The SWARO APO digiscoping adaptor.....the Swaro 95mm scope etc... A 701 Manfrotto video head, .....
There, I started it... jim
The SWARO APO digiscoping adaptor.....the Swaro 95mm scope etc... A 701 Manfrotto video head, .....
There, I started it... jim
Scope - Kowa or Swarovski - it seems as though the 85mm ATX Swarovski is better for digiscoping than the 95mm ATX.
...
But what if you are going for small birds? is the 85 better than the 95?
also camera is important so let's hear complete set ups.
Hi Neil - which gives you better image quality - a 4/3rds or even APS-C mirrorless camera with the digidapter (Paul Sayegh) OR an APS-C camera (such as the Canon 7Dii or Nikon 7100) attached directly to the scope via the Swarovski TLS APO adapter? In other words is having a lens at the end of the camera = better images...OR remove lens and use Swarovski adapter?
as one gets above 40x magnification, heat waves distort the air...that being said, if I was up in the north (Finland, Norway) or a cloudy place (UK) - the higher magnifications with the 95mm atx would be the way to go...gull, ducks and other waterbirds away from shore for example - in conditions where heat waves are absent.
The Panasonic GH-4 gets rave reviews for video - I think for stills other manufacturers (Sony) make a better sensor...the Sony A6000 is a great deal right now - about $450 used or a bit more new.
Digivideo comparison 85mm atx vs 95mm atx: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdT5CCyP9Ho
Neil - would you use the Sony A6000 (or any other mirrorless camera where you can change lenses) with a 24 F1.8 (or 28F2) lens - and the digidapter? OR would you use the same camera, without a lens and the Swarovski TLS APO adapter?
I think the latter option (no lens but using the TLS APO adapter) one loses 1-2 stops of light because the camera is further from the ocular...
However, if one goes the digiapter route (or any adapter that puts the camera/lens combo up against the ocular) and by using the fastest lens possible (eg. on the Panasonic Lumix, the 20mm F1.7) less light is lost - so faster shutter speeds (or lower ISO) can be used. However, if one uses a slower (say F4) lens on the camera next to the ocular (via the digidapter or whatever adapter) then all bets are off...no advantage.
And Neil - thank You! Through the years You have always been most helpful, patient and wise. A true Laurence Poh in spirit if you forgive my analogy for a moment.
here are three photos from the early days in Malaysia - pre 2003. See attached images taken by Ooi Beng Yean and Cheang Kum Seng - still my friends.
So Neil - what are (IF ANY) the advantages of using a camera with a pancake lens and an adapter against the ocular of the scope VERSUS a camera without lens but using the Swarovski APO TLS?
In other words, are there certain situations where you would prefer one to the other - outside of the dust factor (which is where I gather you would prefer the camera/lens/adapter/ocular combo).