Sony a7ii are full-frame cameras ok for digiscoping? (1 Viewer)

[Joker9937]

I have messed around with phonescoping for a bit. Always frustrated with even my "best" photos, due to quality. I realize that generally, digiscoping, with a camer or a phone, is always likely lesser than a "real" camera and lens combo. However, I like the challenge.

There is a Sony a7ii for sale locally. It is in good condition, and would be a decent choice if I decide to move further down the rabbit hole.

I seem to hear more about 4/3 cameras than full frame. If I use the Swaro adapter that they say is FOR full frame, is there a problem with full frame for some reason? Would this be an acceptable choice of camera for digiscoping? Thank you.

Also, I searched this forum before posting, but found nothing about this camera. I apologize if there is already a thread on it.

 

[Peregrine Took]

Bump. I hope someone with authority on digiscoping answers because I don't see what the format of the camera sensor has to do with digiscoping, but I'm willing to be educated.

That said, from what I've seen of the suspect quality of digiscoped images, if I was going to get into photographing birds I'd probably go with an APSC format DSLR (like a Canon 7DmkII) and a long lens. I don't see how digiscoping with a micro four thirds system is going to get anywhere near the quality I'd expect, in order to make it worth the effort.

The biggest negative with full frame (Sony A7##) for birding is that you don't have the 'lens multiplication' that you get with APSC. Obviously this doesn't apply to digiscoping, but if you were to go down the camera/lens -only route, I'd go for APSC.

I used to use a Nikon D810 professionally and sold it for my Fuji XT1, which has better resolution and shadow recovery; there's little to be gained from full frame, except that some people think it's what you have to work your way up to.
.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

I tested briefly the Sony A7c with 24mm on the Swarovski STX95 spotting scope. It was good and easy to get sharp images with the help of focus peaking. Vignetting were minimal too at 30x and gone around 45x. My primary camera for digiscoping are the Nikon V1 (1 inch sensor) and also the Nikon D3s with the TLS APO 30 adapter (for APS-C format). I would choose full frame because of the dynamic range and high ISO capability to get enough shutter speed when shooting in the rainforest.

Brown-throated Sunbird ISO 5000, 1/100s at f2.8

 

[Peregrine Took]

If you want dynamic range, you can't beat the Fuji X series (APSC), or Nikon D750 (full frame)... or maybe you can, I just haven't looked at cameras for a couple of years, since retiring. FF isn't (or wasn't) always the answer to dynamic range - and like I said, APSC will give you 1.5x or 1.6x reach, with no discernible drop in quality, which automatically 'extends' your longer lenses (and why lot of sports photographers don't use FF).
.

 

[Joker9937]

Bump. I hope someone with authority on digiscoping answers because I don't see what the format of the camera sensor has to do with digiscoping, but I'm willing to be educated.

That said, from what I've seen of the suspect quality of digiscoped images, if I was going to get into photographing birds I'd probably go with an APSC format DSLR (like a Canon 7DmkII) and a long lens. I don't see how digiscoping with a micro four thirds system is going to get anywhere near the quality I'd expect, in order to make it worth the effort.

The biggest negative with full frame (Sony A7##) for birding is that you don't have the 'lens multiplication' that you get with APSC. Obviously this doesn't apply to digiscoping, but if you were to go down the camera/lens -only route, I'd go for APSC.

I used to use a Nikon D810 professionally and sold it for my Fuji XT1, which has better resolution and shadow recovery; there's little to be gained from full frame, except that some people think it's what you have to work your way up to.
.

Thanks for posting. Relative to digiscoping, the only real reason I wondered if full-frame was better is that it seems that the spotting scope limits the light more than a regular camera lens ( I might be wrong, but that is my perception through experience with my scope and phone). So, if a person used the biggest possible sensor, my theory was that it would allow a better image at lower light.

I, which I might not need to tell you, am not a photographer. But, I like it much more than I expected. Kind of an accidental birder, and now an accidental photographer. I just drag a scope and binoculars with me on my "hikes" for exercise. But, since I hike in our local public marsh, which has tons of deer, otters, birds, and other wildlife, the crummy photos I take could be better. So, there begins my slide into another hobby . LOL.

 

[Joker9937]

I tested briefly the Sony A7c with 24mm on the Swarovski STX95 spotting scope. It was good and easy to get sharp images with the help of focus peaking. Vignetting were minimal too at 30x and gone around 45x. My primary camera for digiscoping are the Nikon V1 (1 inch sensor) and also the Nikon D3s with the TLS APO 30 adapter (for APS-C format). I would choose full frame because of the dynamic range and high ISO capability to get enough shutter speed when shooting in the rainforest.

Brown-throated Sunbird ISO 5000, 1/100s at f2.8

Thanks. I think any of these configurations would be an improvement over my cell phone. Great photo!