• 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.

Nikon cp990+pentax pf80ed vs. canon digital rebel+400mm f5.6L (1 Viewer)

Paulyoly

Well-known member
I got bored today and thought i'd do some comparison shots with my digiscope setup and my digital rebel. here are two pics taken from the same distance, the nikon pic was only resized to 640x480 the canon pic was cropped and then resized to 640x480, i had to blow the canon pic up to 50% in order for the cans to be the same size as the scoped cans. I figure that puts the pentax with xl28 eyepiece+cp990 zoomed in to full zoom in macro mode(just before the tulip turns back white) to around 1300mm.

http://www.pbase.com/image/22749267

http://www.pbase.com/image/22749268

now here are two 100% crops, the scope crop was teaken from 60 feet while the canon was taken from 30 feet.

scope
http://www.pbase.com/image/22748443

rebel, keep in mind that i did not sharpen this pic and it was shot in parameter 2 which is low sharpening for the rebel, i sharpened the rebel resize to make it fair.
http://www.pbase.com/image/22747868
 
Feel free to comment people. My personal opinion is that if nikon would make a 5 megapixel cp990 camera with lower noise and autofocus comparable to an slr it would rival the big expensive prime lenses atleast for slow moving birds. This is basically a 1300mm f4 Lens, imagine haveing a 6 megapixel camera and being able to crop.
 
Paulyoly said:
Feel free to comment people. My personal opinion is that if nikon would make a 5 megapixel cp990 camera with lower noise and autofocus comparable to an slr it would rival the big expensive prime lenses atleast for slow moving birds. This is basically a 1300mm f4 Lens, imagine haveing a 6 megapixel camera and being able to crop.

In comparisons like these, I really like to see cropped full resolution sections of images that have not been altered. But it seems to me that the DSLR has more contrast and better edge sharpness.

BTW, the CP5000 is 5MP and works just fine for digiscoping - though you have a more limited amount of camera zoom available to you.
 
If anybody goes down the Canon route I have a 170 - 500mm Sigma/Canon lens for sale as I can't afford the digital body!

James
 
Jay Turberville said:
In comparisons like these, I really like to see cropped full resolution sections of images that have not been altered. But it seems to me that the DSLR has more contrast and better edge sharpness.

BTW, the CP5000 is 5MP and works just fine for digiscoping - though you have a more limited amount of camera zoom available to you.

Thanks for the reply Jay, you should go back and reread my original post, i supplied links to 100% crops that are unedited, the scope crop was taken from 60 feet and the dslr crop was taken from 30 feet. Here is the scope at 30 feet, this is a 7??x4?? crop from the original 3mp image, no resizeing was done.
scope
http://www.pbase.com/image/22748444

dslr
http://www.pbase.com/image/22747868

here's the scope at 60 feet
http://www.pbase.com/image/22748443

Your right the dslr wins in contrast, as for sharpness is harder to tell since the scope at the same distance is so much larger and no sharpening was added to the dslr pics were as the nikon sharpens in camera. when shooting at distances of 100 yards the extra reach of the scope really shines, the scope works much better for small birds also.
 
As for the cp5000, i guess i'd have to try it myself, i've heard the focus is not as good as the cp990/4500. I've only seen a few good shots using the cp5000, while there are thousands of great shots with the other two nikons.
 
Paulyoly said:
Thanks for the reply Jay, you should go back and reread my original post, i supplied links to 100% crops that are unedited, the scope crop was taken from 60 feet and the dslr crop was taken from 30 feet.

Geez - I must have had brain fade yesterday. Sorry 'bout that.

I haven't used the CP990 or CP4500. I use the CP995 and CP5000. So I can't compare directly.

But according to a poll that Roy Halpin conducted on the Yahoo forum "digiscopingbirds", the CP990 and CP4500 represent slightly over 50% of all Nikons used for digiscoping while the CP5000 represented 7%. The CP5000 is not commonly used so it should be no surprise that few good shots from it are seen as there are simply a lot fewer shots taken.

http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/PollResults.html

Besides, most shots seen are websized which makes meaningful comparisons in sharpness pretty difficult.

Here are a couple of shots I took today with my CP5000. These are full resolution images. I have included sharpened images as well as the original shots.

http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/fullrez/
(shots are of juvenile white crowned sparrow and a male gila woodpecker.)

The images were taken with a Swarovski ATS 80 HD using the 20-60x eyepiece at 20x under overcast skies. Camera autofocus was used for both.

The gila woodpecker was taken at a 16.2mm camera zoom. This equates to a 1287mm equivalent lens of f4.05.

The white crowned sparrow was taken at a 21.4mm camera zoom. This equates to a 1700mm equivalent lens of f5.35.

There are no tomato soup cans shown, so direct comarisons to your shots are not possible. But this should give you a reasonable idea of what to expect.

It is my opinion that pixel for pixel, the quality of the CP5000 image is essentially the same as a CP995 image. As such, it lacks a bit of the "snap" that the CP990 seems to provide. Opinions differ as to whether the CP4500 has the same "snap" as the CP990. I think the CP5000's 5MPs more than makes up for any edge the CP990 might have in contrast. Other than that, I'll let the images speak for themselves.
 
Jay, i think you would benefit from a fixed eyepiece. I don't think the cp990 is a better camera than the cp5000 or the 4500, but i do think the pentax xl-28 eyepiece is better suited for digiscoping than any zoom eyepiece. someone on here adapted the pentax eyepiece to the swarovski scope. Of course the zoom is more versatile, but for me being a photographer first sharpness is what matters. I do take pics of other things besides cans of soup. These were all taken at 30 feet or less except for the last one which was 15 feet. 100% crops no post processing.

http://www.pbase.com/image/22080216

http://www.pbase.com/image/22881306

http://www.pbase.com/image/22881307

http://www.pbase.com/image/22881304

http://www.pbase.com/image/22881305

If i can get 15 feet from the bird then i can count the mites on his/her feathers. Of course at this distance it's hard to fit the whole bird in the frame unless it's a hummingbird.
http://www.pbase.com/image/22881303

Do you shoot in macro mode? I rarely ever shoot at full zoom and stay in macro mode. it gives me the best results. I dare say that any camera with a good macro mode will give good results with this scope/eyepiece
 
Last edited:
Paulyoly said:
Jay, i think you would benefit from a fixed eyepiece. I don't think the cp990 is a better camera than the cp5000 or the 4500, but i do think the pentax xl-28 eyepiece is better suited for digiscoping than any zoom eyepiece. someone on here adapted the pentax eyepiece to the swarovski scope. Of course the zoom is more versatile, but for me being a photographer first sharpness is what matters. I do take pics of other things besides cans of soup.

Oh - I thought maybe cans were your specialty. ;)

Yes, I agree with the fixed focal length eyepiece recommendation. Those images are from my first outing with the Swaro and zoom eyepiece and I expected a bit more sharpness from the combo. I'm looking into the possibility of getting the Swaro 30X SW. It might provide a sharper view, but certainly will provide a significantly greater camera zoom range with its 66 degree AFOV.

If you look at the out of focus background elements of the images I posted a link to, you can see some orange and green fringing. I suspect this may be part of the source of the image's softness. I'll have to do some side by side testing of the 995 and the 5000 with this scope and eyepiece to see if it the way the scope and eyepiece are interacting with the CP5000 lens.

Paulyoly said:
Do you shoot in macro mode? I rarely ever shoot at full zoom and stay in macro mode. it gives me the best results. I dare say that any camera with a good macro mode will give good results with this scope/eyepiece

It is difficult to get into the macro range with the CP5000 and the 20-60x. The white crowned sparrow was barely there. But yes, I usually shoot in macro mode. I'm not sure if the issue really is full zoom or total magnification. Only testing can tell for sure. Your results, which are very sharp, have me wondering if there really is some aspect of the CP990 that makes it better for digiscoping than subsequent Coolpixes. More testing - especially with a good fixed focus eyepiece will probably be needed to tell for sure. I added an additional image DSCN0318.jpg and a sharpened version that shows that I need to do some post sharpening to reveal a level of detail similar to that shown in the shots you have posted (image was taken with a different scope and a relatively inexpensive Siebert Optics 35mm 1.25" eyepiece).

Thanks for posting the full rez crops. Its good to see unretouched original sections to help evaluate how well various combinations actually work.

Cheers,
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top