lachlustre
Should be recording bird song
I don't know very much about photography, so I would appreciate your help with this:
I'm researching a digiscoping camera. Two models have piqued my interest because they boast technological advances that might be relevant for digiscoping: the Panasonic FX-9, and the Fuji F11 (or perhaps E900: doesn't matter for purposes of this question). Both cameras seem to have had somewhat enthusiastic reviews on different threads in the "Digiscoping cameras" section.
From what I've read, once you've found a camera whose lens matches up well to your scope, and once you've successfully attached the camera to the scope, the main remaining problem is camera-shake. Camera shake is an inherent problem with digiscoping because a) there is a large amount of magnification and b) there is a relatively low amount of light entering the camera from the eyepiece - this means that the camera has to use a slower shutter speed. Therefore some of the advice meted out to would-be digiscopers like me involves investing in a stable tripod, and a scope with a large objective lens to maximize brightness.
The Panasonic and Fuji cameras take alternative approaches to improving the situation still further. The Panasonic does this with Image Stabilization technology which allows you to use a slower shutter speed on the camera without blurring. On the other hand, Fuji has invested in more sensitive sensors that allow you to use higher ISO values without noise becoming an issue. High ISO's = more light sensitivity = faster shutter speeds with less light = less image shake. In contrast, Panasonic cameras seem to be notorious for their relatively poor performance on high ISO settings (see any recent review at dpreview.com).
So... the question: which technique is better? From my perspective as a complete beginner, the Fuji approach seems more useful for wildlife photographers. Why? Well the point of Image Stabilization is to allow you to use slower shutter speeds successfully, but the hand-shaking photographer is not the only moving creature involved in wildlife photography. Surely the aim is to increase shutter speeds as much as possible to capture sharp pictures of moving animals. Hence Fuji's approach seems more likely to work. What do you think?
(Of course there are other factors that distinguish these cameras: Panasonic's Leica lenses are often praised, for example. I am more interested in how these two technological advances stack up against each other for digiscopers)
I'm researching a digiscoping camera. Two models have piqued my interest because they boast technological advances that might be relevant for digiscoping: the Panasonic FX-9, and the Fuji F11 (or perhaps E900: doesn't matter for purposes of this question). Both cameras seem to have had somewhat enthusiastic reviews on different threads in the "Digiscoping cameras" section.
From what I've read, once you've found a camera whose lens matches up well to your scope, and once you've successfully attached the camera to the scope, the main remaining problem is camera-shake. Camera shake is an inherent problem with digiscoping because a) there is a large amount of magnification and b) there is a relatively low amount of light entering the camera from the eyepiece - this means that the camera has to use a slower shutter speed. Therefore some of the advice meted out to would-be digiscopers like me involves investing in a stable tripod, and a scope with a large objective lens to maximize brightness.
The Panasonic and Fuji cameras take alternative approaches to improving the situation still further. The Panasonic does this with Image Stabilization technology which allows you to use a slower shutter speed on the camera without blurring. On the other hand, Fuji has invested in more sensitive sensors that allow you to use higher ISO values without noise becoming an issue. High ISO's = more light sensitivity = faster shutter speeds with less light = less image shake. In contrast, Panasonic cameras seem to be notorious for their relatively poor performance on high ISO settings (see any recent review at dpreview.com).
So... the question: which technique is better? From my perspective as a complete beginner, the Fuji approach seems more useful for wildlife photographers. Why? Well the point of Image Stabilization is to allow you to use slower shutter speeds successfully, but the hand-shaking photographer is not the only moving creature involved in wildlife photography. Surely the aim is to increase shutter speeds as much as possible to capture sharp pictures of moving animals. Hence Fuji's approach seems more likely to work. What do you think?
(Of course there are other factors that distinguish these cameras: Panasonic's Leica lenses are often praised, for example. I am more interested in how these two technological advances stack up against each other for digiscopers)