Astroscope + DSLR = Gallery! (1 Viewer)

[JGobeil]

Thanks Dan,
Working on it... it is getting less of a challenge to get good results as I gain confidence in my setups and how to take advantage of them in various situations.

Same here. Those 10 birding days in Florida helped me a lot. Practice makes perfect ! (Well... almost... sometimes)

I took 4000 photos and quickly discarded 2300. Then I chose 200 that I pre-processed (crop-exposure-clarity-shadows) in LR. I'll probably end up posting less than 100 on my Web site. That's 2.5%.

Somewhat similar if I count only the ones taken with the scope. I started with 675, pre-processed 33 in LR and will publish about 15. 2.2%.

That's a lot of work and expense for 100 good photos... But I enjoyed every minute of it.

Regards
Jules

 

[DanC.Licks]

Look at it this way, film is cheap these days!

 

[Tord]

Little Green Bee-eaters

Sharing a few more Little Green Bee-eaters from Sri Lanka with the TLAPO804.

One lucky shot framing a couple in flight (50% crop), and an easier one (full frame).

 

[JGobeil]

Dan and Tord,
Nice birds we don't have here.

 

[JGobeil]

Florida Ducks

2 nice Florida duck species we don't have here in Quebec: Black-bellied Whistling-duck and Mottled Duck.

EM-1 & SW80ED

 

[Paul Corfield]

Sunbathing Dunnock. Taken with a Miranda 75-300mm TN. It's a good higher power TN for smaller sensors. Corners are a tiny bit soft on 1.6X crop sensors but middle is as sharp as the best TN's. I imagine the soft corners would not be present on the micro 4/3 cameras.

Paul.

 

[DanC.Licks]

I think they would, but obviously somewhat less. The Nik sensor is a bit wider, but not much higher than the 4/3 sensor, 23.7 x 15.5 vs 17.3 x 13mm. The softness comes pretty far into the picture. Here is what it would look like on a 4/3 sensor:

But the center is really good, no question. Have you ever tried a TN like this with a field flattener in between. Gets to be a lot of glass, but just curious....

 

[Paul Corfield]

I think they would, but obviously somewhat less. The Nik sensor is a bit wider, but not much higher than the 4/3 sensor, 23.7 x 15.5 vs 17.3 x 13mm. The softness comes pretty far into the picture. Here is what it would look like on a 4/3 sensor:
View attachment 493707
But the center is really good, no question. Have you ever tried a TN like this with a field flattener in between. Gets to be a lot of glass, but just curious....

I'd have to photograph a wall or something else square on to see how far the corner softness goes. I was at about 45° to this fence so it's not all together clear in this photo. Moving the TN a little further from the camera would remove a fair bit too. I don't own a field flattener unfortunately.

Paul.

 

[Tord]

A small group of Curlews had landed on a meadow to feed within 25 meters from the road, an opportunity I simply had to grab. Photos taken from car, works great as a hide. Wish the light had been a tad softer. Some annoying "double lines" are visible in the background, more or less pronounced depending on distances to subject and to background.

 

[DanC.Licks]

Our 1995 dark green Renault Espace 4x4 doubles as a great hide! I take the seats out of the back and have plenty of room to set up and Elaine can sit in the front with her scope and bins. I tie the tripod down with elastic straps hooked into the floor where the seats usually are mounted, and it is solid as a rock driving around. Needs to be. The roads in Hungary are NOT the best!
Only seen one Curlew all year so far.
The double lines are something we are just going to have to live with I am afraid.

 

[Tord]

Sounds like a practical working platform!

Have been doing some more experiments with the gimbal mounted upside down. This is as low I can come, camera body almost digging the dirt. I need to find spots with even flatter shores, yet providing visibility.

Full EM-5 frames
TS102 700mm

 

[JGobeil]

Sounds like a practical working platform!

Have been doing some more experiments with the gimbal mounted upside down. This is as low I can come, camera body almost digging the dirt. I need to find spots with even flatter shores, yet providing visibility.

Full EM-5 frames
TS102 700mm

Nice photos Tord. Have you tried using a bean bag?

 

[cango]

great shots tord.

I bought a frying pan (light one, not made of cast iron) to butchered, and mounting the gimbal on. like this one, but without the handle http://www.blog.catandturtle.net/wp...Groundpod__201303291_copyrightJessYarnell.jpg

 

[Paul Corfield]

Great shots Tord, lovely low angle.

Paul.

 

[Tord]

Nice photos Tord. Have you tried using a bean bag?

Thanks Jules,

Yes I have a bean bag as well, but the terrain on that spot is not suitable for using it. The tips of the tripod front legs are placed on the shoreline, me sitting on the muddy shore on a piece of frigolite. The tripod centre column is reversed in a matter of 10 seconds and lowered so that the camera body is just above ground. This way risk of disaster (setup falling into mud) is minimized.

 

[Tord]

great shots tord.

I bought a frying pan (light one, not made of cast iron) to butchered, and mounting the gimbal on. like this one, but without the handle http://www.blog.catandturtle.net/wp...Groundpod__201303291_copyrightJessYarnell.jpg

Thanks Carlos,
Yes that could be a solution if the space is restricted, preventing from deploying the tripod legs. I however like the comfort and stability given by a wide base, and furthermore the tripod column can be adjusted to any height.

 

[DanC.Licks]

I think you are low enough. Too low and you will lose the feeling of depth and your pictures might start looking more two dimensional.

 

[Tord]

I think you are low enough. Too low and you will lose the feeling of depth and your pictures might start looking more two dimensional.

Maybe, maybe not. I agree that the perception of depth/distances decreases with lower perspective. My intention was however to try to get a perspective as viewed from the birds' eyes, which is not yet the case. I'd like to render the perspective from like 10 cm above water level but the form factor of the refractor setup, extending 40-50 cm behind centre of gravity means it would work on very flat and firm shores only, something we don't have here. If it's flat enough, its soft or even muddy and usually has vegetation. If it's firm enough then it is usually too steep. Maybe I will try using my spotting scope with DSLR adapter (but then it's no longer prime focusing). The scope is angled so the camera would be safely be placed away from water.

 

[DanC.Licks]

How about using a 45° or a 90° prism?

 

[Tord]

Maybe that would help, but still the length would be same.

Tried the spotting scope + DSLR adapter today. Got the perspective I wanted, but the IQ is sub-par. Must have forgotten how superior IQ the astroscope deliver.