Help I want to digiscope too! (1 Viewer)

Hello all!

Well, after more than 10 years without shooting for real I was back to more serious photos last May when I bought a new SRL camera and zoom. At that time, as a old fashioned photographer who likes to develop a couple of B/W films, I bought a Elan 7E thinking I would go digital only next year.

...then I found this site on the web.....and saw the digiscoped pictures... :| such great photos, incredible details, colors etc...
no film grains ...oh boy.....I want to try this too!

I have a Canon Equipment (Elan 7E, Zoom 100-400 and some smaller lens) and in order to be able to use my current lens , I am thinking of buying a Canon 10D.

I am also new to birding (Birding came through interest in photography) so I am not familiar with scopes and birding equipment.

I hope you can help me with this:

1) What scope would be better to use with a Canon 10D?
2) What Eyepiece and adapter is needed?

Any help will be mostly appreciated!

Thanks much!
Deca

The 10D is a great camera and the 100-400 lens is a good one for birds. But most digiscopers do not use an SLR for digiscoping. They use point-and-shoots like the Nikon Coolpix series because they are better suited to digiscoping for a variety of reasons. But it is possible to digiscope with an SLR and I think at least one Bird Forum member does that. Hopefully one of those people can answer your questions. Glen

I guess I need some sort of "Digiscope for Dummies"
....still have sooo much to learn about this!

Thanks a lot Glen!

Good idea Deca. I need a copy as well.

I have messed around with the Canon 10D and a 50mm f1.8 with my ATS-80 HD. You need as much light as possible as the scope cuts down on light... so I bet the f1.4 would be even better. (Not to mention that it's just a better lens... but 5x the cost & its heavier and bigger.)

I've only done it on two occasions with about 20 pictures total. All are hand held. The best one I did is attached. Here are the interesting settings:

1/500th, ISO 200, manual focus, lens set to infinity. I don't remember what the eye piece magnification was set to.

I touched it up in PhotoShop. Cropped, sharpened, levels and contrast, and reduced to 800 pixels high. If you want to see the original untouched picture I could upload that to my web site for you. I also had to save it at 70 quality in “save to web” in PS, to get the picture down a bit in size. That won’t help its quality.

The noise/distortions in this picture are more than I would like (I have high standards.) I have not run it through neat image, which would help it, although at ISO 200 noise shouldn't be much of a problem. It was also a hot day, so I'm sure the humidity and heat didn't help the quality. I took it for the reflection in the water, which came out well. What do others think? Should I expect better than this?


This company makes an adapter which sounds like it should work with the 50mm:
www.lensadapter.com

I believe the 50mm has a 52mm thread on the front, which matches perfectly with one of the adapters they made. I would (of course) contact them before buying anything. I was going to get a product name for you, but their site seems to be down at the moment.

I hope that helps.

Eric

I think that the 10d and the 100-400 is one set-up. It gives you 640mm at the long end which I find adequate most of the time for birds which can be approached.
The digiscope is another set-up with a good quality spotting scope and a Nikon Coolpix type of camera. This helps cover both birds which are close and those that cannot be approached. (though, in my opinion, you still get the best results with this kit if the bird is close).
Do remember that the 10d option provides images with greater information which means that even a smaller actual image can compare with a larger Coolpix image (at least for web use).
The 10d gives you SLR's mobility, the digiscope kit requires a heavy tripod at all times.
Both serve different purposes. If you have difficult light, birds that are inside dense forests and poor line of view, choose the SLR option. If you get good light, clear views and relatively sedentry/tame birds, choose digiscoping.
I get both types and happily use both tools.

I agree on the 100-400. It’s a wonderful lens that is attached to my 10D about 90% of the time (when I'm not messing around with digiscoping.) It’s a bit heavier than I'd like, but it has got decent range, fast AF, and the IS is a dream come true.

But at least for the places that I go, you can't have enough reach. I've been doing a lot of shots over water with restricted mobility. I just can't get closer than 100-150 feet away. Without the scope, I am quite limited in what I can do with the picture.

Now, maybe the quality isn't enough through the scope that I still can't make a large print from it. So taking the picture with the 100-400 @400 (and then cropping and enlarging) is the way to go. I haven’t compared yet. Andy gets really good pictures through his scope, but he is also very good at digiscoping. I don't print often, but I expect I'll use some for calendars and such (good Christmas gifts.) Quality matters to me. If I can’t get it with a scope… then I’ll find another way.

Eric

Eric and Sumit I REALLY appreciate all the help and tips!

Everything it's much clearer for me now!

Since I live in Brazil, I was hoping to take advantage of quick business trip to USA this month to purchase the "digiscope set" ...but I think I should 1st get the 10D, play with my lens and etc and only once I am comfortable with digital think about getting a scope.

It's amazing how exciting those sharp close-ups are! I can't wait to get to this level, but I must control my anxiety and go through the my learning curve before jumping into digiscoping. (still let's how long I will resist!!)

My dream with animals pictures is to create a reference guide of Birds and small mammals in this place I usually go (High altitude mountains (+1700 mts) with a mixture of Atlantic Forest and remnants of Araucaria forests). Sad to say but unfortunately even though it’s prohibited, some older habitants of this area still hunt animals – and my thoughts are, once the guide is ready get support from local government and use it to educate locals about wildlife preservation and the impacts of not preserving it as well as a guide to trekkers and hikers that visit the place as there is almost no reference to the fauna of this region.
Here, once an animal has been documented several organizations will monitor it and if something happens to it a lot of investigation will come. (let’s say I shoot a picture of a puma and send the image to local authorities or get it print on a local newspaper, if a puma is killed there authorities will go after the one that killed it).
I don’t have intentions to do any super professional book, I am not using blinds and also I am not fond of books where photographers captured the animals to get the photo. I want a reference guide like if someone is doing a trekking around the region what they expect to find and see…but my photos need to improve a lot to get to this point!!!!
Hopefully in 5 to 10 years I can get it done in a nice way!

Thank you very much again for the all the help!
Regards,

You will be amazed how quickly your photography can improve if you go digital and practice. You get instant feedback and it's cheap/free to take lots of pictures of the same thing with different settings.... and then you can easily find what worked in that situation. Accelerated learning is a great thing.

I hope your idea helps. One thing you should seriously consider is mobility. A spotting scope is not very light or small. The 100-400L will serve you will, but digiscoping serves a different purpose (like Sumit says.) On the other hand, some of the animals you'll want to photograph will be dangerious enough that you'll want to stay away. So consider them to be complementary.

Another lens you might consider is the 400mm f4 DO IS USM. It has a good fstop (so a 1.4x teleconverter will work on it and retain AF on the 10D) and it's smaller and ligher than other prime 400mm lenses. The downside is that it is very expensive. Extremely expensive. But it sounds like what you want to do would be a perfect match for this lens. It sounds like you need reach and mobility, which is exactly what this lens is made for. It quality isn't as good as the other 400mm prime lenses, but it's still very good.

Eric

One of the problems I have is light....the best animals are usually inside the forest early in the morning or late afternoon where light is weak...I am using a ISO 400 film and have tried a ISO 800 but it gets too grainy. Most of the times it is too dark to shoot something that is moving...I will still try some manual adjustment to the camera to be able to get more exposure with granularity...(not sure the name in English but there is a setup where you use a ISO 400 film and setup the camera as having a ISO 800 - then at development you need to add more exposure) .

I would love a 400-F4 but I now it's either the lens or the D10 Maybe later!

Here's a story for you:

I was at Ritz Camera purchasing my tele, I was explaining the sales guy what I wanted to do with it (photos of birds, pumas etc)... then he asked very seriously:

- So when taking the pictures, the puma will be running or still?

and I said...

- Mister, if the puma is running that means I WILL BE RUNNING TOO!



Thanks again for the help! Incredibly valuable!
regards,

Hi Deca, Wonderful story! Thanks.
On the choice, I would strongly support the 10D (and I am a Nikon man), you will not regret an investment in a DSLR. Here are a few points which may help:
- In a DSLR (10D) you can change the ISO yourself. No need to push process like film.
- You can go up in step increments. So if ISO 400 is too slow, you can go to ISO 500 then to ISO 620 (?) before you hit 800. These intermediate steps are very helpful/useful.
- Grain is much less evident in DSLR's compared to same high-speed film (on the computer screen)
- My experience with D100 (Nikon DSLR) shows that prints upto A4 size are acceptable. I still find film far superior if one needs a larger print size (many would argue this point.....this is my opinion with my eyes and my taste).
- DSLR's are very prone to picking up dust on the chip. You have to learn to clean it at risk to the equipment and be careful about changing lens in dusty conditions.
- Photoshop or similar is the most important ingredient to this mix. The better you get at it, the better your images will get.
Hope that helps!
Sumit

Hi Sumit!
Thanks a lot for the tiips, it is indeed very dusty there specially now that we are on a dry season! I will surely follow your advices!!

And now I must tell you and Eric.....


This is what happens when a woman is left by herself at home with a cold and internet access:


- I JUST BOUGHT THE 10D!! o


Yes! you 2 convinced me! It will be delivered next Friday So hopefully I will have some fun photos next week!


Many thanks for all the help! It was great!
Regards!
Deca

Congrats on the camera! It is a great camera (as is the D100 from Nikon, to be fair.)

Look into the program called "neat image" (www.neatimage.com) it is the best package I've seen to remove noise from a picture. I don't do anything serious to a picture before first running it through neat image.

When you shot with 400 or 800ISO, what fstop are you using? What mode are you in? If I'm using a flash (which is rare) I'm in program, but 90% of the time I'm in Av so I can control depth of field and shutter speed with the exposure compensation.

Also realize that you are buying into a system. A well built and cared for lens will last you 5-10 years or more. You'll swap camera bodies many times, but the lens collection just grows. I'd love to get either that 400mm DO or a 500 f4, but they are both too expensive right now. I need to build back up the accounts after the spotting scope.

Pumas are beautiful animals. I hope you get some good (and safe) shots of them.

Sumit

I agree on your comment about film still being better. I don't know as much about how large a print they will take.... To me, I always see that the dynamic range of certain films is so much better than film... you have to play tricks to get the same results digitally.

Eric

Good tip on neatimage! I'll try it!! There are some very nice samples and results on their site.

The problem happens inside the forests and when the sun is not 100% shining... I have tried several combinations of Film, aperture and program modes (mostly AV)....if the subject is a bit still it will work OK but if it's moving I get some blur or dark image.
Shooting at Forest edges works well and I am able to get some nice images, but the moment I go inside I start having light problems...

Check the next 2 images, 1st one with "blinky woodcreeper" was at a forest edge, 2a Bromelia plant was under a Araucaria Forest allows more daylight than atlantic forest - both using Fuji ISO 400 film.

Agree with you totally on the equipment, I also have a Nikon F3 and lens that are more than 15 yo and working perfectly! But it is fully manual and I wanted a "auto-focus-make-my-life-easier" one! I like the F3 for family and friends trips and gathering.

I will do some tests this weekend with both cameras (Elan and 10D) and with some luck I will bring some good results to show you!

Regards,

Altitude Bromelia don't know the name :|

I like those pictures. A flash would have helped the first one, by filling in the birds back. The second seems a bit odd. The lack of detail and the high contrast look a little funny to me. But it is a beautiful flower.

So it sounds like your problem is with shutter speed.

There are only a few ways (that I know) to get you more shutter speed. Here are my suggestions in my order of preference:

1) Use exposure compensation to increase shutter speed. I do this all the time. It darkens the picture, but you can recover that in photoshop. If in Av mode, you are pushing the shutter speed slightly faster than the camera thinks is "right". It works great. But it might not be enough.... the reality is that this will either work or not, depending on the situation. But the price is right!

2) Get a powerful flash and a better beamer. A better beamer is a "flash extender", basically a fresnel lens which is mounted in front of the flash to concentrate it. Look here for more info:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/better_beamer.shtml
http://www.birdsasart.com/accs.html
http://www.birdsasart.com/faq_flash.html
http://www.naturephotographers.net/gs/gsbb.html
http://www.moose395.net/gear/bb.html

It takes some trial and error to learn how to use it correctly, but it can get the flash to reach 100 feet or so. This has the advantage of being fairly cheap, light and easy to transport. Heck, you could use two flashes (slaved) and two better beamers if you had to.

3) Get the fastest lens that you can. The lower the fstop number the better. For the lenses that you use (ones with long reach) that has two side effects. They will be heavy and expensive. Unless your targets are really far away, the better beamer is a better option. It will bring more light to the picture than a faster lens will bring (I bet.) To me, your only realistic choices are:

Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=CA4004ISU
Cost: $5,299.95

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=CA40028ISU
Cost: $6,499.95

Maybe pick up a used 400mm f2.8 without IS? No idea the cost of that.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=CA70200ISU
Cost: $1,649.95 + a teleconverter

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=CA70200AFL
Cost: $1,129.95 + a teleconverter

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO HSM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=SG70200HEOS
Cost: $699.00 + a teleconverter

I didn't include the 500mm and 600mm. They are probably too large for you to carry around in the field. They are "tripod only", large and heavy lenses.

Lenses which might work:

Sigma 50-500mmF4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10601748257862975&sku=SG50500EOS
Cost: $889.00
The price is right, and this can be a good lens (quality variations make it a risk.) But that fstop is probably way too high for you. And you'll loose AF.

Nice pictures Deca, a good solid base to start from, keep them coming and take care the Puma doesn't see you before you see him!

Hi Eric,

Once again thank you very much for your suggestions!


I am thinking about the 1.4x teleconverter you suggested with a smaller lens, this seems to be a very nice option. The Canon 70-200 is looking good - but right now I need to recover from the 10D. BTW I just received it today and I 've started to play with it...how much fun!

Once again thanks very much!
Bst Regards,
Deca

Glad to help!

If you don't need the IS, the sigma I listed is very well received:
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO HSM

And much cheaper than the Canon. I've never done a side-by-side, but I hear good things about it from many people.

Also, the Kenko Pro tele converters are also well though of. I know others who use them and like them. (And they are cheaper than the Canon.) No mater what you get, make sure the TC works with the lenses you have. And I wouldn't go over 1.4x. The amount of light you'll loose won't work well in the already dark environment you'll be in.

Good Luck,
Eric