Nikon P5100 (4 Viewers)

[fleisher]

Neil,

Thanks for the feedback. While RAW would certainly be nice I am not sure that it is worth the extra money. In addition, I believe that either digicam would be an improvement in image quality, focusing ability, etc. over the A95 I am currently using.

Regarding Rick's recommendation that I go with the D40 - thanks but no thanks. I already have a full cadre of Canon DSLRs (40D, Rebel XTi, Rebel 400D) and an assortment of long lenses (300mm/f4; 500mm/f4; 75-300mm f4-5.6 all with IS) so it is specifically something to put on the end of a scope (I use the Pentax 80a typically with a Pentax SMC XW 14mm eyepiece) that I am looking for.

Rich

 

[RJM]

Regarding Rick's recommendation that I go with the D40 - thanks but no thanks. I already have a full cadre of Canon DSLRs (40D, Rebel XTi, Rebel 400D) and an assortment of long lenses (300mm/f4; 500mm/f4; 75-300mm f4-5.6 all with IS) so it is specifically something to put on the end of a scope (I use the Pentax 80a typically with a Pentax SMC XW 14mm eyepiece) that I am looking for.

Rich

Then why ever screw around with a digicam? You already have everything you need for excellent pics except for the 43mm to T42 adapter rings. Connect that Bad Boy XTi body directly to the 14mm XW eyepiece via the 43mm thread under the rubber eyeguard. Contact Bob at Alpineastro.com for the Baader parts.

Rick

 

[fleisher]

Rick,

Thanks for the suggestions. I have used the DSLR as a digiscoping camera (400D + 50mm lens connected by a step down ring 52mm-43mm) but I have not been entirely pleased with the results. First, the additional weight of the DSLR makes it awkward to use a digiscoping camera. Second, I have found focusing through the DSLR and the scope more difficult for getting sharp shots as compared to using a P&S. While I will continue playing with the DSLR as a digiscoping camera I would still prefer to put a good P&S at the end of the scope.

 

[Neil]

Rick,

Thanks for the suggestions. I have used the DSLR as a digiscoping camera (400D + 50mm lens connected by a step down ring 52mm-43mm) but I have not been entirely pleased with the results. First, the additional weight of the DSLR makes it awkward to use a digiscoping camera. Second, I have found focusing through the DSLR and the scope more difficult for getting sharp shots as compared to using a P&S. While I will continue playing with the DSLR as a digiscoping camera I would still prefer to put a good P&S at the end of the scope.

Rich,
I also still have trouble with the manual focusing, although it is much better with the newer cameras that have Liveview.
I like to have a day out with just the scope and the camera in a small backpack with a lightweight tripod and be able to digiscope from 1000 - 3000 mm in peace and quiet. The new Panasonic Lumix G1 interests me a lot though and could be a good compromise camera.
Neil.

 

[Neil]

Rick,

Thanks for the suggestions. I have used the DSLR as a digiscoping camera (400D + 50mm lens connected by a step down ring 52mm-43mm) but I have not been entirely pleased with the results. First, the additional weight of the DSLR makes it awkward to use a digiscoping camera. Second, I have found focusing through the DSLR and the scope more difficult for getting sharp shots as compared to using a P&S. While I will continue playing with the DSLR as a digiscoping camera I would still prefer to put a good P&S at the end of the scope.

Rich,
I also still have trouble with the manual focusing, although it is much better with the newer cameras that have Liveview.
I like to have a day out with just the scope and the camera in a small backpack with a lightweight tripod and be able to digiscope from 1000 - 3000 mm in peace and quiet. The new Panasonic Lumix G1 interests me a lot though and could be a good compromise camera.
Neil.

 

[joannec]

Hi guys

This thread is full of interesting and useful information. I have a Nikon ED III scope. Has anyone used the P5100 with this scope? Been thinking of getting one.

Joanne

 

[RJM]

Hi Joanne, no secret I love Nikon dSLRs but still think Nikon's digicams are not up to snuff. Their only adavantage with the EDIII is that they have matching adapters for attaching the camera. Even the Nikon fanboys like Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan think they are not worth buying. Everyone had high hopes the P6000 would be the "one" but again Nikon disappointed.

Here's Thom Hogans review of the latest P6000, http://bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm

and here's the Luminous Landscape's, http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pocket-battleships.shtml

Finally, here is the P5100 conclusion of DP Review (they never find a camera they don't like). Pay attention to the first five "CONS" as these are very important for digiscoping, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp5100/page16.asp

With small aperture scope like the EDIII you really need a camera with good high ISO performance as most your shots will be at ISO400 and higher. Really the only cameras that can do that are dSLRs. Forturnately, the Nikon D40 is not only a great digiscoping camera but also a little CHEAPER now than the flagship digicams and only a little bigger/heavier.

cheers,
Rick

 

[Robert L Jarvis]

With regard to the adverse comments on DPreview as highlighted by Rick, these points are note worthy but For Rick to say Nikon's digicams are not upto snuff as he puts is well wide of the mark. You have only look into the gallery on this site to see the quality of Digiscoped shots using the P5100. Rather than take as the be all and end all as often put out by reviewers who are only looking at the camera for taking general shots, ask people who actually use the P5100 for digiscoping. In fact one very big plus compared to the Canon digicams is the quality of the lcd screen which is so good it is live view!! On paper the Panasonic LX3 appears to be a potentially excellent digiscoping camera and well worth a look but pricey!!

I wonder if Rick ever tried the P5100 for digiscoping? If you read Neil's comments the best Digicam was the Canon A640 but let down by a very poor lcd. Neil also thought that the P5100 was an extremely good digiscoping tool.

There is a great deal of push on the forum by people for using DSLRs for digiscoping of which Rick is clearly a proponent. However using a dslr does have attendant diifficulties, every thing is in manual, you will need good light, a balance rail is a must because of the end weight problem, a decision has to be made about connecting the dslr. Do not be tempted IMO to go for a photoadapter as the F range becomes very poor. You would need to use the standard lens that the dslr of your choice comes withand connect to the scope's eyepiece but there will always be attendant light problems.

That is just a few things in brief, there are many articles, posts on the forum about digiscoping, and indeed on Kowa's. Nikon's and Swarovski's own websites.

Robert

 

[RJM]

I wonder if Rick ever tried the P5100 for digiscoping?

Nope. After having used the D40 for digiscoping and spending about 45min with P5100 at the store (great thing about Tokyo is the big box camera shops have EVERY camera and EVERY spotting scope together on one floor!) I could tell the P5100 would not work for me. Panasonic seems to be hitting on all cyclinders though with the LX3 and G1. Too bad they cost more than the D40 though! :t:

However using a dslr does have attendant diifficulties, every thing is in manual, you will need good light, a balance rail is a must because of the end weight problem, a decision has to be made about connecting the dslr. Do not be tempted IMO to go for a photoadapter as the F range becomes very poor.

Ahh, that is the beauty on Nikon fieldscopes used with the cool FSA-L1 adapter and Nikon DSLRs. It allows you to choose Aperture Priority mode. Metering, exposure, ISO, and shutter can all be automated, leaving only shot compostion and focusing to be done manually. Until someone finds a way to hook up a focus motor to a spotter, some manual focus will always be required even with a digicam.

cheers,
Rick

 

[joannec]

Thanks for comments Robert and Rick. It seems I've wondered into a minefield. I take Ricks point about needing high ISO performance because of the relatively small size objective of the EDIII. I guess this is what I was concerned about because most of you guys use big scopes for digiscoping. But I don't want a big scope; they are too heavy for me and for that reason I would rule out a DSLR for digiscoping too. I want to get the balance right between birding and photography and being overburdened with heavy kit is not part of the plan.

 

[Cactusdave]

Joanne, I don't know what range of eyepiece options there are for the EDIII, but it is perfectly possible to achieve decent results with a smaller scope and a digicam. I have taken shots I am very happy with using a Kowa 614 and TSN X30W eyepiece. Yes you do need reasonable light, yes a cable release is useful. Yes you do need the widest eyepiece you can get. Yes you do need to keep to ISO 200 or below with a compact camera, but it is possible to be too fancy about these things. If you are a perfectionist by nature you may be disappointed, but if you simply want to take pictures you will enjoy, to help you remember a particular bird or a particular trip, I would say go for it. Maybe think about a slightly cheaper camera than the Coolpix 5100 or 6000, say the Canon Powershot 590is which is still an excellent digiscoping camera and about £100 cheaper. In the end its all about what you want to get out of digiscoping, perfection or pleasure.

 

[RJM]

Hi Joanne,

Apologies for being a P5100 "luv fest" spoiler. I really hate to poo poo anyone's choice of camera. It just shocks me Nikon can produce elegant, easy-to-use user interfaces for their dSLRs while their digicams seemed to be designed by folks who never take pics.

I also appreciate your desire for a simple low-weight digiscoping kit. I don't own a car so have to depend on public transport myself. I certainly wouldn't want to take my ED82 kit on an extended hike!

So if the P5100 is priced right now, by all means get it. With the Nikon FSB-6 adapter, and 24x Wide DS eyepiece, you will be hard pressed to find a more elegant solution. The camera can certainly take good pics if you can learn to work within its limitations.

cheers,
Rick

 

[Neil]

Hi Joanne, no secret I love Nikon dSLRs but still think Nikon's digicams are not up to snuff. Their only adavantage with the EDIII is that they have matching adapters for attaching the camera. Even the Nikon fanboys like Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan think they are not worth buying. Everyone had high hopes the P6000 would be the "one" but again Nikon disappointed.

Here's Thom Hogans review of the latest P6000, http://bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm

and here's the Luminous Landscape's, http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pocket-battleships.shtml

Finally, here is the P5100 conclusion of DP Review (they never find a camera they don't like). Pay attention to the first five "CONS" as these are very important for digiscoping, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp5100/page16.asp

With small aperture scope like the EDIII you really need a camera with good high ISO performance as most your shots will be at ISO400 and higher. Really the only cameras that can do that are dSLRs. Forturnately, the Nikon D40 is not only a great digiscoping camera but also a little CHEAPER now than the flagship digicams and only a little bigger/heavier.

cheers,
Rick

Rick,
Thanks for the links. I wish I had the money at the moment to get the G10 and the LX3 as they come up well.
I have been very impressed with images coming out of digicams for some some time, from the Fuji F30 onwards. I have taken the Ricoh GX100 to Egypt (http://www.pbase.com/neilfif11/ricoh_gx100_images&page=2 ) and taken the Canon G6 to India (http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=+India&w=7892550@N03&page=2 ) and digiscoped with them both. I would say I've got images that make me satisfied from all of the recent cameras I've tried.
The most difficult of my cameras to digiscope with is the Fuji F100 (due to it's lens) but it takes excellent photos in it's own right. The one I like to use the most is the Canon G6 ( only on the Scopetronix Maxview eyepiece ).
The easiest to use for digiscoping though at the moment that I've tried are the Nikon P5100 and the Canon A590IS. Most people will get good digiscoped images from these cameras. If the Canon screen was as good as the Nikons' I would give it the most recommended rating.
I do like the extra megs in the Nikon P6000 though as it gives a lot of cropping room.
We are spoilt for choice these days.
Bring on the Panasonic Lumix G1.
Neil.

 

[RJM]

Hi Neal,
I think you could coax great pics out of pinhole camera!:clap:

I would like to upgrade to a newer digicam with IS and good manual control to use with my tiny ED50 and would prefer an all-Nikon solution too. But with the Canon A590IS selling on Amazon.com for under US$100 now, it is a no-brainer for digiscoping IF I can mount it easily to the Nikon DS eyepiece.

Have you tried a sun hood for the A590 LCD? I have a tiny but old Pentax OptioS 5z digicam and use this Velbon fold-out hood with built-in loupe. It attaches magnetically to two thin metal strips held on the camera with double sided tape. It certainly helps with seeing the LCD screen in bright sun.

cheers,
Rick

 

[joannec]

Thanks for information guys. I like the sound of the Canon 590IS and certainly the price is good (it's £94 delivered from Amazon UK now). I also like the fact that you've recommended a Canon as I am familiar with the layout and interface of Canons. My scope has an MC zoom eyepiece. Anyone know how easily it is to fit the Nikon adaptor to this with the A590IS? Or how easy/difficult would it be to make an adaptor for this combination?

Joanne

 

[Robert L Jarvis]

Joan, the A590IS is good value and will cetainly do the job, be patient with the poor lcd screen. AS for a screen cover all you need is a bit of stiff card, cut to shape, of the right thickness so when it is bent ti fit over the screen it will slide into the gap between the camera body and the reversed lcd screen. The benefits are that it costs nothing and will do the job, no need to spend money on some thing like Rick's contraption. As for an an adapter, you have to decide do you want to look through the scope as well as take photos, in which event you will need a swing away adapter on which the camera can be fixed or one that can be put in place and removed quickly. It will depend on what scope you have, I do not recall this being mentioned. The SRB mk11 swing away is excellent but may not neccessarily be the thing for you, however have a look at the opitcron adapter that can be fitted to the eyepiece and removed with little effort but for that you will need the appropriate Canon LA... adapter for the 590.

Robert

 

[joannec]

Thanks Robert...well I do want to be able to look through the scope as well as take pictures. The scope is a Nikon EDIII so will need one that will swing away or be easily removed.

 

[Robert L Jarvis]

Joanne

The first thing to do is check out the Nikon website and then Infocus to look at their digiscoping equipment and cost. That will give you a start point to check what suits your needs and your pocket.

Robert

 

[ColinSev]

P5100

The P5100 in my opinion is a very good digiscoping camera - its not perfect - there isnt such a camera unfortunately. People will always prefer what they have in there own stock - mainly because they are used to it - I see little reason to pay extra to get the P6000. And a DSLR on the end of a scope is only useful if your stuck in a hide.
Be very aware of the panasonics tendency to put a blue fringe on high contrasting images - it is noticeable when you zoom in.
I dont get this with the P5100, and until it breaks down I am happy with this camera.

 

[Lawts]

What settings would you use on a very frustrating Gry Phalarope bobbing about in the water so quickly you couldn't lock focus and shoot.

It was a very bright day with a generally pale bird. I experimented with a number of settings on A, S with different shutter speeds and apeture settings but just couldn't get a sharp shot - mainly I think due to bird movement. It was about twenty yards away. I must have taken about 100 shots and not a single one sharp enough. In contrast I shot some Goldeneye nearby, and only took about ten shots, most of which were pin sharp.

Interested to hear views on best settings.