• 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.

The Ultimate digiscoping rig (1 Viewer)

with the Swarovski 85mm ATX you have a near magnification of 25x (it is 30x on the 95atx) - and 25x is often an easier focal length to work with...larger birds such as herons are easier to fit in the frame. [/B]."

So true...the best digiscoping is done with 20x which the Swaro 85 or 95 does not have. So perhaps, we need to look at a different scope?
 
OK good to know! So let me see if I have your information correct:

there is no significant (noticeable) difference in image quality when one shoots with a camera + lens + adapter via the spotting scope versus camera + NO LENS + Swarovski (or any other brand) APO TLS via the spotting scope.

This means using the same camera in both scenarios (one that allows for interchangeable lenses such as a Sony A6000 or the Panasonic GH-4) - and the same spotting scope.

Why would one prefer using a 20mm lens (say the Lumix 20mm F1.7) versus a 30mm lens in the camera + lens + adapter + spotting scope scenario? Does an F1.7 lens provide more light or better quality or whatever versus a 30mm F2.8 lens?

Should one select a lens with as wide (F1.7) aperture as possible whenever possible?

What is the advantage of using a 20mm versus a 30mm lens...or vice versa?

Apologies for all the questions - I have indeed been reading through all the past threads here - but no one seems to have the extensive experience you do shooting with camera + lens + adapter as well as camera plus Swarovski APO TLS...this major division in equipment (comparison of advantages and disadvantages) - I don't remember reading anywhere.

Thank You,

rdc
Most of the long time digiscoped shave tried lots of combinations over the years.
The Panasonic 20/1.7 is a short pancake lens which is very bright. This means you can get fast shutter speeds at low ISO. An advantage when Digiscoping moving subjects. According to DxOMark the Sigma 30/2.8 is very sharp. I only use it on subjects that are over 50 metres away. The 20/1.7 is on my camera 80% of the time. Not all lenses are created equal but the 20/1.7 is the best value for money in my bag.
Quality of light and distance are a more important variables these days than the differences between cameras and attachment methods.
Neil
 
Neil you have your nice carbon tripod, your nice video head, your swaro 65mm, 85mm, 95mm. only missing piece of the pie is the camera + attachment. You can only choose one camera/adapter set up.

You want the best for video AND stills.

what do you do?
 
Last edited:
I will get the Swarovski STX 95 + TLS APO or Digidapter + any mirrorless camera that is good.

For support, carbon fibre tripod and high end video head made by Sachtler etc
 
Neil you have your nice carbon tripod, your nice video head, your swaro 65mm, 85mm, 95mm. only missing piece of the pie is the camera + attachment. You can only choose one camera/adapter set up.

You want the best for video AND stills.

what do you do?
Most of the serious digiscopers I know are using the Panasonic GH4 + 20/1.7 lens and the Digidapter. You'll be impressed.
Neil
 
Neil,

What you think of the Digidapter so far?

It's an excellent adapter. Very rigid which makes it a better solution than the DCB11 which will flex a bit if you get excited eg.when you see a Spoon-billed Sandpiper. I needed two so that I can have the GH4 and Sony RX100 set up and ready to go at a moments notice.
I'm getting ready for the northerly shorebird migration and will be shooting over two hundred gigs a day with them.
Neil
 
It's an excellent adapter. Very rigid which makes it a better solution than the DCB11 which will flex a bit if you get excited eg.when you see a Spoon-billed Sandpiper. I needed two so that I can have the GH4 and Sony RX100 set up and ready to go at a moments notice.
I'm getting ready for the northerly shorebird migration and will be shooting over two hundred gigs a day with them.
Neil

Thanks Neil. Hope I can try these too!
 
with the Swarovski 85mm ATX you have a near magnification of 25x (it is 30x on the 95atx) - and 25x is often an easier focal length to work with...larger birds such as herons are easier to fit in the frame. Ask Neil from Hong Kong...he is a long-time digiscoper.

or from a previous thread..."Suppressor": "I have the 85mm and if your birding by bike its more than enough scope. It may not have quite the reach of the 95mm, but, it's lighter and has a wider field of view. Also it [85mm] is as bright at its lowest magnifaction ie exit pupil at x25=3.4. 95mm exit pupil at lowest magnifcation x30=3.16.And more compact too."

I am new to digiscoping and am not quite sure how the focal length of the lens on the camera (whether you use a regular camera lens or the TLS APO which is basically a 30mm lens) affects (or combines with) the focal length of the lens on the scope. What I mean is, since the TLS APO is a 30mm lens and is therefore about 0.6 magnification, does that mean you would multiply the 30x on the 95atx by 0.6 to get effectively 18x?
 
Your choice is whether to use the camera plus lens plus adapter (digidapter for example) OR the camera without a lens shooting straight through the ocular of the scope. One then needs something like the Swaorvski APO TLO adapter. In this set-up the camera is further from the ocular...so more light is lost...so a slower shutter speed is needed and/or a higher ISO.

I have been trying to figure out which method will give the highest quality images:
- scope -> scope lens -> adapter -> camera lens (or TLS APO) -> dslr

- scope -> scope lens -> adapter -> t-mount -> dslr

I have been reading quite a bit about the Kowa products and the first method would be like using the Kowa TSN-DA10 adapter and the second method would be like using the Kowa TSN-PA7 adapter.

I have read in another post that the t-mount method is not good because the scope's lens does not provide a flat image. Images can be sharp in the centre but blurrier the further from the centre you get.

From this thread I have learned that any method that uses a camera lens means you could lose 1-2 stops and you will need a fast lens to avoid that.

Thanks!
 
I have been trying to figure out which method will give the highest quality images:
- scope -> scope lens -> adapter -> camera lens (or TLS APO) -> dslr

- scope -> scope lens -> adapter -> t-mount -> dslr

I have been reading quite a bit about the Kowa products and the first method would be like using the Kowa TSN-DA10 adapter and the second method would be like using the Kowa TSN-PA7 adapter.

I have read in another post that the t-mount method is not good because the scope's lens does not provide a flat image. Images can be sharp in the centre but blurrier the further from the centre you get.

From this thread I have learned that any method that uses a camera lens means you could lose 1-2 stops and you will need a fast lens to avoid that.

Thanks!

Xayvian, if I understand you correctly, you are asking about ocular projection (no additional lenses between the camera sensor and the telescope's eyepiece) and afocal photography (=regular digiscoping, where some sort of camera objective lens is between the camera sensor and telescope's eyepiece).

Ocular projection kinda works to get some sort of image, but finding the optimal distance between the sensor and eyepiece is challenging to say the least and, even then, is likely to have high chromatic aberration and poor image quality in general (especially at the edge). It's not something I would recommend, except if you are desperate to get a photo and have no other option.

Regular digiscoping (be it with a camera objective or TLS APO) is really the route you want to go
 
Xayvian, if I understand you correctly, you are asking about ocular projection (no additional lenses between the camera sensor and the telescope's eyepiece) and afocal photography (=regular digiscoping, where some sort of camera objective lens is between the camera sensor and telescope's eyepiece).

Ocular projection kinda works to get some sort of image, but finding the optimal distance between the sensor and eyepiece is challenging to say the least and, even then, is likely to have high chromatic aberration and poor image quality in general (especially at the edge). It's not something I would recommend, except if you are desperate to get a photo and have no other option.

Regular digiscoping (be it with a camera objective or TLS APO) is really the route you want to go

Thanks Dale,

From my reading about Kowa it sounds like they are highly regarded for digiscoping and I see that they have several products (that work with dslrs) that use these methods.

For ocular projection they have:
- TSN-PZ - replace scope eyepiece with PZ and you attach camera to it using t-mount
- TSN-PA7 - PA7 goes over the scope eyepiece and you attach camera to it using t-mount

For regular digiscoping they have:
- TSN-VA3 - replace scope eyepiece with VA3 and you attach camera with lens to it using the filter threads
- TSN-DA10 - attach DA10 to scope eyepiece and you attach camera with lens to it using the filter threads

Are you suggesting that it is best to avoid the TSN-PZ and TSN-PA7? Since the PZ is made for digiscoping is it perhaps designed so that the issues with ocular projection are minimized?

Regarding the PA7 I found a short thread about it - there is a link in it to some photos and they look great to me - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=280939
 
Xayvian, if I understand you correctly, you are asking about ocular projection (no additional lenses between the camera sensor and the telescope's eyepiece) and afocal photography (=regular digiscoping, where some sort of camera objective lens is between the camera sensor and telescope's eyepiece).

Ocular projection kinda works to get some sort of image, but finding the optimal distance between the sensor and eyepiece is challenging to say the least and, even then, is likely to have high chromatic aberration and poor image quality in general (especially at the edge). It's not something I would recommend, except if you are desperate to get a photo and have no other option.

Regular digiscoping (be it with a camera objective or TLS APO) is really the route you want to go

Hi Dale,

Apologies for the Kowa questions - I didn't see who you work for.

How about a Swarovski question? If I go for the ATX and want to digiscope with my dslr, is my only Swarovski option to get the TLS ALO?

Thanks.
 
Hi Dale,

Apologies for the Kowa questions - I didn't see who you work for.

How about a Swarovski question? If I go for the ATX and want to digiscope with my dslr, is my only Swarovski option to get the TLS ALO?

Thanks.

Yes you can connect your DSLR with the TLS APO using T2 ring or if you wanted to use prime lens example like 35mm and below with universal adapter the DCB II.

TLS APO is made mainly for APS-C camera format. Full frame also possible but there will be vignetting through the zoom range such as Nikon D3s etc.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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