• 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.

Canon S95 for digiscoping (1 Viewer)

SteveClifton

Well-known member
I took the new Canon S95 for its first trip out yesterday. I’ve had it for just under a week, and despite the on-line hype about it, I am surprised that so little has been posted here about the camera’s digi-scoping potential.
I spent some time earlier in the week familiarising myself with the camera’s features, and so far I’m very impressed. It seems intuitive and easy to use, and so far I have only needed to refer to the manual to see how long the battery takes to charge!
My old digi-scoping camera (Fuji F31fd), while still delivering decent image quality, is starting to feel a bit long in the tooth, and, having become accustomed to using a DSLR over the last 2-3 years, I was keen to try a high-end compact camera that could hopefully produce similar image quality and functionality.
In particular, I was keen to get a camera that could deliver improvements over some of the Fuji’s shortcomings; in particular the following:

• No Raw shooting, and jpegs can be a little artificial looking, especially at higher ISO’s
• Slow to refresh and write pictures to memory card. The Canon writes to card very quickly though there is still a second or so delay after taking the picture.
• Inability to manual focus. The Canon can do this, and also has an enlarged section in the centre of the screen to aid manual focussing (either by the scope's focus ring, or using the camera)
• Auto focus can fail to lock on, sometimes resulting in a set of out of focus shots of the same subject
• Inability to fully save personal settings. When switched off, the Fuji retains most settings such as ISO, aperture etc, but the Canon can do this too, as well as retaining your preferred zoom position, so that upon switching on the camera, it is instantly ready to ‘go’
• Relatively poor video quality. The S95 has HD video with stereo sound

Other useful features I’ve discovered so far include:

  • F2 Lens instead of F2.8 = double the amount of light reaching the sensor
  • Improved sensor for low light, high ISO performance. This was actually one of the Fuji’s strengths, though some images looked rather over-processed and artificial because of over aggressive in-camera anti-noise settings
  • Ability to set the self timer for anything between 0-30 seconds, and then fire off up to 10 shots of a bird in sequence. Especially useful for fast moving or preening birds that always seem to have their heads down when using the 2 second timer of the Fuji!
  • Hybrid IS system. This even seemed to be effective today, in damping the buffeting effect of a strong breeze on the tripod-mounted scope-an unexpected benefit
Limitations:
  • Battery life is not as good (nothing like in fact) as that of the Fuji, which literally ‘lasts for ever’ on a full charge
  • The zoom range of the Canon isn’t as digi-scoping friendly as that of the Fuji. Significant vignetting occurs with the Swarovski zoom lens, until the camera is zoomed to about half way out, when it virtually disappears. I think with a fixed 30x this will be less of an issue, but personally I think I can live happily enough with the zoom eyepiece for digi-scoping, as I usually use at least 50% camera zoom anyway for most of my photography.
  • So far the few jpegs I’ve taken on the AWB (automatic white balance) setting have had a strong orange cast in natural light. Switching to tungsten seems to correct this, but perhaps this indicates a fault?

So far so good. Can't wait to get out and use it again.

First few jpegs taken in late afternoon low light, ISO 640, 1/30 sec, timer mode, f4 (two ducks) Swan at ISO 640 1/80 sec, f3.5. Zoom was between 1/2 & 3/4 out
All taken through Swarovski ATS80 HD, 20-60 zoom at lower end of the zoom, DCA and adapter

All birds here were close, between 5-10m away
All have been tweaked a little (a little cropping, sharpened etc), but original of female Mallard has just been re-sized for posting
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0326.JPG
    IMG_0326.JPG
    134.4 KB · Views: 1,074
  • IMG_0334.JPG
    IMG_0334.JPG
    152.2 KB · Views: 1,138
  • IMG_0398-4.jpg
    IMG_0398-4.jpg
    120.9 KB · Views: 722
  • IMG_0334 - Copy-1.JPG
    IMG_0334 - Copy-1.JPG
    109.9 KB · Views: 825
Last edited:
Steve,

I've had an s95 for a couple months and love it. I bought it mainly for the RAW, Aperture mode and 56Kingbirds pics on this site.. At only 10MP its detail is equal or better than my Sony w-300. When birding I shoot only in RAW and talk about flexability, it has it. Once you get used to it the raw program that comes with the camera (DPP) blows away anything I've used before.

I noticed some CA in your pics and when I started using it with my pics but not after using it for a while, the color is super. If I have a complaint it is the auto focus seems to not be as sensitive as my sony.

One reason the camera hasn't been noticed may be that it is so similar to the s90 and whole threads on the s90 were lost. For digiscoping the main improvement over the 90 has been continuous shooting which is now fine.

My first outing with the 95 produced this woody pic a couple weeks ago. I was out with it the next day and slipped on the ice having equipment damage so I'm now in a state of waiting but you can be sure I'll be back with more.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0624pirpsBF.jpg
    IMG_0624pirpsBF.jpg
    290.8 KB · Views: 1,428
Hi Steve,

Being that you use the Swarovski DCA adapter, I take it there is a screw thread on the S95? An illustration of your set up would be appreciated as I'm interested in this camera.

Cheers
 
Hi Steve,

Being that you use the Swarovski DCA adapter, I take it there is a screw thread on the S95? An illustration of your set up would be appreciated as I'm interested in this camera.

Cheers

Actually Steve, no, the S95 doesn't have a screw thread around the lens. Details here of my own solution to connecting the DCA and non-threaded cameras, seen here with my Fuji F31fd:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=133323

It seems that now the link to the ebay lens adapter is broken. These were widely available a couple of years ago for about £15, specifically for attaching filters and close up lenses/teleconverters in front of a compact. The Manfrotto Q/R adapters are still available for about £20.

Perhaps not the most elegant solution, but for under £50 it works, it's small, light and unclips/screws easily to fit in a jacket pocket.

If I find any that are still available I will post a link. Perhaps someone else knows of someone still selling them? I could do with a spare for the Fuji, now that I've had to alter the old one for the Canon and it no longer fits the older camera without adjustment with a spanner.

If these adapters are now unavailable then perhaps the Swarovski UCA or DCB adapters are the only real solution, but both are more bulky and considerably more £££!

edit: I actually bought one of these, thinking it would also fit on the S95, however the camera screw doesn't line up with the tripod thread on the base of the S95. It's about 2mm further back!!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/JJC-Filter-Adapter-CANON-PowerShot/dp/B003790AJM/ref=sr_1_94?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1294684090&sr=1-94

re-edit: just found and ordered one of these:

http://www.digitaltoyshop.co.uk/Universal_adapter_tube_Canon_Powershot_S95_t2218_5847
 
Last edited:
I tried using my S95 through my Zen Ray bins like i've been using with my Casio camera. The lens will not fit the eye cups so this is the best I could come up with (hand held).


Why does it look so terrible compared to the second photo which is the Casio?

Edit - oops, the second photo is from my camera phone - also completely hand held.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0045.jpg
    IMG_0045.jpg
    82.4 KB · Views: 716
  • duckbin.jpg
    duckbin.jpg
    316.7 KB · Views: 814
Last edited:
Steve,

I've had an s95 for a couple months and love it. I bought it mainly for the RAW, Aperture mode and 56Kingbirds pics on this site.. At only 10MP its detail is equal or better than my Sony w-300. When birding I shoot only in RAW and talk about flexability, it has it. Once you get used to it the raw program that comes with the camera (DPP) blows away anything I've used before.

I noticed some CA in your pics and when I started using it with my pics but not after using it for a while, the color is super. If I have a complaint it is the auto focus seems to not be as sensitive as my sony.

One reason the camera hasn't been noticed may be that it is so similar to the s90 and whole threads on the s90 were lost. For digiscoping the main improvement over the 90 has been continuous shooting which is now fine.

My first outing with the 95 produced this woody pic a couple weeks ago. I was out with it the next day and slipped on the ice having equipment damage so I'm now in a state of waiting but you can be sure I'll be back with more.

Joseph, thanks for the info about DPP. I will give it a try sometime. So far I haven't been able to open the S95 RAW files in PSE7, even though I updated the raw plugin recently to use on my 50D images.

I was aware of the mysterious disappearance of the S90 thread. One reason I wanted to begin a new thread about the S95.

Nice pic of the Wood Duck by the way;)
 
Steve,
Thanks for the information. Too bad about loss of threads on the S95. Threads could be attached directly to the flat body by bonding if a person wanted. That would eliminate the two adjustments on the universal from getting out of adjustment.

Concerning the f 2 lens. With your current eyepiece you are only digiscoping at f-4, reguardless of where you set the aperature. If you were to get the 30X and went to almost no zoom you could be at f2.8, but not faster. So, having the f-2 would mean that you were effectively down one stop, which is fine. Of course this f-number is only about camera operation. The total speed of the system can be no faster than the scope, which would be about f-6.3

From the IR Comparitor I see the S-95 is sharper than most cameras, about as sharp as the LX-3, which is good. And some good duck shots. Gene
 
Last edited:
I just bought a prestine P6000 on the Bay for $108. Now THAT can be a major factor, plus the body threads for digiscoping. Gene

Nice one Gene:t:

Is the P6000 they are selling now the same as it always was or is it a newer model with the same designation? Reason I ask is there are 3 web sites (which are the same company really) (http://www.digital-cameras.com & http://www.camerabox.co.uk/ & http://www.digitalfirst.co.uk/) who have the product as Out of Stock - Product Discontinued

And yet there are other places still selling P6000. They can't both be right.

Amendment 1:

Only one P6000 model made - which now appears to be as rare as rocking horse doodah. All the cheapest ones are gone and speculators are trying to sell reconditioned units for new prices. I feel an S95 coming on even without the remote function which I shall sorely miss.
 
Last edited:
Steve, Just looking at the head to head on S95 versus P6000
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_PowerShot_S95-vs-Nikon_Coolpix_P6000 and it looks like the S95 wins hands down but has no remote (wireless or cable). I can't see anyone offering anything to do the job. Is that why you are using timer?

That's worth knowing, thanks for posting it.

Had another play with the camera today. It's a bit more complicated that the Fuji F31fd, but with perseverence I think IQ is clearly better. I suppose part of this is familiarity with the camera's functions, and with practice I'll get more used to it.

I use self timer because I got into the habit of using it with my previous camera, and because on this camera it is easy to customise for between 1-10 shots (after a timed peried of 0-30 seconds). I think SRB Griturn could probably supply a cable release that would fit. Might look into it sometime.

This time a used RAW today and these are two of the better results (cropped, sharpened etc):

Bluetit: ISO 500, 1/80, f4.5, camera focal length 15mm. Scope zoomed to around 25x

Starling: ISO 640, 1/80, f4.5, camera focal length 15mm. Scope zoomed to around 25x
 

Attachments

  • DPP_0005-8.jpg
    DPP_0005-8.jpg
    188 KB · Views: 996
  • DPP_0015.jpg
    DPP_0015.jpg
    175.1 KB · Views: 1,072
Last edited:
Yes, Oggbad, I think you are right that reconditioned ones are being sold as new, but, as long as it works well I am not much concerned at that price. I just do not think it likely that Joe Storekeeper found a new one on his back shelf. Some may be gray market also. Gene
 
You convinced me Steve, I ordered my S95 today from Canon. If I spot a P6000 on ebay for a good price I will try and get it as well.

Now all I have to do is wait and pray for some daylight to pierce the clouds ;)
 
You convinced me Steve, I ordered my S95 today from Canon. If I spot a P6000 on ebay for a good price I will try and get it as well.

Now all I have to do is wait and pray for some daylight to pierce the clouds ;)

Congratulations on the new camera. I think you will enjoy it, though it does have a steep learning curve for digiscoping.

Also, be prepared to buy at least one spare battery. Fortunately they are available for under a tenner if you buy after-market copies, and a pair can be had for about £12.

A slight bugbear is that the battery compartment is very close to the tripod socket. Not a problem in itself, but as I keep a Q/R plate on the camera to allow it to quickly connect to my adapter, this has to be removed each time the battery is changed (could be once or twice a day if shooting a lot). At the moment I am getting about an hour or perhaps 1 1/2 hours of continuous use before the battery dies, even with the screen set to power saving after 30 seconds. Perhaps I will get more during the summer?

I've posted a couple of jpegs here, to compare with the RAW shots above (camera was set to record RAW & JPEG). Considering these had about a minute each of PP in Picassa, I don't think they look too bad. In fact, to my eyes the Blue Tit looks distinctly better! Perhaps this says more about my RAW PP skills (or lack of!) but it's quite encouraging for anyone who doesn't want to spend hours in front of a monitor.

Reed Bunting was ISO 640, f4.5, 1/250, focal length of camera 18.2mm (zoomed out about 3/4 of full capacity as the lens is 6mm-22.5mm)

BTW, watch out for the flash when you turn the camera on in auto mode. I wonder how many people have dropped their S95 before they got used to it?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1063.JPG
    IMG_1063.JPG
    174.9 KB · Views: 557
  • IMG_1176.JPG
    IMG_1176.JPG
    104.6 KB · Views: 777
Last edited:
Steve, The jpgs are fantastic from a P&S camera. I hope you don't mind but I just adjusted the color slightly and removed a little noise but nothing else.

Your jpg's are great.

Bob
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1176b.jpg
    IMG_1176b.jpg
    194 KB · Views: 839
Steve, The jpgs are fantastic from a P&S camera. I hope you don't mind but I just adjusted the color slightly and removed a little noise but nothing else.

Your jpg's are great.

Bob

Just trying to get into digiscoping so working through the vast ammount of material available on the subject. What software did you use to adjust the image Bob.

Also to Steve. Great images! What distance were you from the birds. Just gives and idea of how much the image is cropped.

Mark
 
Mark, I am using a very basic Photoshop on Mac. It is version 8 over 10years old.

The key to any picture adjustment is to have a monitor that you know is correct.

Bob
 
Just trying to get into digiscoping so working through the vast ammount of material available on the subject. What software did you use to adjust the image Bob.

Also to Steve. Great images! What distance were you from the birds. Just gives and idea of how much the image is cropped.

Mark

Mark, the attached images are uncropped or otherwise unprocessed versions of the same. They weren't cropped very heavily as you can see. The birds were only between 5-10m from the camera at a feeding station, so it wasn't really necessary. Scope zoom was low I think, somewhere around 20-30x.

Bob, I don't mind at all that you had a play with one of the images. The Reed Bunting looks better with a smoother background, which is usually where noise is a problem. I'm currently teaching myself Photoshop (Elements 7) and noise reduction is something I haven't mastered yet. Any ideas or a link to a tutorial would be helpful.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1063-1.JPG
    IMG_1063-1.JPG
    79.1 KB · Views: 299
  • IMG_1176-1.JPG
    IMG_1176-1.JPG
    56.6 KB · Views: 335
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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