought the 170-500 But that may be down to being a Canon Owner ... I'd never Buy Sony by the
way ... Go Canon every time ... I've had Nikon,Sony and Oly and Canon is my Favourite

Here's a couple i took when we had Sun last ... Two Week's ago i think ...
These were Handheld aswell ... Not too Bad for a 170-500 ...
Take care,
John,