-
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.
How much magnification do you use? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter calbirder
- Start date
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
I would think that your 30x is a lot more than the average person that uses a DSLR - I think this is akin to about a 1500mm lens - minus the crop factor. Canon do a 1200mm f5.6 lens but it cost around $100,000 !!!.
Even with big lenses you still have to get close to the birds - most people use a DSLR for versatility (different lenses) and quality.
Some digiscopers would shoot at 60x - 90x but that is a different ball game as you require a good scope, a rock solid tripod as well as a camera ( and good technique).
Even with big lenses you still have to get close to the birds - most people use a DSLR for versatility (different lenses) and quality.
Some digiscopers would shoot at 60x - 90x but that is a different ball game as you require a good scope, a rock solid tripod as well as a camera ( and good technique).
Last edited:
scampo
Steve Campsall
I was a very keen photographer when I was younger but soon realised that to take decent shots of wildlife I needed a portable hide and a job that left me with lots of free time as well as massively large and expensive lenses.calbirder said:
The close up shots of birds you see that are taken with a standard camera will generally have been taken from a viewing area at a nature reserve, I would guess. All others will have been taken via a "digiscoping" set up consisting of something like an ED type spotting scope with a 20x eye piece and a compact digital camera such as the new Fuji F30.
I normally use a 500mm lens on my dslr which gives ~10X mag, I often ad a 1.4x tc thus getting 14x mag. If I need more I go down eth digiscoping route which gives me 30-40X.
More important than the magnification is getting close to the subject, the further away you are the more chance there is that issue such as heat haze willl effect your images. Spending time with the bird your are trying to photograph will help, learn where it regularly appears and set yourself up in the right place.
More important than the magnification is getting close to the subject, the further away you are the more chance there is that issue such as heat haze willl effect your images. Spending time with the bird your are trying to photograph will help, learn where it regularly appears and set yourself up in the right place.
Sorry about nitpicking, but since your camera lens starts from slightly wide-angled field-of-view ("negative magnification"), the true power of your system is maybe closer to 20x. :t: 30x is a typical "total" power of digiscoped shots (scope 20x & camera 1.5x).calbirder said:
Ilkka
800x2=1600Romy Ocon said:I use a Sigma 10-20 for scenics, and a Sigmonster + 2x TC (1600 mm) for birds. So I guess that's about 160x zoom...
Romy
1600/50=32
32 x mag on a 35mm body.
Multiply by the camera crop factor (usually 1.5-2x)to get the equivalent 35mm magnification.
Keith Reeder
Watch the birdie...
Hi Rob,
Romy's talking about 1600 divided by the lowest focal length of his 10-20, hence 160x.
Seems reasonable to me - remember there's a smiley in there too!
Romy's talking about 1600 divided by the lowest focal length of his 10-20, hence 160x.
Seems reasonable to me - remember there's a smiley in there too!
Last edited:
lockbreeze926
Well-known member
Looking at these calculations, can I ask this basic question : how do you calculate the X on, say, a Nikon DSLR?
I have read that their sensors are around 24mm, not 35, so does this imply there is a size reduction (crop factor < 1) in play before zooms are applied? So, in the case of a 400mm lens......
400/50 = 8X basic magnification
crop factor 24/35 = 0.69 or so
effective X magnification = 5.5ish
Doesn't sound right - or should I be dividing by 0.69 instead, i. e. multiplying by about 1.45?
I have read that their sensors are around 24mm, not 35, so does this imply there is a size reduction (crop factor < 1) in play before zooms are applied? So, in the case of a 400mm lens......
400/50 = 8X basic magnification
crop factor 24/35 = 0.69 or so
effective X magnification = 5.5ish
Doesn't sound right - or should I be dividing by 0.69 instead, i. e. multiplying by about 1.45?
The sensor on a Nikon dslr is roughly 1.5x smaller than 35mm, so it's 400mm x 1.5 divided by 50mm = 12xlockbreeze926 said:
cheers,
Andy
btw; Yep, I had a chuckle at Romy's 160x, but he's right. Ignore zoom factors, it's misleads a lot of people and is largely irrelevant.
