Digiscoping cameras page at wikipedia.org (1 Viewer)

Digiscoping cameras page at wikibooks.org

After a couple weeks of research on this and other forums for a replacement/addition to my FZ20 + 1.5x I have collated a short list of compact digiscoping-suitable cameras.

I'm sure many of us have gone through this exercise. However, wanting to share this research (and more importantly allow others to edit and add to it) I've create a page at wikibooks:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Digiscoping

My intent is not, of course, to distract from the amazing resources here, but for me, at least, having a single page is easier to wrap my head around.

So feel free to edit to your hearts content (a wiki is a system of simple web page that the community can edit and update). I have also attached the results of my work as a word doc for those who might just want their own copy.

Also note I started this research with a document and web-page some other folks had worked compile. Much to my dismay I've lost those links, but if they see this work: thanks!

I hope this is helpful!

Thank you. Wishing to replace my camera, I'll definitely take a look.

Great idea Sean!
I might have a quibble about the high-ISO performances. From all the reviews I've read at the digital camera web-sites, Fuji seems to be head-and-shoulders ahead of the pack. Especially the F11, but even the E900 is very good. I read a couple of reviews which said that the E900 was not as good at high ISO as the F10/11 and this was a disappointment, but then the F10/11 is still the benchmark for high-ISO performance in a non-DSLR... have I missed something?
ROb

Thanks, I really hope folks will feel inclined to help contribute. I am quite the newbie at digiscoping and it really just started as something for me to gather my thoughts. Please do, of course, feel free to make edits at the page http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Digiscoping

As with many things I can see the chance for "scope (haha - pun) creep" but I'd love to hear from others if they'd like to see a community maintained source for a comprehensive Digiscoping How-to with sections like: History | Equipment Recipes/Reviews | Techniques for the field.

Yes, I agree on the E900. It was noted as not the best performer. Sad, because it has so many other great traits!

lachlustre said:

Great idea Sean!
I might have a quibble about the high-ISO performances. From all the reviews I've read at the digital camera web-sites, Fuji seems to be head-and-shoulders ahead of the pack. Especially the F11, but even the E900 is very good. I read a couple of reviews which said that the E900 was not as good at high ISO as the F10/11 and this was a disappointment, but then the F10/11 is still the benchmark for high-ISO performance in a non-DSLR... have I missed something?
ROb

Click to expand...

I too had the E900 on my short list to check out. Why oh why doesn't raw luck and the vast number of camera models provide us the perfect digiscoping camera at each technology advance?? There is no justice in the world!

Sean, your camera comparison pages are very informative. Great going. I didn't know about many of these potentially great digiscoping cameras.

I've been doing some online research too, and for me, to buy right now, the F11 will be the best bet. Looks like I can get it from NY store for $264. For me, I already use xD cards, so this is a benefit of this camera. For many of you, the Fuji F11 and F30 will have to be excluded due to no lens thread adapter. However if you have a straight viewing scope like I do, you should be able to find a satisfactory mount. I actually make one that's on the web for $80; and prefer it for its quick swing-away facility (that's why I designed it). I'm not "plugging" it here.

The reason I'll pick the F11 over yet to be released (May '06?) F30 is this: The F11 is the same as the F10 except for a few more controls; Aper. priority and Shutter priority which is a very big deal. Full manual would be even better. For the newer F30 Fuji has made some kind of changes to sensitivity boosting it all the way to ISO3200. Digiscopers, generally don't need that. Instead of starting at ISO-80 the F30 will start at ISO-100 and double until 3200. Our best quality shots are at the lowest speed we can attain adequate shutter speed at. Thus the F11's ISO-80 should yield a better shot under ideal circumstances. I'd like ISO-50 if I could get it, and I have ISO 64 currently. The rave reviews of the F10 for low noise indicate that it's ISO-80 may be as good as other top brands' ISO-50 anyway. I hope so. And being forced to shoot at ISO-80 will force slightly higher shutter speeds than at ISO-50/64 which will tend to yield fewer blurred, or greater no. of sharp photos (at the ISO-80 I mean).

Unfortunate that the F11's LCD is at the 153k pixel res. whereas the newer F30 will be, what was it 235k or so. Bottom line for me (butfor those who can wait, great to do so,) is that the F10 image quality out-resolved the competition in dpreview tests, and the low noise is in a whole new class. This is a major breakthrough for digiscoping, as slow lens/slow shutter is our great bane. If we can shoot at higher sensitivities with low noise we'll have many more outstanding results.

Of course the optical quality is of utmost importance or all is for naught. Fuji actually scored very high at dpreview in edge distortion-low and high resolution no's Horiz, Vert. lines and "extinction" res. I feel pretty certain at this point that Fuji is staying "in the dark ages" of megapixel res. at just 6.3 with these new releases because they can't get out the noise to the same extent at greater MP's... Fuji E900 case in point (9MP more noise.) This is the right realists' conclusion for them to make. You can get excellent 8x10 prints from 6+ megapixel with a great camera. How many of us need to make poster-sized prints?? Course cropping is also an issue, but nearly all my 8x10's currently with 6MP Olympus are cropped.

I try to keep a standard of 180ppi res. for 8x10 print, and 200+ ppi is preferred. For those who've not been there yet, this is how you do all manner of cropping variation and know how good your print will be at any size.
Final note: I also learned that Nikon P-3 has auto ISO selection only. I was interested in that camera, but that feature is not acceptable. Oh, one more difference from F11 to F30. For some reason the F30 news release on dpr does not show it offers the top-3/final-3 continuous shooting mode option. I think this is a good feature, tho I've never had a final-3 option to try. Both Fuji cameras lack manual focus, which I also was hoping to get. I'm not sure if they have multi-point focus selection.. have to go back to news rel. and look. All for now.

Wow, a lot of useful information in this post! A couple of follow-up questions.

Forcreeks said:

For many of you, the Fuji F11 and F30 will have to be excluded due to no lens thread adapter. However if you have a straight viewing scope like I do, you should be able to find a satisfactory mount.

Click to expand...

Is this generally the case? That angled scopes do not work well with the swing-out/bracket type of adapters?

Forcreeks said:

The reason I'll pick the F11 over yet to be released (May '06?) F30 is this: ... For the newer F30 Fuji has made some kind of changes to sensitivity boosting it all the way to ISO3200. Digiscopers, generally don't need that. Instead of starting at ISO-80 the F30 will start at ISO-100 and double until 3200. Our best quality shots are at the lowest speed we can attain adequate shutter speed at. Thus the F11's ISO-80 should yield a better shot under ideal circumstances.

Click to expand...

I admit that I am certainly not a photographic expert, but I'd really appreciate it if you could explain this some more. If the F30's sensor is more sensitive (something like 20% more sensitive, I read), how does this affect quality at ISO-80? ISO-80 is a fixed standard level of light sensitivity, isn't it? I thought the point of Fuji's claim about sensitivity is that the F30 should produce 20% (or whatever) less noise at any given ISO level. Therefore even high ISO settings will be more usable (although maybe not 3200!), and the advantage of this for digiscopers will be that we can get the same image quality with faster shutter speeds, and thus less image-shake.

Finally, I have some follow-up points about the E900. I am not sure it is that bad of a camera at all. First, Its levels of noise are only inferior compared to the F10 - which was described as the nearest thing to a DSLR in terms of high ISO noise in one of the reviews I read. I don't think that its noise levels compare badly to those of other brands. In fact, I think that they are still rather good, compared to the field as a whole.
Second, it has this enormous 9MP sensor, and can also save in RAW (and since the digital camera reviews came out, I think that there are photoshop plug-ins for this format too...). Now, I am wondering what the noise levels would really look like if you photoshopped the image, and downsampled the image to 6MP. I guess they would be *closer* to the levels of the F10, but would they overtake it? It is a shame that dpreview has not reviewed the E900, so I don't know what the resolution of the E900 is compared to the F10.
Finally, with the E900, you can screw in an lens adapter to the front of the camera with a 43mm thread at the end. My plan right now is to do this and try and join up this thread to the Nikon FSA-3 adapter with a step-down ring. Anyone have any advice about how successful I'm likely to be?

Cheers,
Rob

Is this generally the case? That angled scopes do not work well with the swing-out/bracket type of adapters?

Click to expand...

Not true at all ... I've used Both and have a 4500 with the threaded adapter and a 7900 with the Mount adapter as the 7900 as no thread on the lense,I've used both on a Straight Scope aswell as my Angled ES 80 ED,
Found no difference at all ... Not sure if Straight Scope's give better Picture's but the Angle does'nt interfere or make a difference with what i've used,

My confusion with all this ... is what Camera is going to improve over my 7900?, The 7900 start's at 50 ISO upward's, Has ED and 7.1MP,
I only have to zoom 1x to get rid of Vignetting and my result's i am pleased with,
So do i get another 7900?, The Camera's mentioned so far don't give me anything better ... The new Nikon P Serie's have'nt got ED ... Why would they do that?????,
I get a little tired when these Multimillion Pound company's give you all these Feature's and leave quality out ... Who give's a S**t about the Camera making pretty startup sound's and multi mode's that generally have no use at all ... And take away the most important thing's that Photographer's want ... I went on WHE and looked for about an Hour to buy a new Camera,
Nearly every Compact by every Make had a Serie's of Camera's that were nearly identical,
5 - 6 MP??, Come on ... That was last Year's entry,
Nikon ... Canon ... Fuji ... etc all have this idea that the look's, Compactness and a thousand unused feature's is what the Public want ...
Be nice if they thought of Photographer's eh?, ... Anyway as anyOne got any Idea's on what i should upgrade to?,
I'm thinking another 7900 which is discontinued ... but as been replaced by the P serie's which give's less of a Camera,
Anyway ... Thank's all for the Info ... Any advice would be very grateful,
EDIT : Just looked at the E900 ... Why oh why has'nt it got a Rechargeable Lithium-ion???, ... It take's 2 AA's ... That alone put's me off a Camera, Look's
nice though apart from the Prehistoric Powering,
Thank's and Take Care,

John,

Sure do agree with John about manufacturer's throwing in all the "bells and whistles" of shooting modes for every activity known to man, instead of concentrating on overall shot quality and user control. I guess we're just too small a market segment for them to think about.

What I was saying about angled scope mounts is, I don't know of any universal mounts other that I believe Zeiss and Swaro's proprietary and very expensive mounts. These are designed to match their own scopes. The Swaro swing-away which I've used, is heavy and bulky and locks down with some effort. It has an odd shaped cradle-yoke that fits the scope body shape below eyepiece attachment point, and the peep site tube must be removed from scope to install it. It seems very well made tho.. I just find it awkward to bird and photo together with it on, but it's a viable option for a Swaro owner.

Being a straight through view scope owner only, maybe I just don't know the range of non threaded lens (i.e. camera base-mounted) digiscoping adapters for angled scopes out there. Actually I'm struggling with whether to get angled scope in the near future, so if you have mount suggestions for "external focus" cameras (i.e. limited to base mounting), it would be great to get some links in this forum. I know of a number of folks who've made their own angled scope camera mounts because of this lack of "universal" type adapters. Personally, I still won't use a threaded lens type adapter, as I don't like having to take the camera on and off the scope to bird or track a bird, but that's personal preference. I respect that others don't mind digiscoping in this manner.

About the ISO issue Rob, my point was that ISO-80 and ISO-100 are fixed values of sensitivity as you say. These are the respective slowest values of the F11 vs. F30. That's all I was pointing out. In my experience, the lower (slower) the film speed equivalent, the better the shot looks. Now if Fuji's claim is that the F30's ISO-100 will yield as fine a "film-quality" image as the F11's ISO-80, then I'm with you. Is it your understanding they're claiming that? I'm not expert on cameras and these aren't even reviewed yet... more importantly objectively tested and reviewed.

Which brings me to my other point, since the F10 is objectively tested, and the F11 is a "clone" of the image production system, we can expect equal performance. The F30 will be more of a guess, and if one wants to just wait longer to find out, there's nothing wrong with that course.

Sure do agree with John about manufacturer's throwing in all the "bells and whistles" of shooting modes for every activity known to man, instead of concentrating on overall shot quality and user control. I guess we're just too small a market segment for them to think about.

What I was saying about angled scope mounts, Rob, is I don't know of any universal mounts other that I believe Zeiss' and Swaro's proprietary and very expensive mounts. These are designed to match their own scopes. The Swaro swing-away which I've used, is heavy and bulky and locks down with some effort. It has an odd shaped cradle-yoke that fits the scope body shape below eyepiece attachment point, and the peep site tube must be removed from scope to install it. It seems very well made tho.. I just find it awkward to bird and photo together with it on, but it's a viable option for a Swaro owner.

Being a straight through view scope owner only, maybe I just don't know the range of non-threaded lens (i.e. camera base-mounted) digiscoping adapters for angled scopes out there. Actually I'm struggling with whether to get an angled scope in the near future, so if you have mount suggestions for "external focus" cameras (i.e. limited to base mounting), John, it would be great to get some links in this forum. I know of a number of folks who've made their own angled-scope camera mounts because of this lack of "universal" type adapters. Personally, I still won't use a threaded lens type adapter, as I don't like having to take the camera on and off the scope to bird or track a bird, but that's personal preference. I respect that others don't mind digiscoping in this manner.

About the ISO issue Rob, my point was that ISO-80 and ISO-100 are fixed values of sensitivity as you say. These are the respective slowest values of the F11 vs. F30. That's all I was pointing out. In my experience, the lower (slower) the film speed equivalent, the better the shot looks. Now if Fuji's claim is that the F30's ISO-100 will yield as fine a "film-quality" image as the F11's ISO-80, then I'm with you. Is it your understanding they're claiming that? And if that's the case, why couldn't they add an ISO-80 or ISO-64 to the F-30 for the most perfect film-quality in a compact ever, beating even the F10/11? If that's impossible, tho, I do agree with you that if they made their ISO-100 do what the F11's ISO-80 will do, then go with the faster camera. It's just that we'll have to wait and see the test results, won't we. I'm not expert on cameras and these two aren't even reviewed yet... more importantly objectively "tested and reviewed."

Which brings me to my other point, since the F10 is objectively tested, and the F11 is a "clone" of it's image production system, we can reasonably expect equal performance, plus the better user controls. The F30 will be more of a guess, and if one wants to just wait longer to find out, there's nothing wrong with that course, obviously.

Good luck to us all in finding just the right digiscoping cameras. I have this forum to thank for even knowing about these newest potentially great digiscope cams.

I had seriously considered the 7900 as well (and particularly now that the price has dropped). I think one of the compelling bits with the 7900/P series is if you also have a Nikon Fieldscope III (and I think the 50mm as well) you can then get the Nikon adapter (which has an integrated cable shutter release) which would seem to make for quite a tidy setup.

I wonder, has anyone with a Nikon FSA used them with some eyepiece other than the Nikon ones for which (I suspect they are intended?). In other words could they be used with 1.25" astro eyepieces (e.g. are they threaded)? I suspect they are not.

And yes, as you point out the ED lens on the 7900 would potentially add a nic e punch of quality.

Really the only advantage on tthe P3/4 is the VR (the utility of which has been debated on other threads).

I'm not sure how much I care about the AA issue. I would certainly want to invest in a number of high quality rechargeables! For the me the issue with the E900 is that I also want a camera that is more or less pocketable (yes double duty, so sad!) and I'm not sure if the E900 gets me that.

Fun thread!

Cheers,

Sean

Modular said:

...
Anyway ... Thank's all for the Info ... Any advice would be very grateful,
EDIT : Just looked at the E900 ... Why oh why has'nt it got a Rechargeable Lithium-ion???, ... It take's 2 AA's ... That alone put's me off a Camera, Look's
nice though apart from the Prehistoric Powering,
Thank's and Take Care,

John,

Click to expand...

:hi: :hi:

To be honest with you ... I've only used the 7900 for my picture's,
Have a look at my gallery, I'm only new at this so the gallery is'nt very big but
you'll get somewhat of an idea,
I use it with an Opticron ES 80 ED,
John,

By the way ... I'm 99% sure i'm getting the E900 when it's at WHE and see what price there doing it for lol ... Had a good look at that Camera and it seem's very nice all round apart from AA's, I guess i can get a Charger and Some Nicad's ...|8(||8(|

Modular said:

Just looked at the E900 ... Why oh why has'nt it got a Rechargeable Lithium-ion???, ... It take's 2 AA's ... That alone put's me off a Camera, Look's nice though apart from the Prehistoric Powering,

Click to expand...

Prehistoric? Well, I personally prefer AA's to Li-Ions anytime. For a start, I don't particularly like having to carry half a dozen different chargers when I'm on a birding trip, so I try to standardize my rechargeables as much as I can. Ideally my flashlight, my cassette recorder, my camera and so on all use the same type of rechargeable, so I only need to carry two chargers - one for AA's and one for my mobile. And if something goes wrong I can always use standard alkaline batteries that I can get almost anywhere.

Also, modern NiMH rechargeables have gone a long way in the past few years. High quality NiMH's nowadays have a capacity of 2300 to 2500 mAh, and they last a long time in a camera. Get a couple of sets of Sanyo NiMH rechargeables and a decent charger and you're all set.

Hermann

Hello Hermann,

Thank's for the reply ... I'm guessing i don't know much about AA's to be
honest, I alway's remember putting them in a Digital Camera and them running
out Half an Hour later ... That was a couple of Year's ago and the AA's were
Duracell Alkaline ... So as you can imagine after paying nearly £5 for Half an
Hour's Life out of AA's ... I started to get fed up with Paying load's of Money
for the fun,

You have me very Interested in these Batterie's though ... My question's about
these are ...
1, How long does 4 AA's take to charge?,
2, What's the typical amount of Time you get out of them ... Camera with monitor on etc, A rough guess?,
3, How much does This charger cost and how much does 4 "Good" AA's cost?,

Would the lack of Battery and charger that the E900 does'nt give ... Make the
Camera a more expensive Camera than it is ... If the Camera is £350 ... then
if i have to spend £50 on a charger and batterie's then it would be £400 to me,
But to you it would'nt because you use AA's a lot and probably have a lot of them anyway,
Good argument i guess all round, AA's must be getting better
as i see Camera's coming out that use them and these Company's surely
would'nt make mistake's like that,
I don't do Field Trip's or Birding Trip's so no need of Batterie's like yourself but definetly understand it,
You mentioned A Recorder ... If your using it for Data ... Meaning just for
Birding information and Sound's ... Then have a look at the couple of picture's
i've added, This recorder will record Over Two Hour's without Tape's,
It's Digital ... No media needed, It's just over 3 Inche's, Take 2 AAA's that
never need replacing until Year's down the Line and weigh's less than 2 AA's,
Also a put a picture of my Battery to show the size etc,
Anyway please let us know on this Samsung stuff as it sound's ideal for the
E900,
Thank's for the reply too,
Take care,
John,

Seem to be following you around John.

Just been thinking about batteries too because of "Complete Novice" thread in Cameras and Photography forum (guy going to Africa, possibly safari, so will be needing backups).

Seems some of latest cameras accepting AA batteries when powered by new high capacity NiMH batteries can certainly outlast many Li Ion powered cameras according to specs.

Downsides, as you say John, cost of charger and batteries generally not included in camera cost. Could also be a disadvantage that the AAs might add bulk and almost certainly weight to camera (also Li Ion battery is less in danger of being "borrowed"...)

On other hand, also previously stated, if you're going to need lots of spare battery capacity, several sets of spare Ni MH batteries are almost certainly a lot cheaper than one proprietary Li Ion.

There's interesting stuff here on what to look for in battery charger :
http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/C204W/C204WA.HTM
His recommendation available in UK :
http://www.mahaenergy.co.uk/acatalog/battery-chargers.html

www.7dayshop.com is a site oft recommended on BirdForum as a good place in UK to buy consumables such as batteries.

Angled Scope

Forcreeks said:

Sure do agree with John about manufacturer's throwing in all the "bells and whistles" of shooting modes for every activity known to man, instead of concentrating on overall shot quality and user control. I guess we're just too small a market segment for them to think about.

What I was saying about angled scope mounts is, I don't know of any universal mounts other that I believe Zeiss and Swaro's proprietary and very expensive mounts. These are designed to match their own scopes. The Swaro swing-away which I've used, is heavy and bulky and locks down with some effort. It has an odd shaped cradle-yoke that fits the scope body shape below eyepiece attachment point, and the peep site tube must be removed from scope to install it. It seems very well made tho.. I just find it awkward to bird and photo together with it on, but it's a viable option for a Swaro owner.

Being a straight through view scope owner only, maybe I just don't know the range of non threaded lens (i.e. camera base-mounted) digiscoping adapters for angled scopes out there. Actually I'm struggling with whether to get angled scope in the near future, so if you have mount suggestions for "external focus" cameras (i.e. limited to base mounting), it would be great to get some links in this forum. I know of a number of folks who've made their own angled scope camera mounts because of this lack of "universal" type adapters. Personally, I still won't use a threaded lens type adapter, as I don't like having to take the camera on and off the scope to bird or track a bird, but that's personal preference. I respect that others don't mind digiscoping in this manner.

About the ISO issue Rob, my point was that ISO-80 and ISO-100 are fixed values of sensitivity as you say. These are the respective slowest values of the F11 vs. F30. That's all I was pointing out. In my experience, the lower (slower) the film speed equivalent, the better the shot looks. Now if Fuji's claim is that the F30's ISO-100 will yield as fine a "film-quality" image as the F11's ISO-80, then I'm with you. Is it your understanding they're claiming that? I'm not expert on cameras and these aren't even reviewed yet... more importantly objectively tested and reviewed.

Which brings me to my other point, since the F10 is objectively tested, and the F11 is a "clone" of the image production system, we can expect equal performance. The F30 will be more of a guess, and if one wants to just wait longer to find out, there's nothing wrong with that course.

Click to expand...

I have made a bracket for an angled Scope and a Canon A610, which will swivel either left or right, and there is no physical attachment between Camera and Scope, anybody interest to see, I will photograph it and post somewhere. It should be adjustable to suit a few different camera's. Ernie

A charger was included when I bought my Sony DSC-W7. I've been very impressed witht the performance of the NiMH batteries that were also included.
Graham

normjackson said:

Seem to be following you around John.

Just been thinking about batteries too because of "Complete Novice" thread in Cameras and Photography forum (guy going to Africa, possibly safari, so will be needing backups).

Seems some of latest cameras accepting AA batteries when powered by new high capacity NiMH batteries can certainly outlast many Li Ion powered cameras according to specs.

Downsides, as you say John, cost of charger and batteries generally not included in camera cost. Could also be a disadvantage that the AAs might add bulk and almost certainly weight to camera (also Li Ion battery is less in danger of being "borrowed"...)

On other hand, also previously stated, if you're going to need lots of spare battery capacity, several sets of spare Ni MH batteries are almost certainly a lot cheaper than one proprietary Li Ion.

There's interesting stuff here on what to look for in battery charger :
http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/C204W/C204WA.HTM
His recommendation available in UK :
http://www.mahaenergy.co.uk/acatalog/battery-chargers.html

www.7dayshop.com is a site oft recommended on BirdForum as a good place in UK to buy consumables such as batteries.

Click to expand...

I'd be very interested to see that ... Please post,
Thank's,
John,

erniehatt said:

I have made a bracket for an angled Scope and a Canon A610, which will swivel either left or right, and there is no physical attachment between Camera and Scope, anybody interest to see, I will photograph it and post somewhere. It should be adjustable to suit a few different camera's. Ernie

Click to expand...

Ok

Modular said:

I'd be very interested to see that ... Please post,
Thank's,
John,

Click to expand...

Ok John, Have a look here. Let me know if you need further info. Ernie





This is first pic, not spot on but getting there.