I've tried and tried, but either I just don't get it, or my equipment sucks. What could I have goofed on here? Remote shutter, on good tripod. Nikon Coolpix 4300, LE Adapter. Camera set on Macro setting. About 60 - 70 feet away. Nikon RAII scope at 45x magnification.
-
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.
Considering giving up Digiscoping (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Draco
- Start date
Pie Face
Well-known member
Draco said:
I'd stick with it if I were you. Try to take photos at a much lower magnification than 45X. I usually use 20 and certainly no more than 30X. As your scope is only a 60mm ojective a smaller mag will certainly improve the quality and sharpness of your photos and at 60 - 70ft away 20X is plenty.
Actually the photo is quite good. Is it an Eastern Screech Owl
Hope this helps
Mark
christineredgate
Winner of the Copeland Wildlife Photographer of th
Draco,that is a good shot,a little dark maybe.Stick with it,honestly you will get very good results eventually ,I promise
A bit of brightening up and it's fine, just a shame the owl has it's eyes closed.
Yep, 45x is way too much even with an 80mm scope. 20-30x (and closer to 20x on your 60mm) is the norm for digiscoping. Being greedy with magnification is a common downfall for digiscopers, you need very good conditions and scope to pull it off. You can usually ignore all these people who show photos said to be taken at 200 yards or whatever, most people are very poor at judging real distances, with most birds you'll need to be within 50 yards for an o.k. photo (less than 20 for your average sparrow sized bird).
Yep, 45x is way too much even with an 80mm scope. 20-30x (and closer to 20x on your 60mm) is the norm for digiscoping. Being greedy with magnification is a common downfall for digiscopers, you need very good conditions and scope to pull it off. You can usually ignore all these people who show photos said to be taken at 200 yards or whatever, most people are very poor at judging real distances, with most birds you'll need to be within 50 yards for an o.k. photo (less than 20 for your average sparrow sized bird).
Draco, do you know how many times I have uttered those same words? Then I will get a shot that is decent and will be overjoyed only to get another batch that I am distraught with. There are so many variables involved in getting a decent shot.
I agree with Mark. Try sticking to no higher than 20x for a bit and see if you can see the difference. Bringing up the power is also going to darken your photos as less light is getting in. Keep it up. Honest, you will finally see results.
I agree with Mark. Try sticking to no higher than 20x for a bit and see if you can see the difference. Bringing up the power is also going to darken your photos as less light is getting in. Keep it up. Honest, you will finally see results.
Gill Osborne
Well-known member
Draco, I'm with Christine and Mark....looks fine to me...just a little dark. I'm sure it'll all come together with a bit more practice and experimenting!
GILL
GILL
LzyPhotographer
Well-known member
Stick with it... I read once it's considered great if 10% of all the shots are keepers. Out of that 10%, every now and then you get a real beauty. And practice DOES make perfect, so keep trying.
Show us more pics.. I bet they're better than you think.. coz you're your own harshest critic. ;-)
Show us more pics.. I bet they're better than you think.. coz you're your own harshest critic. ;-)
nigelblake
don't re member
M N Reeder said:
Stick with it Draco, it will suddenly all become easy......honest, I still shoot some serious duds.
As for Surfbirds Mark, are you going to name names? I have a few good guess's
Thanks everyone!
I've only been at this for about 8 months. I have a few decent shots of Dragonflies, but the birds are much more difficult. I was mostly upset with this shot because I had all the time in the world (I couldn't get her to wake up, Andy!) and I knew from past experience that I would need to take a LOT of shots to get a good one. The focus/depth of field problem is what got me so down. I tried to refocus every ten shots, or so. This was as good as I could get with 30 - 40 shots.
If the problem has been that I'm shooting with too much magnification that will cheer me up a bit. Now, I just have to figure out how to get closer to birds!
Do you shoot at the lower magnification and crop your photos? If I'm shooting at 4 mega pixels can I crop and enlarge, or does that end up grainy? Are there any other tricks to getting a sharp image with what I have from a distance and still have the subject take up a good portion of the shot?
While I'm bugging you good folks, can I leave the camera on the scope and expect to be able to focus? The viewer on the 4300 is so small that I have not attempted it. Do you have any tricks? It is almost impossible to get a bird to sit long enough for me to get the scope on it, focus, mount the camera and take the shot. Unless, of course, it's a SLEEPY Owl!!!
Thanks again for your kind words, encouragement and tips!
Mark
I've only been at this for about 8 months. I have a few decent shots of Dragonflies, but the birds are much more difficult. I was mostly upset with this shot because I had all the time in the world (I couldn't get her to wake up, Andy!) and I knew from past experience that I would need to take a LOT of shots to get a good one. The focus/depth of field problem is what got me so down. I tried to refocus every ten shots, or so. This was as good as I could get with 30 - 40 shots.
If the problem has been that I'm shooting with too much magnification that will cheer me up a bit. Now, I just have to figure out how to get closer to birds!
Do you shoot at the lower magnification and crop your photos? If I'm shooting at 4 mega pixels can I crop and enlarge, or does that end up grainy? Are there any other tricks to getting a sharp image with what I have from a distance and still have the subject take up a good portion of the shot?While I'm bugging you good folks, can I leave the camera on the scope and expect to be able to focus? The viewer on the 4300 is so small that I have not attempted it. Do you have any tricks? It is almost impossible to get a bird to sit long enough for me to get the scope on it, focus, mount the camera and take the shot. Unless, of course, it's a SLEEPY Owl!!!
Thanks again for your kind words, encouragement and tips!
Mark
Dont Give up.
My initial shots were REALLY shocking and I blamed eveything from myself to the camera, and started thinking it was a black art.
I improved my own results significantly by :
1) Sparrow sized bird - 20 feet distance 20 x.
2) Bigger birds 20 - 25 yards 20x.
3) Make sure subject is lit ( In sunlight )
4) Shoot on highest shutter speed 125th min ideally 250 and use a remote or cable release.
5) Use the lowest optical zoom on 4500 to avoid vignetting and keep the Yellow flower lit.
6) Keep looking at someone like Richard Bledsoe's shots for inspiration - how does he do it !
Generally, I would say the closer you can get to the bird the better - I bought my digi set up to take shots of Waders and Peregrines at 180 yards - ooops !
You have probably heard all this and more from the experts but maybe coming from a duffer like me will give you hope !!!
Good luck and have some fun trying.
Lindsay
My initial shots were REALLY shocking and I blamed eveything from myself to the camera, and started thinking it was a black art.
I improved my own results significantly by :
1) Sparrow sized bird - 20 feet distance 20 x.
2) Bigger birds 20 - 25 yards 20x.
3) Make sure subject is lit ( In sunlight )
4) Shoot on highest shutter speed 125th min ideally 250 and use a remote or cable release.
5) Use the lowest optical zoom on 4500 to avoid vignetting and keep the Yellow flower lit.
6) Keep looking at someone like Richard Bledsoe's shots for inspiration - how does he do it !
Generally, I would say the closer you can get to the bird the better - I bought my digi set up to take shots of Waders and Peregrines at 180 yards - ooops !
You have probably heard all this and more from the experts but maybe coming from a duffer like me will give you hope !!!
Good luck and have some fun trying.
Lindsay
Doug Greenberg
Well-known member
While I'm bugging you good folks, can I leave the camera on the scope and expect to be able to focus? The viewer on the 4300 is so small that I have not attempted it. Do you have any tricks? It is almost impossible to get a bird to sit long enough for me to get the scope on it, focus, mount the camera and take the shot.
I encourage you to keep the camera on the scope when you're digiscoping. If the viewfinder on the 4300 is too small, get an Xtend-a-view shade/magnifier to attach to the LCD. It makes focusing somewhat easier.
I agree that digiscoping birds that move at all is very difficult, given the delays that are inherent in working the shutter of a small digital camera. I guess mastering capturing images of motionless birds is the first step, and like any difficult skill, one has to practice, practice, practice.
I encourage you to keep the camera on the scope when you're digiscoping. If the viewfinder on the 4300 is too small, get an Xtend-a-view shade/magnifier to attach to the LCD. It makes focusing somewhat easier.
I agree that digiscoping birds that move at all is very difficult, given the delays that are inherent in working the shutter of a small digital camera. I guess mastering capturing images of motionless birds is the first step, and like any difficult skill, one has to practice, practice, practice.
Hi Draco, i too use a Nikon 4300 had it for two months and i was not so impressed with what i was seeing.
But i was beginning to suspect i was being a little ambitious with distances , something that others seem to confirm.
I think your shot of the owl is good if a little dark and i hope you persevere because im sure it will be worth it.
Cuddy.
But i was beginning to suspect i was being a little ambitious with distances , something that others seem to confirm.
I think your shot of the owl is good if a little dark and i hope you persevere because im sure it will be worth it.
Cuddy.
dahyon
Well-known member
I would like to show you what you have been attempting, with the help of a Digiscoping calculator by George Raiche :www.digibird.com. I have plugged your data into George's spreadsheet and the 35mm equivalent of your setup is about 6000mm. This gives a brightness index (relative intensity of digiscoped image at CCD) of 0.5 To put that in context your 20x mag would give you a BI of 13, more than 20 times more light. If you used a low power eyepiece (I use a Maxview40) this would give you a BI of 86. BELIEVE me this is something to experience.
Unfortunately you do need Excel or equivalent to use the calculator. Perhaps Jay Turberville will include the brightness index in the next version of his excellent on-line calculator.
Keep going, as the other digiscopers have said that image is quite acceptable considering the known limitations of high magnification and consequent low light.
Cheers
dave nuttall
Unfortunately you do need Excel or equivalent to use the calculator. Perhaps Jay Turberville will include the brightness index in the next version of his excellent on-line calculator.
Keep going, as the other digiscopers have said that image is quite acceptable considering the known limitations of high magnification and consequent low light.
Cheers
dave nuttall
Ruby
Well-known member
Hi Draco,
I too would like to join in the general encouragement - it's a tricky old business, but worth sticking with I reckon.
One point to add.... It may just be worth taking some test shots under as near perfect conditions as you can manage, just to ensure that there aren't any equipment problems. This would also to put a stake in the ground for just how good results you could ever hope to get...
Just stick a nice suitable subject up about 20m away in good light, and see how good a result you can get??
Do you have an adapter to fix the camera to the scope BTW?? Also a cable shutter release - these make quite a difference!!
I too would like to join in the general encouragement - it's a tricky old business, but worth sticking with I reckon.
One point to add.... It may just be worth taking some test shots under as near perfect conditions as you can manage, just to ensure that there aren't any equipment problems. This would also to put a stake in the ground for just how good results you could ever hope to get...
Just stick a nice suitable subject up about 20m away in good light, and see how good a result you can get??
Do you have an adapter to fix the camera to the scope BTW?? Also a cable shutter release - these make quite a difference!!
scampo
Steve Campsall
It's surely better than you think! I'd be pleased if it were mine, even if it is asleep.Draco said:
I guess you've done a bit of work on it anyway - have you tried downloading a free trial of a photo enhancer such as AutoEye? A rather expensive product but might just be what you need to hang on inthere with this wonderful (...ly frustrating!) hobby.
I've played around in PSE2 with it below.
Attachments
Last edited:
