DIGISCOPING....
May 1st.....
My first video of a Hummingbird for the year! ....There are two of them, not sure if two females or one male, one female.... Hopefully as the weather improves and I sit outside (like an old man in his chair), I will be able to see. The weather has been so WWWWWIIIIINNNNNNDDDDDDYYYYYYY as of late that even though I saw them on the 29th of April, the wind just wasn't going to have me go outside much. How do they fly and not get blown away?!!.. So, nice to settle in. We bought a few Salvia's and will watch them grow. I have a few other salvia's around the house and I know these little guys love the flowers. Should be an exciting spring.
My first video of a Hummingbird for the year! ....There are two of them, not sure if two females or one male, one female.... Hopefully as the weather improves and I sit outside (like an old man in his chair), I will be able to see. The weather has been so WWWWWIIIIINNNNNNDDDDDDYYYYYYY as of late that even though I saw them on the 29th of April, the wind just wasn't going to have me go outside much. How do they fly and not get blown away?!!.. So, nice to settle in. We bought a few Salvia's and will watch them grow. I have a few other salvia's around the house and I know these little guys love the flowers. Should be an exciting spring.
April 30th...
One of the more enjoyable aspects of Digi-scoping (other than slowing the photography down and taking your time) is experimenting with digi-scoping techniques and 'what works and what does not'. Even though my equipment, much like others is great gear,( as I have a Monfrotto Head, A Benro Trip-Pod etc...) ...there has always been this nagging issue of the 'foot of the scope' rotating on the QR plate. This causes the scope to not be perfectly angled and is loopy. That wobblyness is terrible for digital-scoping as you want to have as much stability as you can, thus a tripod to being with! Notice how the rubber strips in front of the scope foot are 'pushing up'. This pushing up causes the screw to not have enough 'twist in it' to fully tighten.
So, an online buddy of mine suggested a simple fix. A RUBBER BAND. You can see by the photo that wrapping a flat rubber band (in red) around the scope foot and in-between the threaded hole where the screw of the Quick Release (QR) goes into the foot. By having that rubber band wrapped within, the screw now has just a bit more play as the cushion (provided by rubber band) allows for a better tightening of the foot to the QR. WOW...what a simple fix. Here I have been playing with this issue 'forever' it seems and now a simple rubber band does the trick. Hats off to my friend in Norfolk, UK!
Another friend suggested I remove the rubber strips that are embedded in the QR and replace them with cork, even with the metal. Yes that might work. The cork might also 'push up' as the rubber has here. Is it so bad having just a rubber band as a fix?
One of the more enjoyable aspects of Digi-scoping (other than slowing the photography down and taking your time) is experimenting with digi-scoping techniques and 'what works and what does not'. Even though my equipment, much like others is great gear,( as I have a Monfrotto Head, A Benro Trip-Pod etc...) ...there has always been this nagging issue of the 'foot of the scope' rotating on the QR plate. This causes the scope to not be perfectly angled and is loopy. That wobblyness is terrible for digital-scoping as you want to have as much stability as you can, thus a tripod to being with! Notice how the rubber strips in front of the scope foot are 'pushing up'. This pushing up causes the screw to not have enough 'twist in it' to fully tighten.
So, an online buddy of mine suggested a simple fix. A RUBBER BAND. You can see by the photo that wrapping a flat rubber band (in red) around the scope foot and in-between the threaded hole where the screw of the Quick Release (QR) goes into the foot. By having that rubber band wrapped within, the screw now has just a bit more play as the cushion (provided by rubber band) allows for a better tightening of the foot to the QR. WOW...what a simple fix. Here I have been playing with this issue 'forever' it seems and now a simple rubber band does the trick. Hats off to my friend in Norfolk, UK!
Another friend suggested I remove the rubber strips that are embedded in the QR and replace them with cork, even with the metal. Yes that might work. The cork might also 'push up' as the rubber has here. Is it so bad having just a rubber band as a fix?
April 2020...
Below is my 'second' digiscoping adapter. This one is made by Swarovski and this adapter is connected to the scope, as opposed to having to hold it in one hand and then attach or many people will hang the attachment around the eye-piece and then attach when needed. Two totally different adapters and which one you use is up to your liking. This Swarovski adapter used to retail around $430, if you can find them anymore. They might be cheaper now. This adapter below, 'swings up' and out of the way while I can view from the eyepiece and get into focus. Then when I want to take a shot, I merely swing the adapter down and the camera is already aligned perfectly to the scope, so I just turn on the camera and shoot.
The weather (more importantly the 'wind') has been terrible this past week so not much opportunity to dig-scope without the tripod and set up being knocked to the ground!... Looks like rain coming up, so might have to be next week before I get out again. Bummer.....but end of April and first of May are great Migration times so will get 'my share'......
Below is my 'second' digiscoping adapter. This one is made by Swarovski and this adapter is connected to the scope, as opposed to having to hold it in one hand and then attach or many people will hang the attachment around the eye-piece and then attach when needed. Two totally different adapters and which one you use is up to your liking. This Swarovski adapter used to retail around $430, if you can find them anymore. They might be cheaper now. This adapter below, 'swings up' and out of the way while I can view from the eyepiece and get into focus. Then when I want to take a shot, I merely swing the adapter down and the camera is already aligned perfectly to the scope, so I just turn on the camera and shoot.
The weather (more importantly the 'wind') has been terrible this past week so not much opportunity to dig-scope without the tripod and set up being knocked to the ground!... Looks like rain coming up, so might have to be next week before I get out again. Bummer.....but end of April and first of May are great Migration times so will get 'my share'......
|
|
April 14th 2020
A small movie from my digital-scoping set-up as I went out to the Egg Harbor Township Nature Trail and found a Red-winged Blackbird sitting in a tree. The Video is 'telling' for the bird is just hanging out most of the time and then, then...then, it hears another of 'it's kind' calling. At that time you can almost tell by it's expression that wow, who is that? It immediately starts to call in response. Click on the arrow and wait a sec while it downloads/opens. |
April 13th, 2020
My digidapter arrived in the mail and I had to give it a try. Very easy to set up and it worked like it was supposed to. In the above photo, the bird was way up in the trees and my angled scope was pointing way 'up'....my butt was on the ground as I honed in on the bird with the scope. I focused it, then attached the adapter/camera to the scope and 'clicked'. I managed to get off a few shots before it flew off. I choose this image for it was actually 'doing something' ....the tail feathers spread. You can see that while it is not 'tack-sharp', it is still not a bad image.
My digidapter arrived in the mail and I had to give it a try. Very easy to set up and it worked like it was supposed to. In the above photo, the bird was way up in the trees and my angled scope was pointing way 'up'....my butt was on the ground as I honed in on the bird with the scope. I focused it, then attached the adapter/camera to the scope and 'clicked'. I managed to get off a few shots before it flew off. I choose this image for it was actually 'doing something' ....the tail feathers spread. You can see that while it is not 'tack-sharp', it is still not a bad image.
The photo of the finch on the feeder was easier to take. The bird was more passive and I didn't have to aim the scope way into the sky. It is not easy to aim an angled scope (or any scope) into the trees and find your target bird. If your focus on the scope is 'off'...it will blur out anything else either behind your focus distance or before, so many times you might have passed over the bird in the trees but the focus was 'off', thus no bird in the scope. So not as easy to find birds such as using a pair of binoculars. The finch was relatively easy since I was just going at eye-level.
The difference between using a camera adapter to 'hand-holding' the camera to the scope is huge. First, vignetting is not as much of an issue since I set up the adapter/camera to my scope and have the camera distance on the adapter attuned to no vignetting. The other thing is the ease of focus. With an adapter, you simply find the bird with the scope, focus...quickly attach the camera and shoot. No re-adjusting needed in focus. But if you are hand-holding, you have no way of really finding the 'sweet-spot' between the end of the camera lens and the eye-piece of the scope. You might be close, but not perfect. Thus many times you have to re-focus the scope looking thru the camera. Not easy. Or, many times it might be in focus but your hand moves just a bit 'closer or further' away from the eye-piece and your focus suffers. Below is my adapter and camera set-up.
The difference between using a camera adapter to 'hand-holding' the camera to the scope is huge. First, vignetting is not as much of an issue since I set up the adapter/camera to my scope and have the camera distance on the adapter attuned to no vignetting. The other thing is the ease of focus. With an adapter, you simply find the bird with the scope, focus...quickly attach the camera and shoot. No re-adjusting needed in focus. But if you are hand-holding, you have no way of really finding the 'sweet-spot' between the end of the camera lens and the eye-piece of the scope. You might be close, but not perfect. Thus many times you have to re-focus the scope looking thru the camera. Not easy. Or, many times it might be in focus but your hand moves just a bit 'closer or further' away from the eye-piece and your focus suffers. Below is my adapter and camera set-up.
I use a digidatper which is available thru www.digiscopeadapter.com. It cost $289. Now, it is a solid product and is easy to attach the camera to the adapter. You do have a series of steps that must be taken to match up your camera to your scope. For instance, the camera 'lens' (and not just the camera, as the metal connection on the bottom of all cameras might be off-set as was the case in my camera) has to be centered perfectly to your eye-piece. You also have to move the camera up those spatula' like slots until you have that distance between 'vignetting and no vignetting' when you turn the camera on. The lens can't be too close to your eye-piece nor too far. There is exactly one spot for the camera on your adapter and that spot varies by camera. So those two steps are critical. Once you have those steps, the camera can be taken off the adapter to download photos etc and then replaced onto the adapter and all of my settings for placement are locked in, via using the red nuts.
The only problem with this particular adapter is.....what do you do with the adapter when you are in the field and want to first look thru your scope and focus on birds? Where is the adapter? Are you holding it? Is it on the ground? Do you have a big enough pocket? Or many people will keep the wrist-loop on the camera as I have and then when not in use I just wrap it around the eye-piece. I focus the scope, then just attach the adapter. Pretty easy to do. I have another adapter made by Swarovski where I will show the difference as that adapter actually swings away from the scope, and yet still attached. If you scroll down to Nov 3rd, 2011 and Oct 3rd, 2011 blogs, I have an image of that set-up and how it swings away. More on that in another blog. Below is the adapter/camera attached to my scope.
The only problem with this particular adapter is.....what do you do with the adapter when you are in the field and want to first look thru your scope and focus on birds? Where is the adapter? Are you holding it? Is it on the ground? Do you have a big enough pocket? Or many people will keep the wrist-loop on the camera as I have and then when not in use I just wrap it around the eye-piece. I focus the scope, then just attach the adapter. Pretty easy to do. I have another adapter made by Swarovski where I will show the difference as that adapter actually swings away from the scope, and yet still attached. If you scroll down to Nov 3rd, 2011 and Oct 3rd, 2011 blogs, I have an image of that set-up and how it swings away. More on that in another blog. Below is the adapter/camera attached to my scope.
April 10th 2020
Now...an experiment today on some pretty static objects since the day was very blustery and there were no birds to be had. So a quick tour of the neighborhood across the street was in order. The test involved the following gear: a 80mm Swarovski Scope with a NikonP310 Point and Shoot Camera with 'no eyepiece adapter' vs Canon 7D plus 400mm L lens.
The idea was to compare the camera + lens to a scope + point and shoot. The results are in the images that follow but since I cannot enlarge them here, they are difficult to discern the differences. The scope plus the Nikon P310 beat the Canon + 400mm lens in both the meter and the Verizon tag while the two were equal in the green pot. The first photo of each is the scope, the second photo being the Canon. All photos were photoshopped to add sharpness, contrast and color.
Overall sharpness went clearly to the scope with clarity determination being an objective in this experiment. I tried to make the comparison equal by handholding both cameras. The digiscoping was done w/o any adapter to stabilize the placement of the camera or the movement of my hands. The same with the Canon camera+lens, although I did use the top of the scope as added support. This would somewhat equal the tri-pod of the scope as in the field I would use a tri-pod for the scope but would handhold the camera but brace up against a fence post or squat down to support better focus etc.
The value of a spotting scope adapter for the camera was the first thing that hit me. It is very difficult to place the camera into/near the eye-piece and be perfectly level. If you are 'off' , the image is blurred more-so. So the value of an adapter for your digital-scoping setup is critical. While easy to do in the field w/o an adapter and many people do this, the results are strictly 'ID only'
Between the two, I was surprised at the results. The closest object was the verizon sign which was about 30 yards away, followed by the meter which was 40 yards followed by the green pail which was 75 yards in the distance.
The images of the scope are "NOT CROPPED" while the camera images ARE CROPPED. I wanted to compare views side-by-side and if I didn't crop the camera images, the images would have been more distant in viewing. The objective of this experiment was to compare the two given equal close-up view so a cropping of the camera was needed.
This only compares a camera plus a 400mm lens, which is affordable and what I have. I am not comparing a 500, 600, 800 lens which both Canon and Nikon have. Others such as Sigma and Tamron are making inroads in their lens line-up too. The results using an increased lens focal length would most likely be vastly different. But the cost of the Canon and Nikon is rather steep, thus,....what are the differences between two somewhat affordable options? My views on why I do not like the larger lens (500, 600 and 800) are in previous blogs. If the distance is not far, the camera-lens combo (distance depending on your lens) will always have a much better image.
Now...an experiment today on some pretty static objects since the day was very blustery and there were no birds to be had. So a quick tour of the neighborhood across the street was in order. The test involved the following gear: a 80mm Swarovski Scope with a NikonP310 Point and Shoot Camera with 'no eyepiece adapter' vs Canon 7D plus 400mm L lens.
The idea was to compare the camera + lens to a scope + point and shoot. The results are in the images that follow but since I cannot enlarge them here, they are difficult to discern the differences. The scope plus the Nikon P310 beat the Canon + 400mm lens in both the meter and the Verizon tag while the two were equal in the green pot. The first photo of each is the scope, the second photo being the Canon. All photos were photoshopped to add sharpness, contrast and color.
Overall sharpness went clearly to the scope with clarity determination being an objective in this experiment. I tried to make the comparison equal by handholding both cameras. The digiscoping was done w/o any adapter to stabilize the placement of the camera or the movement of my hands. The same with the Canon camera+lens, although I did use the top of the scope as added support. This would somewhat equal the tri-pod of the scope as in the field I would use a tri-pod for the scope but would handhold the camera but brace up against a fence post or squat down to support better focus etc.
The value of a spotting scope adapter for the camera was the first thing that hit me. It is very difficult to place the camera into/near the eye-piece and be perfectly level. If you are 'off' , the image is blurred more-so. So the value of an adapter for your digital-scoping setup is critical. While easy to do in the field w/o an adapter and many people do this, the results are strictly 'ID only'
Between the two, I was surprised at the results. The closest object was the verizon sign which was about 30 yards away, followed by the meter which was 40 yards followed by the green pail which was 75 yards in the distance.
The images of the scope are "NOT CROPPED" while the camera images ARE CROPPED. I wanted to compare views side-by-side and if I didn't crop the camera images, the images would have been more distant in viewing. The objective of this experiment was to compare the two given equal close-up view so a cropping of the camera was needed.
This only compares a camera plus a 400mm lens, which is affordable and what I have. I am not comparing a 500, 600, 800 lens which both Canon and Nikon have. Others such as Sigma and Tamron are making inroads in their lens line-up too. The results using an increased lens focal length would most likely be vastly different. But the cost of the Canon and Nikon is rather steep, thus,....what are the differences between two somewhat affordable options? My views on why I do not like the larger lens (500, 600 and 800) are in previous blogs. If the distance is not far, the camera-lens combo (distance depending on your lens) will always have a much better image.
April 9th 2020
Yesterday was good day so again, being quarantined ....I hung around the house and found some targets. The Chickadee above seems to be nesting in our bucket/nest, so I just waiting long enough till I could grab a decent shot. Now, what is a decent shot. First, notice the eye and sparkle in and second; notice the 'worm'. Together they make this shot. A bird photography without the sparkle in the eye is worthless. Also, a bird photograph of the bird doing little, is also worthless in my thinking. So if you scroll down a bit and notice the goldfinch, I don't consider that much of a photo. No action, no animal/bird behavior. To capture this Chickadee, I waiting until the bird 'went in' and then I prefocused and had the shutter button half down so it was auto-focusing on the hole. That allowed me to take a quick shot, already set up....once the Chickadee emerged. Now for a second photo:
Yesterday was good day so again, being quarantined ....I hung around the house and found some targets. The Chickadee above seems to be nesting in our bucket/nest, so I just waiting long enough till I could grab a decent shot. Now, what is a decent shot. First, notice the eye and sparkle in and second; notice the 'worm'. Together they make this shot. A bird photography without the sparkle in the eye is worthless. Also, a bird photograph of the bird doing little, is also worthless in my thinking. So if you scroll down a bit and notice the goldfinch, I don't consider that much of a photo. No action, no animal/bird behavior. To capture this Chickadee, I waiting until the bird 'went in' and then I prefocused and had the shutter button half down so it was auto-focusing on the hole. That allowed me to take a quick shot, already set up....once the Chickadee emerged. Now for a second photo:
The bluebird isn't a spectacular picture by any means....just a bluebird. But this bird was perched 70 yards away. That alone shows me the value of a scope. I was shooting at the equivalent of 1250mm in a camera lens. My Canon Camera and 400mm lens can't come close. But, could the 'crop' of that image be better than the shot of this bird shot digital-scoping? Not sure.... That will add to my understanding of digiscoping and will be my next challenge. Does a 400mm camera/lens combo I have in my bag, equate or beat out the 1250mm equivalent of a scope? More to come....
But, to add on just a bit to that debate. One of the reasons I 'left' camera/lens photography was the relatively 'ease' to shoot good photos. Now, many people I see have 500 or 600mm and even 800mm lens with a Nikon or Canon camera. They collect excellent photo's....superb! But if you are a photographer of any means, it is relatively easy to sit patiently and just wait for a shot and then have that camera click away 10-15 frames per second and viola, you are bound to have one nice shot...and not just nice shots but superb shots! Even a bird in flight is relatively easy to shoot and the camera has technology that 'tracks' the bird using AI and keeps the bird in focus in flight. So my personal debate centers around the challenge. If a great camera and lens ($$$$$$) can make for a superb picture, is it more to the skills of the photographer or to the equipment?
Now, center around to dig-scoping. I am using a Point and Shoot Nikon P310 (5-6 years old). I am not using the latest and best Swarovski scope but a darn good one 80mm ATS scope. To capture birds I have to actually use skill. For instance, even though I have the camera set to "P" mode, that isn't good enough for focus. See the above photo? See how the bird and some of the branches sticking up are 'in focus" while other branches just 'inches away' are not in focus, and ....this is from 70 yards? Once I initially focus the scope on the bird and then I place the camera to the scope, I have to optically zoom in a bit to eliminate some of the vignetting. I have to manually 'refocus' or tighten up the focus. I have very little play in the helical focus wheel so some skill involved. I also have to manually adjust for exposure. I got off only 3 shots before the bird flew the coup, so unlike the camera/lens setup, I don't have 50-60 shots in the same 5 second span to choose from. Are you beginning to see the challenge?
So digi-scoping always has been and continues to be a learning challenge. It will never provide me with the same sharp and in some sense, fake images ....(too sharp in many cases) of birds, but it will provide me with a 'challenge' .
There is one other challenge that comes into mind too and I will get to this in another blog. But essentially being more attuned to nature vs more attuned to the camera. Anyhow, more on that in a future blog.
But, to add on just a bit to that debate. One of the reasons I 'left' camera/lens photography was the relatively 'ease' to shoot good photos. Now, many people I see have 500 or 600mm and even 800mm lens with a Nikon or Canon camera. They collect excellent photo's....superb! But if you are a photographer of any means, it is relatively easy to sit patiently and just wait for a shot and then have that camera click away 10-15 frames per second and viola, you are bound to have one nice shot...and not just nice shots but superb shots! Even a bird in flight is relatively easy to shoot and the camera has technology that 'tracks' the bird using AI and keeps the bird in focus in flight. So my personal debate centers around the challenge. If a great camera and lens ($$$$$$) can make for a superb picture, is it more to the skills of the photographer or to the equipment?
Now, center around to dig-scoping. I am using a Point and Shoot Nikon P310 (5-6 years old). I am not using the latest and best Swarovski scope but a darn good one 80mm ATS scope. To capture birds I have to actually use skill. For instance, even though I have the camera set to "P" mode, that isn't good enough for focus. See the above photo? See how the bird and some of the branches sticking up are 'in focus" while other branches just 'inches away' are not in focus, and ....this is from 70 yards? Once I initially focus the scope on the bird and then I place the camera to the scope, I have to optically zoom in a bit to eliminate some of the vignetting. I have to manually 'refocus' or tighten up the focus. I have very little play in the helical focus wheel so some skill involved. I also have to manually adjust for exposure. I got off only 3 shots before the bird flew the coup, so unlike the camera/lens setup, I don't have 50-60 shots in the same 5 second span to choose from. Are you beginning to see the challenge?
So digi-scoping always has been and continues to be a learning challenge. It will never provide me with the same sharp and in some sense, fake images ....(too sharp in many cases) of birds, but it will provide me with a 'challenge' .
There is one other challenge that comes into mind too and I will get to this in another blog. But essentially being more attuned to nature vs more attuned to the camera. Anyhow, more on that in a future blog.
April 7th (Part B), 2020
Played with the Nikon Cool Pix P310 and did some scoping in the backyard. It is important to have the right camera and I forgot that I even had the Nikon Cool Pix. Although 5-6 years old, it works well, as evident by image above. You don't need the latest and greatest for Digital-scoping as most advanced features on a camera are useless. Also, some of the best digital-scoping cameras are simply point and shoots' with nice screen resolution and hopefully a "P" mode for you to shoot with. I figured that the Cool Pix had pretty good screen resolution although admittedly it was more of a cloudy day.
Some hints/tips:
First...I will scope out a general area I expect birds to go. In this case the feeder but even in the 'wild', one knows a general area for birds to land or the direction and distance you are looking at. So I pre-focus the scope which saves me time when I do find a bird to take a shot of. Steps that save you time in the field allow you to get a 'shot' as opposed to the bird flying away before you get it in focus.
Second...I adjust the exposure on the camera at this time. If cloudy, adjust upwards a notch or two, or if overly sunny, adjust down a notch or two. Although all camera's differ in actual 'exposure need' in the field so this is not a give-me step as all cameras differ. You have to know your camera.
Third...Once the bird lands in the general area, I move the camera to the scope. At the moment I don't have an adapter as I just ordered it, so this is hand-held. At this time I will refocus the spotting scope via the live view screen on the camera as the lens is pointing into the eye-piece of the scope. This fine-tunes the focus. This is also why you need good resolution for your camera screen.
Fourth...I will press the shutter down half to make sure the bird is what the camera is focusing on. I use "P" mode as manual focus is just a bit too difficult to do with digiscoping. I only have two hands.
Fifth...Take the shot. Now, some cameras allow you to bracket three images so '3' shots are automatically taken with different contrast . Some cameras allow you to set on a timer so you can shoot hands-free after 3 -5 seconds. That helps with shakiness and ultimately a slightly blurred image. Or, you just hold the camera steady and shoot. If you have an adapter (like I will have), the camera is more steady in general.
Played with the Nikon Cool Pix P310 and did some scoping in the backyard. It is important to have the right camera and I forgot that I even had the Nikon Cool Pix. Although 5-6 years old, it works well, as evident by image above. You don't need the latest and greatest for Digital-scoping as most advanced features on a camera are useless. Also, some of the best digital-scoping cameras are simply point and shoots' with nice screen resolution and hopefully a "P" mode for you to shoot with. I figured that the Cool Pix had pretty good screen resolution although admittedly it was more of a cloudy day.
Some hints/tips:
First...I will scope out a general area I expect birds to go. In this case the feeder but even in the 'wild', one knows a general area for birds to land or the direction and distance you are looking at. So I pre-focus the scope which saves me time when I do find a bird to take a shot of. Steps that save you time in the field allow you to get a 'shot' as opposed to the bird flying away before you get it in focus.
Second...I adjust the exposure on the camera at this time. If cloudy, adjust upwards a notch or two, or if overly sunny, adjust down a notch or two. Although all camera's differ in actual 'exposure need' in the field so this is not a give-me step as all cameras differ. You have to know your camera.
Third...Once the bird lands in the general area, I move the camera to the scope. At the moment I don't have an adapter as I just ordered it, so this is hand-held. At this time I will refocus the spotting scope via the live view screen on the camera as the lens is pointing into the eye-piece of the scope. This fine-tunes the focus. This is also why you need good resolution for your camera screen.
Fourth...I will press the shutter down half to make sure the bird is what the camera is focusing on. I use "P" mode as manual focus is just a bit too difficult to do with digiscoping. I only have two hands.
Fifth...Take the shot. Now, some cameras allow you to bracket three images so '3' shots are automatically taken with different contrast . Some cameras allow you to set on a timer so you can shoot hands-free after 3 -5 seconds. That helps with shakiness and ultimately a slightly blurred image. Or, you just hold the camera steady and shoot. If you have an adapter (like I will have), the camera is more steady in general.
April 7th, 2020
Yesterday was a beautiful day and so I sat outside with my scope and camera and attempted to take some shots. The first thing I noticed was my 'fumbling' of the working mechanisms of the scope as I haven't been on it in awhile. I noticed that panning the scope and finding birds needs a bit of practice as anyone who has owned an angled scope will be able to relate to. The issue was almost more due to the height of the trees in back of me and how close they were and the Cardinal being on the very top. The angle of the scope 'skyward' was steep, thus I was sitting on the ground looking 100 degrees up! ... Difficult.
Another problem encountered was the camera I was using. Now, I don't have my Canon Point and Shoots anymore as I handed them to a grandson a few years back and they are in pieces now. But they were getting a bit old dating back from 2010. But 'SCREEN RESOLUTION" is huge when determining a camera. I was using a Fuji X-E1. When digi-scoping, you rely upon the 'live screen' on the back of the camera. When the day is bright, the screen can easily get washed out by the sun. Just think of looking at your phone screen in the sun. The resolution on this X-E1 is 460k, which is equal to the old Canon S95 screen I had which was 461K. This is not good enough. Years back, I had no choice as cameras were not advanced enough. But I have other options now and I need to begin thinking of these other options. Sunlight on a poor screen resolution camera means that I cannot see what I am shooting at nor can I view focus. I am guessing a bit. I cannot have that so I have a few cameras in mind. A few I have research though do not come up with sufficient resolutions such as:
At the moment those are my options. I would say the Canon S120 would work, while the Lumix DC-ZS70 is better for digiscoping. The earlier Lumix DC ZS60 might even be better as while it doesn't have a flip screen, I am thinking it would be fine for Digiscoping. The Canon Powershot Series SX730, 740 or SX620 are also perfect with the former two having slip screens. Good video on all too. I like the Canon as I am very familiar with the navigation and find them to be perfect cameras. But I might just keep the Nikon Cool Pix P310 as it works fine and it if 'free' since I already have one. But if forced to upgrade, I would go with the Canon SX730.
Below are images from yesterday..... Cardinal , high in the trees in my backyard. Notice the vignetting on the corners. This is 'not a good camera' to use since I can't zoom in to take care of vignetting. Usually you want a nice point and shoot camera that has 5x optical zoom. You will never go much over that. So when you place the camera to the eye-piece, you can optically zoom in on the eye-piece and reduce the circular view and / or vignetting. That is the point of having a small optical zoom on your camera. Also, you want 'optical zoom' and not ''digital zoom'...keep that in mind. Many smaller point and shoot cameras will have 5x optical and up to XXXX digital zoom. Just don't allow yourself to use digital zoom as images come out crappy. But another reason for vignetting might be that I was hand-holding this and by doing so, it is difficult to gauge placement of lens, especially if the screen resolution on the back of the camera is 500,000 as this one is. You want a camera that has min screen resolution near one million dots.
Yesterday was a beautiful day and so I sat outside with my scope and camera and attempted to take some shots. The first thing I noticed was my 'fumbling' of the working mechanisms of the scope as I haven't been on it in awhile. I noticed that panning the scope and finding birds needs a bit of practice as anyone who has owned an angled scope will be able to relate to. The issue was almost more due to the height of the trees in back of me and how close they were and the Cardinal being on the very top. The angle of the scope 'skyward' was steep, thus I was sitting on the ground looking 100 degrees up! ... Difficult.
Another problem encountered was the camera I was using. Now, I don't have my Canon Point and Shoots anymore as I handed them to a grandson a few years back and they are in pieces now. But they were getting a bit old dating back from 2010. But 'SCREEN RESOLUTION" is huge when determining a camera. I was using a Fuji X-E1. When digi-scoping, you rely upon the 'live screen' on the back of the camera. When the day is bright, the screen can easily get washed out by the sun. Just think of looking at your phone screen in the sun. The resolution on this X-E1 is 460k, which is equal to the old Canon S95 screen I had which was 461K. This is not good enough. Years back, I had no choice as cameras were not advanced enough. But I have other options now and I need to begin thinking of these other options. Sunlight on a poor screen resolution camera means that I cannot see what I am shooting at nor can I view focus. I am guessing a bit. I cannot have that so I have a few cameras in mind. A few I have research though do not come up with sufficient resolutions such as:
- Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W800. ... 230,000 K...not good enough
- Canon Elf 189...220K...not good enough
- Fuji Film XP-140...920 K...adaquate and price cheap but camera doesn't fit digiscoping
- Coolpix W150...250k...not good enough
- Olympus Tough TG-6...1,040,000...This should be good. Price is $350 though. No 5x optical
- Lumix DC-ZS70...1,040,000...Price is $300. A zoom so should fit
- Canon Powershot XS740...920,000...adaquate but close to $400 and maybe overkill for digiscoping
- Canon S95...460,000K...my older camera but can get on Ebay for $40
- Canon S120...920,000k...adaquate but doable at $120 on Ebay.
- Lumix DC ZS60 or even ZS50...1,040,000. Ebay price around $250 Earlier version of ZX70.
- Sony RX100...Various models (most like the "V" version but will look into (eBay for discontinued but would work) Appears in $450 range which is more than I wanted to spend.
- Nikon Cool Pix P310. 921,000 K...adaquate. F1.8. Free since I have this one already.
- Canon Powershot SX730 or 740 (latest) or SX620. Any of these are perfect.
At the moment those are my options. I would say the Canon S120 would work, while the Lumix DC-ZS70 is better for digiscoping. The earlier Lumix DC ZS60 might even be better as while it doesn't have a flip screen, I am thinking it would be fine for Digiscoping. The Canon Powershot Series SX730, 740 or SX620 are also perfect with the former two having slip screens. Good video on all too. I like the Canon as I am very familiar with the navigation and find them to be perfect cameras. But I might just keep the Nikon Cool Pix P310 as it works fine and it if 'free' since I already have one. But if forced to upgrade, I would go with the Canon SX730.
Below are images from yesterday..... Cardinal , high in the trees in my backyard. Notice the vignetting on the corners. This is 'not a good camera' to use since I can't zoom in to take care of vignetting. Usually you want a nice point and shoot camera that has 5x optical zoom. You will never go much over that. So when you place the camera to the eye-piece, you can optically zoom in on the eye-piece and reduce the circular view and / or vignetting. That is the point of having a small optical zoom on your camera. Also, you want 'optical zoom' and not ''digital zoom'...keep that in mind. Many smaller point and shoot cameras will have 5x optical and up to XXXX digital zoom. Just don't allow yourself to use digital zoom as images come out crappy. But another reason for vignetting might be that I was hand-holding this and by doing so, it is difficult to gauge placement of lens, especially if the screen resolution on the back of the camera is 500,000 as this one is. You want a camera that has min screen resolution near one million dots.
April 6th, 2020
Decided to re-enter the digiscoping world which is something I have been doing since the mid 1990's. If you scroll down you will find past blogs from 2010-2012 regarding some exploits with digiscoping. I thought I would cover a few basics first. Basics are: Eye-piece, scope, camera, adapters and try-pod.
First...Eyepiece. The sweet spot for digiscoping is 20-25x. Many scopes come with eye-pieces that extend to 60-70 zoom but that simply will not work for digi-scoping. "Light" is a premium and the larger zoom you go, the less light is allowed into the eye-piece (and ultimately the camera attached). FYI: a 20x magnification is equivalent to a 1000mm on a camera lens. A 25x equals 1250mm. Given that, you can see the lure of digi-scoping.
Second...Scope. Light again is a factor in your scope. The diameter of the glass on the scope allows light in. A 80mm scope means you have 80mm diameter while a 60mm is a diameter much narrower. While you can still digs-scope with smaller scopes, you will find that 'light' lacks, thus a 80mm scope works best. In addition the type of 'glass' should be ED glass as you will have more sharpness and richer color and less chromatic aberration. But not all ED glass is equal. While better than not having ED glass, if you find a scope that is relatively cheap and states it has ED glass, chances are the material used and craftsmanship employed both lack. So with a scope, you do get what you pay for. Make sure you get an 'angled scope.' Brands such as Swarovksi, Zeiss, Kowa are brands that consistently have excellent quality control. As an example I have moved from a Swarovski ATS to an ATM and back to a ATS. The ATM was three generations ago, while the ATS is two generations ago. I have never scoped with the ATX model although I am sure with the diameter and quality, it is outstanding. The price though, is not worth it for me.
Third...Camera. Yes you can use a phone but quality of digital-scoped images are sub-par to camera/lens set-up and the camera for a scope needs to be better quality than a phone, unless you just want ID shots. The type of camera might depend on the 'adapter' you use to connect to the eye-piece. If you are not using an adapter, you will have considerable more 'shake', thus blurriness in images. But if you have the right adapter for your camera, you can pretty much use any camera. I prefer small 'point and shoots'. I prefer Canon's S95, 110, 120 etc... Or there are Sony's RX100's which are excellent too. Now, how much are you willing to pay? I find used older models such as the Canon's and although not as quality as some of the newer Sony's, I am willing to forgo that. You can use a DSL or mirrorless etc. With those it helps to have a prime lens of not more than 28mm. With point and shoots, make sure you have one that doesn't have an optical zoom more than 5x. You will use some of that optical zoom to decrease vignetting on the sides. Many videos on You Tube about this. Cameras can run anywhere from $40 (eBay) to $1000.
Fourth...Adapter... Many high brand scopes have an accessory line-up that will include some sort of adapter. An adapter is used to connect the camera to the eye-piece so you have less movement as you take images. So check the maker of your scope and see if there is a product out there. I am wording in a digiscopeadapter (www.digiscopeadapter.com) which is a product tailor made for your brand of scope. Adapters in general run anywhere from high $200's to $500. The one I am purchasing thru dicisopeadapter is $290.
Fifth...Tri-pod....get a solid tri-pod. There are many to be had but you need one that is sturdy and has a nice 'head' to hold your scope. Also, most likely a quick release 'rail' to support your scope. I have a Benro tri-pod, Manfrotto 701HDV scope head with the latter capable of panning much like a video camera needs. The trick-pod might cost a few hundred, the head another $120, the quick release another $40.
When I first started digi-scoping in the mid 90's...I was using a cheap $89 scope, whatever digital camera was around, and a very wobbly trip-pod. I had no adapters. Essentially I, among many....learned as we went. I can remember jury-rigging PFC pipe for a camera adapter. I had heavy vignetting.... the camera shutter was slow so most objects moved prior to me being able to capture and image. The Tripod was so wobbly that any wind vibration caused a blurry image. But, I persevered and I learned.
I will begin to post updated blogs of 're-entering' the digital-scoping world and some of my success and failures. Be prepared for a steep learning curve in not only the mechanics of a scope but toss in getting the camera part right too. I really enjoy digs-scoping for t allows me to slow down, and look at nature and 'know my equipment'. The following image is my scope and head/tripod. Below is an ATS scope from Swaro. I picked this one up several years ago on my trip to Alaska. So I have had an ATS scope, and ATM, and now back to a ATS. This is one generation back (as I add to this blog dated 2020). The ATM scope (two generations back) has the black near the tip of the scope while the ATS has the black on the Helical focus wheel as shown below. This is a far better version to digiscope by. I found that the ATM was not a very 'sharp' scope, or at least the model I had. You will see images of this as you scroll down.
Also, take note....look at the 'pan handle' of the head. I purposely cut-off 4-5 inches as it just got in the way. It is after all, 'my equipment' and by slicing off the handle, my body doesn't get in the way as I pan the scope. I remember a few years back talking to 'Chatterbox' out in Forsythe and he did the same thing. Only other person I saw that has done that, but a small tip. My ATS 80m scope below with 25-50 eye-piece.
Decided to re-enter the digiscoping world which is something I have been doing since the mid 1990's. If you scroll down you will find past blogs from 2010-2012 regarding some exploits with digiscoping. I thought I would cover a few basics first. Basics are: Eye-piece, scope, camera, adapters and try-pod.
First...Eyepiece. The sweet spot for digiscoping is 20-25x. Many scopes come with eye-pieces that extend to 60-70 zoom but that simply will not work for digi-scoping. "Light" is a premium and the larger zoom you go, the less light is allowed into the eye-piece (and ultimately the camera attached). FYI: a 20x magnification is equivalent to a 1000mm on a camera lens. A 25x equals 1250mm. Given that, you can see the lure of digi-scoping.
Second...Scope. Light again is a factor in your scope. The diameter of the glass on the scope allows light in. A 80mm scope means you have 80mm diameter while a 60mm is a diameter much narrower. While you can still digs-scope with smaller scopes, you will find that 'light' lacks, thus a 80mm scope works best. In addition the type of 'glass' should be ED glass as you will have more sharpness and richer color and less chromatic aberration. But not all ED glass is equal. While better than not having ED glass, if you find a scope that is relatively cheap and states it has ED glass, chances are the material used and craftsmanship employed both lack. So with a scope, you do get what you pay for. Make sure you get an 'angled scope.' Brands such as Swarovksi, Zeiss, Kowa are brands that consistently have excellent quality control. As an example I have moved from a Swarovski ATS to an ATM and back to a ATS. The ATM was three generations ago, while the ATS is two generations ago. I have never scoped with the ATX model although I am sure with the diameter and quality, it is outstanding. The price though, is not worth it for me.
Third...Camera. Yes you can use a phone but quality of digital-scoped images are sub-par to camera/lens set-up and the camera for a scope needs to be better quality than a phone, unless you just want ID shots. The type of camera might depend on the 'adapter' you use to connect to the eye-piece. If you are not using an adapter, you will have considerable more 'shake', thus blurriness in images. But if you have the right adapter for your camera, you can pretty much use any camera. I prefer small 'point and shoots'. I prefer Canon's S95, 110, 120 etc... Or there are Sony's RX100's which are excellent too. Now, how much are you willing to pay? I find used older models such as the Canon's and although not as quality as some of the newer Sony's, I am willing to forgo that. You can use a DSL or mirrorless etc. With those it helps to have a prime lens of not more than 28mm. With point and shoots, make sure you have one that doesn't have an optical zoom more than 5x. You will use some of that optical zoom to decrease vignetting on the sides. Many videos on You Tube about this. Cameras can run anywhere from $40 (eBay) to $1000.
Fourth...Adapter... Many high brand scopes have an accessory line-up that will include some sort of adapter. An adapter is used to connect the camera to the eye-piece so you have less movement as you take images. So check the maker of your scope and see if there is a product out there. I am wording in a digiscopeadapter (www.digiscopeadapter.com) which is a product tailor made for your brand of scope. Adapters in general run anywhere from high $200's to $500. The one I am purchasing thru dicisopeadapter is $290.
Fifth...Tri-pod....get a solid tri-pod. There are many to be had but you need one that is sturdy and has a nice 'head' to hold your scope. Also, most likely a quick release 'rail' to support your scope. I have a Benro tri-pod, Manfrotto 701HDV scope head with the latter capable of panning much like a video camera needs. The trick-pod might cost a few hundred, the head another $120, the quick release another $40.
When I first started digi-scoping in the mid 90's...I was using a cheap $89 scope, whatever digital camera was around, and a very wobbly trip-pod. I had no adapters. Essentially I, among many....learned as we went. I can remember jury-rigging PFC pipe for a camera adapter. I had heavy vignetting.... the camera shutter was slow so most objects moved prior to me being able to capture and image. The Tripod was so wobbly that any wind vibration caused a blurry image. But, I persevered and I learned.
I will begin to post updated blogs of 're-entering' the digital-scoping world and some of my success and failures. Be prepared for a steep learning curve in not only the mechanics of a scope but toss in getting the camera part right too. I really enjoy digs-scoping for t allows me to slow down, and look at nature and 'know my equipment'. The following image is my scope and head/tripod. Below is an ATS scope from Swaro. I picked this one up several years ago on my trip to Alaska. So I have had an ATS scope, and ATM, and now back to a ATS. This is one generation back (as I add to this blog dated 2020). The ATM scope (two generations back) has the black near the tip of the scope while the ATS has the black on the Helical focus wheel as shown below. This is a far better version to digiscope by. I found that the ATM was not a very 'sharp' scope, or at least the model I had. You will see images of this as you scroll down.
Also, take note....look at the 'pan handle' of the head. I purposely cut-off 4-5 inches as it just got in the way. It is after all, 'my equipment' and by slicing off the handle, my body doesn't get in the way as I pan the scope. I remember a few years back talking to 'Chatterbox' out in Forsythe and he did the same thing. Only other person I saw that has done that, but a small tip. My ATS 80m scope below with 25-50 eye-piece.
The following are past blogs from 2008-2012..... tips included.
March 3rd 2012
I heard there were snowy owls spending the Winter in a wheat field about 70 miles from where I live so decided to take a look. I debated, scope or camera or both. Well, the first time I just took the camera and regretted not bringing the scope. There were five immature snowy owls lined up in a row like ducks..... but separated by a 100 meters or so.
Next day...yepper...you guessed it. I took my scope and did some digiscoping. This time around the owls were not in the spot they were before and I was initially bummed out as they were 'gone'... That location would have been perfect as I could of scoped from the road and the owls were perhaps 50 meters away. So, I went a looking.... I found em. There were two of them sitting in the wheat fields, one had its back to me but the other was facing me. There were about 100 meters apart still so I focused on the nearest one facing me.
The day was cool in the low 30's and the wind was blowing pretty good, ...cloudy for most part with a bit of sun in between. I was cold.
I set up my scope outside my car and shot the owl from about 100 meters again. Hmmm...too far I thought, even for a large bird as an owl. So I started creeping in by walking in the wheat field and soon I narrowed the distance to a solid 50 meters....definitely a doable shot given the size of the owl.
Shots were taken at exposure - 2 stops and kept my F stop at 4.5 which gave me good enough shutter speed ...at times over a 1000. Not bad for a stationary owl. The wind was a bother though as even though I have a solid Benro tripod, I was worried that even a bit of wind would upset the shots. But I had little choice...one can't choose the perfect field now, eh?
All told I snapped off 150 shots...with sets of 4 shots on a 3 second timer delay. The shot above was taken near the foothills of Wallula Junction near the Columbia River. A bit high, cold.... windy.
What did I learn from this little adventure...first, that it I have a steady tripod, a windy day doesn't hurt my digiscoping too much. Also, I continued to strive for my shots by not upping the ISO...The ISO remained 100 or 200 as I will not venture into that territory where shots come out looking soft. I can always compensate for lack of ISO but can never compensate for softness.
Thoughts? jim
I heard there were snowy owls spending the Winter in a wheat field about 70 miles from where I live so decided to take a look. I debated, scope or camera or both. Well, the first time I just took the camera and regretted not bringing the scope. There were five immature snowy owls lined up in a row like ducks..... but separated by a 100 meters or so.
Next day...yepper...you guessed it. I took my scope and did some digiscoping. This time around the owls were not in the spot they were before and I was initially bummed out as they were 'gone'... That location would have been perfect as I could of scoped from the road and the owls were perhaps 50 meters away. So, I went a looking.... I found em. There were two of them sitting in the wheat fields, one had its back to me but the other was facing me. There were about 100 meters apart still so I focused on the nearest one facing me.
The day was cool in the low 30's and the wind was blowing pretty good, ...cloudy for most part with a bit of sun in between. I was cold.
I set up my scope outside my car and shot the owl from about 100 meters again. Hmmm...too far I thought, even for a large bird as an owl. So I started creeping in by walking in the wheat field and soon I narrowed the distance to a solid 50 meters....definitely a doable shot given the size of the owl.
Shots were taken at exposure - 2 stops and kept my F stop at 4.5 which gave me good enough shutter speed ...at times over a 1000. Not bad for a stationary owl. The wind was a bother though as even though I have a solid Benro tripod, I was worried that even a bit of wind would upset the shots. But I had little choice...one can't choose the perfect field now, eh?
All told I snapped off 150 shots...with sets of 4 shots on a 3 second timer delay. The shot above was taken near the foothills of Wallula Junction near the Columbia River. A bit high, cold.... windy.
What did I learn from this little adventure...first, that it I have a steady tripod, a windy day doesn't hurt my digiscoping too much. Also, I continued to strive for my shots by not upping the ISO...The ISO remained 100 or 200 as I will not venture into that territory where shots come out looking soft. I can always compensate for lack of ISO but can never compensate for softness.
Thoughts? jim
|
|
Nov 11th 2011
Well today a goal was to digiscope a Western Grebe and to do so in the right sunlight...I feel I was successful..see image...
One thing I learned was how to get a fairly clear shot of a Grebe. We all know that the angle of sunlight hitting upon the Grebe is important and especially so with this bird since it has that 'red eye''...I wanted that to show and show clear.
So the first thing I figured out was that the Grebe had to be swimming in one direction...okay, fair enough.
Now...I go back to my 'current' problem as I found on the Oregon Coast...how to digiscope with the bird moving, either by the current or by swimming as was this case. I took my shots of a bird in a man-made lake..as it swam past me. I probably waited in the bushes for an hour before the grebes made there way close to my end of the lake as I waited in anticipation.
I tried several methods...including that of having my left hand on the helical focus of my Swarovski scope while my right hand remained glued to the camera trigger.. the left hand also moved the scope to keep in line with the bird swimming,. This worked well.
While the bird swam and I kept pace with it on the scope...I had my camera swung down all ready to take a shot and my left hand continually focusing the bird on the LCD.... It seemed like a good plan as my camera was on manual mode and I had it magnified in the LCD. I took lots of shots with this method.... no avail..the bird continually was out of focus enough to make the images useless in my opinion...perhaps not to my level of skill and technology of 1995, but surely not digiscoping in 2012.
I reverted back to my old method...a time delay of one second and four continuous shots. this produced the most in focus hits upon the grebe. Although remember, the grebe is moving and I have my hands free of the scope and helical focus..the grebe is swimming. And away it swims,...away and out of view of the camera too!!!..So out of every 4 picture sequence...two were always blank as the grebe swam out of view. Of the other two...I managed to take some some shots of grebes in focus....see my images ...
So...what did I learn?....I can take 'current or swimming shots' but it is difficult. I still need to use the time delay and not the single shot...that proved to again be the trick. At same time...realize there will be lots of useless shots as the bird simply swam out of the camera ....but of the few that remained, I could get some really good shots.
I love the color involved in digiscoping...rich, vivid...and the closeness...I cannot do this with my Canon 7D and 400 L lens....
Well today a goal was to digiscope a Western Grebe and to do so in the right sunlight...I feel I was successful..see image...
One thing I learned was how to get a fairly clear shot of a Grebe. We all know that the angle of sunlight hitting upon the Grebe is important and especially so with this bird since it has that 'red eye''...I wanted that to show and show clear.
So the first thing I figured out was that the Grebe had to be swimming in one direction...okay, fair enough.
Now...I go back to my 'current' problem as I found on the Oregon Coast...how to digiscope with the bird moving, either by the current or by swimming as was this case. I took my shots of a bird in a man-made lake..as it swam past me. I probably waited in the bushes for an hour before the grebes made there way close to my end of the lake as I waited in anticipation.
I tried several methods...including that of having my left hand on the helical focus of my Swarovski scope while my right hand remained glued to the camera trigger.. the left hand also moved the scope to keep in line with the bird swimming,. This worked well.
While the bird swam and I kept pace with it on the scope...I had my camera swung down all ready to take a shot and my left hand continually focusing the bird on the LCD.... It seemed like a good plan as my camera was on manual mode and I had it magnified in the LCD. I took lots of shots with this method.... no avail..the bird continually was out of focus enough to make the images useless in my opinion...perhaps not to my level of skill and technology of 1995, but surely not digiscoping in 2012.
I reverted back to my old method...a time delay of one second and four continuous shots. this produced the most in focus hits upon the grebe. Although remember, the grebe is moving and I have my hands free of the scope and helical focus..the grebe is swimming. And away it swims,...away and out of view of the camera too!!!..So out of every 4 picture sequence...two were always blank as the grebe swam out of view. Of the other two...I managed to take some some shots of grebes in focus....see my images ...
So...what did I learn?....I can take 'current or swimming shots' but it is difficult. I still need to use the time delay and not the single shot...that proved to again be the trick. At same time...realize there will be lots of useless shots as the bird simply swam out of the camera ....but of the few that remained, I could get some really good shots.
I love the color involved in digiscoping...rich, vivid...and the closeness...I cannot do this with my Canon 7D and 400 L lens....
Nov 8th 2011
Another sunny day...can't help but go digiscoping.... In my part of the country I always label this as a nuclear dead zone in terms of birds and migration etc... A terrible part of Washington State. But I do have one small water area to take shots of...a local river that has long ago been diverted by the Corps of Engineers into a spillway. At least it is overgrown in and around so various species of waterfoul are present although not overly diverse...the usual herons, mallards, today was a hooded merganser, kingfishers etc...
Usually around here herons are pretty spooky and they are difficult to get a shot of. I noticed today that ducks...seem to have a sense of when 'you have them in their site" ...has anyone else noticed that? Talk about a sixth sense. The minute I get one in focus, it knows it and scoots away too. I really feel birds do have a sense ...they know when we are onto them.
Now for the heron...it is a large bird and I find it hard to really capture the bird digiscoping when upclose, for obvious reasons. But this shot attached was one of it preening itself and the right leg was drawn up. Such awkward looking birds and not overly graceful looking in flight either but the kicker is, they are!
I am getting more comfortable with my new method of digiscoping...+ on the exposure, low ISO....and no more than 20 zoom. I always always always use the timer with a second delay and 4 shots. Even though the focus is preset as I scope in on the bird, the secret I feel is fine tuning focus when you have the camera in place. This is not always easy due to sun light on camera. It works well with my camera and set up. When the sun shines in the NW, in the morning...shots come out well. The long shadows come out during the afternoon making for tough shots, especially in this creek where the sun is perfectly set in the morning.
I also try to get as close to eye level as I can. This is not easy as when doing so, you scare away most birds as you move from above ground thru bush...to get even with the water. My tri-pod doesn't take 'upside down' scoping, so I can get about as low as 1 1/2 feet from ground to scope. Perhaps 2 feet at eyepiece. But usually that is low enough to give the feel of ground level or in this case ---water level.
Scoped a few more waterfoul...wigeons and mergansers and tried to capture a junco but they were in high grass and shade... next time... I have another place in mind not far from here where I can take some shots...I think the next sunny day I will venture out there and see what it is their pond....
Another sunny day...can't help but go digiscoping.... In my part of the country I always label this as a nuclear dead zone in terms of birds and migration etc... A terrible part of Washington State. But I do have one small water area to take shots of...a local river that has long ago been diverted by the Corps of Engineers into a spillway. At least it is overgrown in and around so various species of waterfoul are present although not overly diverse...the usual herons, mallards, today was a hooded merganser, kingfishers etc...
Usually around here herons are pretty spooky and they are difficult to get a shot of. I noticed today that ducks...seem to have a sense of when 'you have them in their site" ...has anyone else noticed that? Talk about a sixth sense. The minute I get one in focus, it knows it and scoots away too. I really feel birds do have a sense ...they know when we are onto them.
Now for the heron...it is a large bird and I find it hard to really capture the bird digiscoping when upclose, for obvious reasons. But this shot attached was one of it preening itself and the right leg was drawn up. Such awkward looking birds and not overly graceful looking in flight either but the kicker is, they are!
I am getting more comfortable with my new method of digiscoping...+ on the exposure, low ISO....and no more than 20 zoom. I always always always use the timer with a second delay and 4 shots. Even though the focus is preset as I scope in on the bird, the secret I feel is fine tuning focus when you have the camera in place. This is not always easy due to sun light on camera. It works well with my camera and set up. When the sun shines in the NW, in the morning...shots come out well. The long shadows come out during the afternoon making for tough shots, especially in this creek where the sun is perfectly set in the morning.
I also try to get as close to eye level as I can. This is not easy as when doing so, you scare away most birds as you move from above ground thru bush...to get even with the water. My tri-pod doesn't take 'upside down' scoping, so I can get about as low as 1 1/2 feet from ground to scope. Perhaps 2 feet at eyepiece. But usually that is low enough to give the feel of ground level or in this case ---water level.
Scoped a few more waterfoul...wigeons and mergansers and tried to capture a junco but they were in high grass and shade... next time... I have another place in mind not far from here where I can take some shots...I think the next sunny day I will venture out there and see what it is their pond....
Nov 3rd, 2011
Well it is sunny in the Northwestern region of United States which at this time of the year doesn't happen much. So I took advantage of the sun and went out and digiscoped.
Rule number one...make sure you have a full battery. When I reached my destination, the battery light immediately went on but I managed to snap a 150 shots or so before running dry and not having a backup. So the rule is in there someplace to learn!
Kingfishers is what I was after...as I am constantly trying to get a shot of a kingfisher in the right light. They are flighty birds that spook easy. They are real comfortable at being around people unless they know you are looking at them. I think they sense our eyes.
Usually they are visible and surely you can hear them. But they stay at a distance and that makes my usual mode of photography with my camera and 400 a bit stretched. So thought I would try digiscoping on them. I can't do them in flight, but perched.
Found a nice target...probably 40-50 meters away, across the river...in a tall tree. It just kept going back and forth between trees so I have ample opportunity to take a shot. Funny how the placement of the sun and the way the bird's head is turned makes all the difference in the world. I can't exactly move my gear one way or the other so I have to rely on 'luck' shots in terms of how the bird is facing etc...
But I got some good shots.... The sun and blue skies made it a fantastic day as I snapped shots and included one in the bird forum gallery. Harder to 'frame' the bird as my S90 has no focus points like my 7D has ...so the bird is usually in the middle....well, always.
I used ISO of 100...which gave me a shutter of around 1/400 --1/1000 depending but the higher shutters did not afford me the best shots to see the true colors or feathers sticking up on head. So I stuck with the 1/400 shots .... again, placement of bird and on which tree did this for me.
I kept the Exposure to the left a notch or two...
I used 'self timer'...something you have to do and if not, you will never end up with good shots unless you have a remote switch. The touching of the scope and the camera is just too much at that distance in zoom to not effect overall quality. So, use a self timer.
I like to use 'vivid' where I can..especially on birds that have color like the belted kingfisher...
The scope does real nicely and even at this distance since the Kingbird is a bit larger than the sparrow hawk that was sitting in back of it and at a greater distance. I wish I could snap a shot with my scope with the kingbird being closer but, no such luck.... But happy with the shots... jim
Well it is sunny in the Northwestern region of United States which at this time of the year doesn't happen much. So I took advantage of the sun and went out and digiscoped.
Rule number one...make sure you have a full battery. When I reached my destination, the battery light immediately went on but I managed to snap a 150 shots or so before running dry and not having a backup. So the rule is in there someplace to learn!
Kingfishers is what I was after...as I am constantly trying to get a shot of a kingfisher in the right light. They are flighty birds that spook easy. They are real comfortable at being around people unless they know you are looking at them. I think they sense our eyes.
Usually they are visible and surely you can hear them. But they stay at a distance and that makes my usual mode of photography with my camera and 400 a bit stretched. So thought I would try digiscoping on them. I can't do them in flight, but perched.
Found a nice target...probably 40-50 meters away, across the river...in a tall tree. It just kept going back and forth between trees so I have ample opportunity to take a shot. Funny how the placement of the sun and the way the bird's head is turned makes all the difference in the world. I can't exactly move my gear one way or the other so I have to rely on 'luck' shots in terms of how the bird is facing etc...
But I got some good shots.... The sun and blue skies made it a fantastic day as I snapped shots and included one in the bird forum gallery. Harder to 'frame' the bird as my S90 has no focus points like my 7D has ...so the bird is usually in the middle....well, always.
I used ISO of 100...which gave me a shutter of around 1/400 --1/1000 depending but the higher shutters did not afford me the best shots to see the true colors or feathers sticking up on head. So I stuck with the 1/400 shots .... again, placement of bird and on which tree did this for me.
I kept the Exposure to the left a notch or two...
I used 'self timer'...something you have to do and if not, you will never end up with good shots unless you have a remote switch. The touching of the scope and the camera is just too much at that distance in zoom to not effect overall quality. So, use a self timer.
I like to use 'vivid' where I can..especially on birds that have color like the belted kingfisher...
The scope does real nicely and even at this distance since the Kingbird is a bit larger than the sparrow hawk that was sitting in back of it and at a greater distance. I wish I could snap a shot with my scope with the kingbird being closer but, no such luck.... But happy with the shots... jim
Oct 30th 2010....
I am back from the coast....cloudy days. But I want to try some digiscoping techniques.
First....I want to compare by SX20 Canon Super Zoom with my Swaro... easy since there are plenty of house sparrows in my yard. Took shots using the Sx20 at full zoom which is 20 power I believe. Tooks shots with the Swaro at 20 power but with my Canon S90 on 3-4 optical zoom.
The results were easily for the spotting scope. One issue with the camera is that no matter how hard one tries to keep it steady, it is almost impossible when you are zooming at 20x...let alone the latest cameras with super zoom up to 35. To get clear shots, you need a tripod but by using one, you defeat the purpose of a quick and portable method of photography.
The scope worked fine...even in cloudy skies and a shutter speed of 125. I have found the optimum method for me with the right ISO, Exposure and zoom. I have a 20-60x eyepiece. After playing with the ISO, exp and zoom, I think I came up with what I feel is the perfect method for taking shots using my scope...anyplace. Of course Exposure has to be adjusted quite a bit depending on type of bird and background...more to come as I practice with it ...
It is essential that one uses a 'timer' ..I place mine on a 2 second delay and four continuous shots. That way the vibration is lessened. That is crucial...it has to be on a tripod and it needs to be on the timer. Without that, you have blurs. Especially in low light situations.
I prefer low ISO... exposure +1 notch.
I am back from the coast....cloudy days. But I want to try some digiscoping techniques.
First....I want to compare by SX20 Canon Super Zoom with my Swaro... easy since there are plenty of house sparrows in my yard. Took shots using the Sx20 at full zoom which is 20 power I believe. Tooks shots with the Swaro at 20 power but with my Canon S90 on 3-4 optical zoom.
The results were easily for the spotting scope. One issue with the camera is that no matter how hard one tries to keep it steady, it is almost impossible when you are zooming at 20x...let alone the latest cameras with super zoom up to 35. To get clear shots, you need a tripod but by using one, you defeat the purpose of a quick and portable method of photography.
The scope worked fine...even in cloudy skies and a shutter speed of 125. I have found the optimum method for me with the right ISO, Exposure and zoom. I have a 20-60x eyepiece. After playing with the ISO, exp and zoom, I think I came up with what I feel is the perfect method for taking shots using my scope...anyplace. Of course Exposure has to be adjusted quite a bit depending on type of bird and background...more to come as I practice with it ...
It is essential that one uses a 'timer' ..I place mine on a 2 second delay and four continuous shots. That way the vibration is lessened. That is crucial...it has to be on a tripod and it needs to be on the timer. Without that, you have blurs. Especially in low light situations.
I prefer low ISO... exposure +1 notch.
Oct 25th 2010
I spent the early portion of today in Newport Oregon, digiscoping harbor birds.....A few common loons, scoters etc..
Sunny day....I had my settings at 80 ISO and my exposure -1 .... The one image that came out perfect was of a pelagic cormorant sitting on the bridge. Nice shot..
Now....the other shots were poor and here is the reason why. One word..."current'.... I would focus the scope on the bird, swing my DCB down with the camera attached....with a one second delay, four shot. But the current would take the bird 'someplace'...out of the picture and out of focus.
If I followed the bird in the current, I lose the benefit of having the camera on a timed delay, thus a sharp image. When I move the scope following the current and bird, it ends up blurred...
I am glad I practiced this for this is the type of thing a digiscoper has to know. Sometimes digiscoping just doesn't cut it, whether it is a bird in flight, or a bird in current. If I had my 7D and 400mm...it would have been an easy shot. But not digiscoping, but I sure had fun in the process.
By the way...the scope worked perfectly as I could pick out birds in the open sea as well as harbor... I wasn't digiscoping at that distance, but I can tell you that even at 60x, the Swaro came thru, light wise and clarity....there were several feeding frenzies in the ocean that could be scoped from the cliffs....my scope picked em up, I am happy....
I spent the early portion of today in Newport Oregon, digiscoping harbor birds.....A few common loons, scoters etc..
Sunny day....I had my settings at 80 ISO and my exposure -1 .... The one image that came out perfect was of a pelagic cormorant sitting on the bridge. Nice shot..
Now....the other shots were poor and here is the reason why. One word..."current'.... I would focus the scope on the bird, swing my DCB down with the camera attached....with a one second delay, four shot. But the current would take the bird 'someplace'...out of the picture and out of focus.
If I followed the bird in the current, I lose the benefit of having the camera on a timed delay, thus a sharp image. When I move the scope following the current and bird, it ends up blurred...
I am glad I practiced this for this is the type of thing a digiscoper has to know. Sometimes digiscoping just doesn't cut it, whether it is a bird in flight, or a bird in current. If I had my 7D and 400mm...it would have been an easy shot. But not digiscoping, but I sure had fun in the process.
By the way...the scope worked perfectly as I could pick out birds in the open sea as well as harbor... I wasn't digiscoping at that distance, but I can tell you that even at 60x, the Swaro came thru, light wise and clarity....there were several feeding frenzies in the ocean that could be scoped from the cliffs....my scope picked em up, I am happy....
Oct 23rd, 2010
Digiscoping with my Swaro on the Oregon Coast in October...lots of sea birds obviously.
Anything far away...well...no use digiscoping but I managed to do some excellent digiscoping of Harlequin Ducks in Newport Harbor as well as of gulls chomping on star fishes. Both of those were hampered a bit by the constant rain.
I had to cover the scope with a waterproof jacket, not so much for the scope but for the camera as well as the eyepiece....I felt like one of those old time photographers with the cape over their head as they snapped off a shot.
Got a excellent shot of a Perigrine Falcon on the beach in Oceanside...it was just on top of the cliffs looking out. I took quite a bit of shots and kept getting washed out images as the falcon is gray and white. Since it was on a dark soil ledge....I played with exposure and took it down to -2.... that really worked out pretty well as I ended up with great shots I will post here later on.
Vignetting is always an issue with the Canon S90 and my swaro. Not sure why...it shouldn't be that bad but I look at it realistically and just cut it out. If I get a good shot with vignetting, as long as it doesn't take away from the photo, I am good with that...
I also kept my ISO at 80....way down.... My shutter was only 1/100 but the quality improved by sticking to low ISO. In older days I am not sure I would have played with it as low...I always used to stay with ISO of 400 or even 800 but that makes for a lot of noise. So tried it this week...not bad, I am happy, Now I need to do a better job of exposure. It is far better dark than light as far as image goes. So I am going to work on that as a goal.
I have one more day of my coastal digiscoping ....hopefully some sun will show. I have a few places I want to go before making the 7 hour drive back....
Digiscoping with my Swaro on the Oregon Coast in October...lots of sea birds obviously.
Anything far away...well...no use digiscoping but I managed to do some excellent digiscoping of Harlequin Ducks in Newport Harbor as well as of gulls chomping on star fishes. Both of those were hampered a bit by the constant rain.
I had to cover the scope with a waterproof jacket, not so much for the scope but for the camera as well as the eyepiece....I felt like one of those old time photographers with the cape over their head as they snapped off a shot.
Got a excellent shot of a Perigrine Falcon on the beach in Oceanside...it was just on top of the cliffs looking out. I took quite a bit of shots and kept getting washed out images as the falcon is gray and white. Since it was on a dark soil ledge....I played with exposure and took it down to -2.... that really worked out pretty well as I ended up with great shots I will post here later on.
Vignetting is always an issue with the Canon S90 and my swaro. Not sure why...it shouldn't be that bad but I look at it realistically and just cut it out. If I get a good shot with vignetting, as long as it doesn't take away from the photo, I am good with that...
I also kept my ISO at 80....way down.... My shutter was only 1/100 but the quality improved by sticking to low ISO. In older days I am not sure I would have played with it as low...I always used to stay with ISO of 400 or even 800 but that makes for a lot of noise. So tried it this week...not bad, I am happy, Now I need to do a better job of exposure. It is far better dark than light as far as image goes. So I am going to work on that as a goal.
I have one more day of my coastal digiscoping ....hopefully some sun will show. I have a few places I want to go before making the 7 hour drive back....
Oct 3rd, 2010
Well...I know I said in my last posting that my repurchase of a scope was coming down to the Vortex Razor....and I believe that to be an excellent scope after looking at the 09 reviews of higher end scopes. That clearly shows it is.
But, I had a call from a store in Montana that had a demo Swaro 80 HS ATM plus a eyepiece for a real good price and couldn't pass it up. ... I like the Swaro Helical focus wheel...to me that helps as I have a little bit of arthritis in my right thumb and sometimes twisting caps or...in a scopes world, turning a knob, just plain hurts. So...the larger helical wheel on the Swaro is perfect. See Below...this is the ATM model, not the ATS... This is the older model as the 'black' color is on the out scope ring, while the newer ATS has the black on the Helical Focal wheel.
Also, I love the styling, the rubber armor feel...the locking eye piece...and the quality of the image. All in all, perfect for me so I picked up another one after selling my ATS just a month or so ago. Gees....am I a ping pong ball or what!...?
So it should be arriving next week, just in time to do some coastal bird watching on the Oregon Coast, end of October...I am excited.
I am breaking out my S90 Canon and will do some digiscoping where needed. Although the camera makes for a better overall image...the scope slows me down and forces me to observe bird habitat and the environment....I like it.
Digiscoping has its place...just as walking around with a pair of bino's has or taking a camera and lens. One just has to know when to do each one ....Below is the ATM version of Swaro 80mm scope. The ATM version is not nearly as sharp as the ATS version (2015 or later) in my opinion having had both. I started with an ATS (pre-2011), then sold...picked up the ATM from my Montana dealer. The image below show my ATM scope plus my Swarovski adapter. Notice how it swings 'up' and away from the eyepiece when I don't want to take a shot, but perhaps want to view and focus from the scope and eye-piece.
Well...I know I said in my last posting that my repurchase of a scope was coming down to the Vortex Razor....and I believe that to be an excellent scope after looking at the 09 reviews of higher end scopes. That clearly shows it is.
But, I had a call from a store in Montana that had a demo Swaro 80 HS ATM plus a eyepiece for a real good price and couldn't pass it up. ... I like the Swaro Helical focus wheel...to me that helps as I have a little bit of arthritis in my right thumb and sometimes twisting caps or...in a scopes world, turning a knob, just plain hurts. So...the larger helical wheel on the Swaro is perfect. See Below...this is the ATM model, not the ATS... This is the older model as the 'black' color is on the out scope ring, while the newer ATS has the black on the Helical Focal wheel.
Also, I love the styling, the rubber armor feel...the locking eye piece...and the quality of the image. All in all, perfect for me so I picked up another one after selling my ATS just a month or so ago. Gees....am I a ping pong ball or what!...?
So it should be arriving next week, just in time to do some coastal bird watching on the Oregon Coast, end of October...I am excited.
I am breaking out my S90 Canon and will do some digiscoping where needed. Although the camera makes for a better overall image...the scope slows me down and forces me to observe bird habitat and the environment....I like it.
Digiscoping has its place...just as walking around with a pair of bino's has or taking a camera and lens. One just has to know when to do each one ....Below is the ATM version of Swaro 80mm scope. The ATM version is not nearly as sharp as the ATS version (2015 or later) in my opinion having had both. I started with an ATS (pre-2011), then sold...picked up the ATM from my Montana dealer. The image below show my ATM scope plus my Swarovski adapter. Notice how it swings 'up' and away from the eyepiece when I don't want to take a shot, but perhaps want to view and focus from the scope and eye-piece.
August 27th, 2010
I think my last blog on this issue was a year and half ago...wow, time flies. Since that time I have experimented with digiscoping and learned how to take fairly good images using a scope plus camera.
My Zenfolio page has a link dedicated to Digiscoping only.
Sadly...in this past year I sold my Swaro 80HD....I wanted and needed to finance some other aspects of my overall birding.... and it was a sound investment.
Now...I am back to getting into digiscoping but the world is open to me. I still will be using my Canon S90 camera but what scope? I thought of even looking at Telescopes but declined that as I figured out they are not rain or fog proof...not a good thing....
So...what scope..another Swaro, or perhaps a Kowa.... those are two top choices. Well I looked and have it narrowed down to the Vortex Razor 85mm HD angled (all are angled), the Brunton 8omm, the Leupold Kanai or the Bushnell Elite.
These are the factors I want to take into account. First, I am not a novice so my skills have gone beyond the basics and the basic scope. I am up to Swaro or Kowa speed, in other wards. But not in terms of price~!
I am concerned about quality, light, rubber coating (Don't like to scratch my equipment), eye relief and length. I am not so concerned about weight (relatively speaking it doesn't matter a few ounces but length of scope does when I am looking at packing it on trips or planes).
FOV is not as important for I learned when searching, you search at 20mm and then hone in once you find. Most scopes are pretty much the same at this zoom.
Close focus....while nice...how many times will I take a shot of a bird at close focus and be able to fit it on the screen? ...few...
But eye relief is important as a day of digiscoping is hard on the eyes and the larger it is...even a mm or so, makes a difference.
Quality is obviously huge.... I believe that quality in terms of binoculars has reached a point where a relatively midpriced bino equals a higher priced ALPHA bino...to a degree... But in terms of scopes...a lower or mid price scope doesn't have the light or glass (even though they state ED)...
Quality takes research...asking others, reading reviews...and carefully coming up with quality based upon glass quality, light, ease of use and feel etc. I am beginning to think that mid priced scopes (<$1000) are not going to give me the quality I need overall.
So I am looking at the Vortex Razor...a quality scope ....not quite on the same level as the Swaro I had but not all that far behind. I am going to pick one up and compare the two. If the Vortex doesn't cut it....I can send it back~! .....I have a trip to the Oregon coast coming up and this will be the perfect opportunity to run it thru the works.... jim
I think my last blog on this issue was a year and half ago...wow, time flies. Since that time I have experimented with digiscoping and learned how to take fairly good images using a scope plus camera.
My Zenfolio page has a link dedicated to Digiscoping only.
Sadly...in this past year I sold my Swaro 80HD....I wanted and needed to finance some other aspects of my overall birding.... and it was a sound investment.
Now...I am back to getting into digiscoping but the world is open to me. I still will be using my Canon S90 camera but what scope? I thought of even looking at Telescopes but declined that as I figured out they are not rain or fog proof...not a good thing....
So...what scope..another Swaro, or perhaps a Kowa.... those are two top choices. Well I looked and have it narrowed down to the Vortex Razor 85mm HD angled (all are angled), the Brunton 8omm, the Leupold Kanai or the Bushnell Elite.
These are the factors I want to take into account. First, I am not a novice so my skills have gone beyond the basics and the basic scope. I am up to Swaro or Kowa speed, in other wards. But not in terms of price~!
I am concerned about quality, light, rubber coating (Don't like to scratch my equipment), eye relief and length. I am not so concerned about weight (relatively speaking it doesn't matter a few ounces but length of scope does when I am looking at packing it on trips or planes).
FOV is not as important for I learned when searching, you search at 20mm and then hone in once you find. Most scopes are pretty much the same at this zoom.
Close focus....while nice...how many times will I take a shot of a bird at close focus and be able to fit it on the screen? ...few...
But eye relief is important as a day of digiscoping is hard on the eyes and the larger it is...even a mm or so, makes a difference.
Quality is obviously huge.... I believe that quality in terms of binoculars has reached a point where a relatively midpriced bino equals a higher priced ALPHA bino...to a degree... But in terms of scopes...a lower or mid price scope doesn't have the light or glass (even though they state ED)...
Quality takes research...asking others, reading reviews...and carefully coming up with quality based upon glass quality, light, ease of use and feel etc. I am beginning to think that mid priced scopes (<$1000) are not going to give me the quality I need overall.
So I am looking at the Vortex Razor...a quality scope ....not quite on the same level as the Swaro I had but not all that far behind. I am going to pick one up and compare the two. If the Vortex doesn't cut it....I can send it back~! .....I have a trip to the Oregon coast coming up and this will be the perfect opportunity to run it thru the works.... jim
March 12th, 2008
Since I have time...I am digiscoping. The weather was a bit crummy today in the Northwest with cloudy skies and a bit of spit in the air.
I went out to photograph geese and other waterfoul in the wet areas. No use looking for song birds or sparrows when weather is so bad....
But learned a few things as I took both my camera and 300 lens and my digiscoping equipment. I am getting digiscoping down pat with my adapter and feeling more comfortable doing it. That helps, just establishing your comfort zone. I use my left hand to focus with the focal ring on my swaro and to also follow birds with the scope if they are moving. I use my right hand on the shutter button.
Thing I learned today.....birds in flight ....the camera lens is much better. It is way to difficult to follow flight birds with a scope, a lens is easy... Birds from a distance are better photo'd with the scope, up close it is a toss up. Huge Learning Find is the distance from the eyepiece glass of your camera. I had it out just a bit too far. Even an extra mm is too much. I believe it should be no more than 2 mm once the camera is turned on and the lens pops out from the point and shoot. Anymore and you will always have more blue than needed. I found this out when I was scoping in on a goose and using 60x magnification and I still had a bit of vignetting. I was trying to figure out why and never did figure it out till I came home and looked at the space I had between open lens and glass on eye piece. Today I hope to try this out a bit more and see the difference. Yesterday I got blurred images when I shouldn't have so figure it was the spacing issue.
That shows you how important it is when digiscoping to really check your equipment prior to taking a shot. Not just the settings on your camera as usual, but the equipment. I looked ahead of time to see if it was centered on the eyepiece when the adapter for camera swung into place, which it was....but not the closeness of the camera lens once I turn on the camera. So....a new thing to learn!!!
Also, when using the scope to pan, make sure you have tightend up the fluid head so you have just a bit of play, not a lot...so your scope is not too fluid in motion~!... that is an easy one to pick up on but something that I thought about yesterday when digiscoping.
Last thing to learn...or just know...cloudy weather is not good for any photography at a distance. Just not enough light. My flash kept coming on my camera and that is a bad thing when digiscoping as it is only providing a flash on the eyepiece...terrible~ I can't seem to turn it off. Also, I would like to get a camera that allows me to have a remote control switch but that will have to wait as I just bought this one 4 months ago and it was 200$ but I need to find a good digiscoping camera...
Since I have time...I am digiscoping. The weather was a bit crummy today in the Northwest with cloudy skies and a bit of spit in the air.
I went out to photograph geese and other waterfoul in the wet areas. No use looking for song birds or sparrows when weather is so bad....
But learned a few things as I took both my camera and 300 lens and my digiscoping equipment. I am getting digiscoping down pat with my adapter and feeling more comfortable doing it. That helps, just establishing your comfort zone. I use my left hand to focus with the focal ring on my swaro and to also follow birds with the scope if they are moving. I use my right hand on the shutter button.
Thing I learned today.....birds in flight ....the camera lens is much better. It is way to difficult to follow flight birds with a scope, a lens is easy... Birds from a distance are better photo'd with the scope, up close it is a toss up. Huge Learning Find is the distance from the eyepiece glass of your camera. I had it out just a bit too far. Even an extra mm is too much. I believe it should be no more than 2 mm once the camera is turned on and the lens pops out from the point and shoot. Anymore and you will always have more blue than needed. I found this out when I was scoping in on a goose and using 60x magnification and I still had a bit of vignetting. I was trying to figure out why and never did figure it out till I came home and looked at the space I had between open lens and glass on eye piece. Today I hope to try this out a bit more and see the difference. Yesterday I got blurred images when I shouldn't have so figure it was the spacing issue.
That shows you how important it is when digiscoping to really check your equipment prior to taking a shot. Not just the settings on your camera as usual, but the equipment. I looked ahead of time to see if it was centered on the eyepiece when the adapter for camera swung into place, which it was....but not the closeness of the camera lens once I turn on the camera. So....a new thing to learn!!!
Also, when using the scope to pan, make sure you have tightend up the fluid head so you have just a bit of play, not a lot...so your scope is not too fluid in motion~!... that is an easy one to pick up on but something that I thought about yesterday when digiscoping.
Last thing to learn...or just know...cloudy weather is not good for any photography at a distance. Just not enough light. My flash kept coming on my camera and that is a bad thing when digiscoping as it is only providing a flash on the eyepiece...terrible~ I can't seem to turn it off. Also, I would like to get a camera that allows me to have a remote control switch but that will have to wait as I just bought this one 4 months ago and it was 200$ but I need to find a good digiscoping camera...
Feb 28th, 2008
Well it took a few days (work, of all things got in the way) before I could get out again. Today was a sunny day so decided to take the scope and adapter and do some digiscoping.
This time I was prepared as I set the camera up just right ahead of time and took the alum wrench with me just in case I needed to adjust something.
I felt good about the process now of setting up the scope, focusing in on the bird, swinging the adapter/camera down and taking the picture. I do notice the "pressing of the shutter button' does make the camera wiggle a bit, so will eventually look into getting a remote switch to take photos.
I transported the tripod and scope/adapter in my car with the legs of the tripod already extended to where I would want them. When going to a spot, I merely placed the scope and tripod over my shoulder and walked to where I took photos from. This worked fine and much easier to do than attempting to extend the tripod legs in the field. Not cumbersome as I carry the scope and tripod on shoulder regardless if legs are extended or not, so no big deal.
I don't like the idea of having the eyepiece cap not attached to the eyepiece. When I place the camera adapter on (swaro)...it makes me take unhook the safety string which attaches to the cap, ...thus the cap might fall off, it didn't....but I worry about that.
I fumbled with my glasses, going from sunglasses to reading, so need to bring upon my "Cheater" sunglasses next time. Also, the bill of a baseball cap gets in the way when the adapter is swung up, as I look solely thru the scope. When the adapter is down, no problem. I usually focus the scope first, swing down the adapter and take the shot. If a non moving bird like the owl, see attached image....it is a perfect shot. If the bird is moving such as a hooded merganser I foto'd, I find I have to move the scope and take the image at the same time, thus not getting what I call the best photo but not bad either, see attached.
Things to work on....better job of following a bird while camera in place on adapter and scope. A moving bird is tougher to photograph and get sharp, even waterfoul. I feel good about the general field work/process I did, I freely did the little things such as place / swing adapter in place, focus, take image etc. I would like to see if a better camera would take images a bit quicker, although this Canon 1200 IS does a fairly good job, especially since the salesman at the store recommended it as being one that would take an image quick. I keep the IS on for now even though I am using a tri pod for there is still movement in some sense as I pan the bird and move the scope to capture the bird (hooded merganser). Also, since their is movement in the camera as I snap the image, I keep IS on.
So, just more practice, more birds...see which birds come into focus and which do not. I notice that finding the bird using a scope is not as easy as using a camera + lens such as my canon and 300mm lens. Need to work on that too.
Well it took a few days (work, of all things got in the way) before I could get out again. Today was a sunny day so decided to take the scope and adapter and do some digiscoping.
This time I was prepared as I set the camera up just right ahead of time and took the alum wrench with me just in case I needed to adjust something.
I felt good about the process now of setting up the scope, focusing in on the bird, swinging the adapter/camera down and taking the picture. I do notice the "pressing of the shutter button' does make the camera wiggle a bit, so will eventually look into getting a remote switch to take photos.
I transported the tripod and scope/adapter in my car with the legs of the tripod already extended to where I would want them. When going to a spot, I merely placed the scope and tripod over my shoulder and walked to where I took photos from. This worked fine and much easier to do than attempting to extend the tripod legs in the field. Not cumbersome as I carry the scope and tripod on shoulder regardless if legs are extended or not, so no big deal.
I don't like the idea of having the eyepiece cap not attached to the eyepiece. When I place the camera adapter on (swaro)...it makes me take unhook the safety string which attaches to the cap, ...thus the cap might fall off, it didn't....but I worry about that.
I fumbled with my glasses, going from sunglasses to reading, so need to bring upon my "Cheater" sunglasses next time. Also, the bill of a baseball cap gets in the way when the adapter is swung up, as I look solely thru the scope. When the adapter is down, no problem. I usually focus the scope first, swing down the adapter and take the shot. If a non moving bird like the owl, see attached image....it is a perfect shot. If the bird is moving such as a hooded merganser I foto'd, I find I have to move the scope and take the image at the same time, thus not getting what I call the best photo but not bad either, see attached.
Things to work on....better job of following a bird while camera in place on adapter and scope. A moving bird is tougher to photograph and get sharp, even waterfoul. I feel good about the general field work/process I did, I freely did the little things such as place / swing adapter in place, focus, take image etc. I would like to see if a better camera would take images a bit quicker, although this Canon 1200 IS does a fairly good job, especially since the salesman at the store recommended it as being one that would take an image quick. I keep the IS on for now even though I am using a tri pod for there is still movement in some sense as I pan the bird and move the scope to capture the bird (hooded merganser). Also, since their is movement in the camera as I snap the image, I keep IS on.
So, just more practice, more birds...see which birds come into focus and which do not. I notice that finding the bird using a scope is not as easy as using a camera + lens such as my canon and 300mm lens. Need to work on that too.
Jan 15th, 2008
I began digiscoping as an alternative to my camera for birding. I seem to fit better with the concept of digiscoping and now I have to work with it to hone my skills. I have excellent equipment with my swaro 80mm HD and adaptor. I went out today for the first time with the adapter and of course it was cold, somewhat rainy. Why is it that everytime I begin something it is in rotten weather?
Anyhow, I had my camera all set up with my adapter on the scope and ready to go. I needed to practice this in the field, much like photography so that was the point of today, to see where I am going wrong and what I have to think about.
First, ....by the time I trooped off to where I wanted to go and spread out the tripod, the camera had readjusted itself or I should say the adapter had. Whether I bumped it or not, ...it was not centered to take a pic. I forgot to bring with me the alum wrench to adjust the camera so right off I learned I need to bring the alum wrench with me.
Second...the height of the tripod needs to be just so. It cannot be the same height I use without adapter and camera. So I needed to come home and play with it and mark my tri pod so I know at what height the legs should be. The adapter and camera add a few inches, thus the height I usually use will not do since I am standing on my tiptoes looking out at the bird. Also, depending on if the scope is angle up to trees, down or even, will or might change height of tri pod. I need to do more field work on that.
I did figure out that I can bring the bird into focus, bring the adapter down with the camera and from the screen refocus if needed prior to taking a shot.
So, end of day learning?....(a) I need to bring alum wrench (b) tri pod height adjustment is different than with no camera and adapter (c) I need to figure out the exact spotting my marking my adapter so if it does get off whack, I can easily adjust in the field since I will mark where it should be.
Other questions....(a) how easy to pack around camera and adapter and scope and tri pod? I am usually one to go light and this is a bit more than I usually do. I do not bird from a sitting blind, from the car etc...I am in the field walking into what ever topography I find myself in ...in ecuador in all sorts of climate, even in the states. (b) How easy is it to find and locate birds given the adapter attached? (C) is this set up more for long distance waterfoul and birds or for any type of birding? (d) will my birding change to more sitting and waiting with my scope already adjusted and ready to take a shot as opposed to walking around with my camera and taking shots...so more of a sit and wait (although not in a blind or any thing of the sort). .....
More later as I post and update my blog thru more field work.
I began digiscoping as an alternative to my camera for birding. I seem to fit better with the concept of digiscoping and now I have to work with it to hone my skills. I have excellent equipment with my swaro 80mm HD and adaptor. I went out today for the first time with the adapter and of course it was cold, somewhat rainy. Why is it that everytime I begin something it is in rotten weather?
Anyhow, I had my camera all set up with my adapter on the scope and ready to go. I needed to practice this in the field, much like photography so that was the point of today, to see where I am going wrong and what I have to think about.
First, ....by the time I trooped off to where I wanted to go and spread out the tripod, the camera had readjusted itself or I should say the adapter had. Whether I bumped it or not, ...it was not centered to take a pic. I forgot to bring with me the alum wrench to adjust the camera so right off I learned I need to bring the alum wrench with me.
Second...the height of the tripod needs to be just so. It cannot be the same height I use without adapter and camera. So I needed to come home and play with it and mark my tri pod so I know at what height the legs should be. The adapter and camera add a few inches, thus the height I usually use will not do since I am standing on my tiptoes looking out at the bird. Also, depending on if the scope is angle up to trees, down or even, will or might change height of tri pod. I need to do more field work on that.
I did figure out that I can bring the bird into focus, bring the adapter down with the camera and from the screen refocus if needed prior to taking a shot.
So, end of day learning?....(a) I need to bring alum wrench (b) tri pod height adjustment is different than with no camera and adapter (c) I need to figure out the exact spotting my marking my adapter so if it does get off whack, I can easily adjust in the field since I will mark where it should be.
Other questions....(a) how easy to pack around camera and adapter and scope and tri pod? I am usually one to go light and this is a bit more than I usually do. I do not bird from a sitting blind, from the car etc...I am in the field walking into what ever topography I find myself in ...in ecuador in all sorts of climate, even in the states. (b) How easy is it to find and locate birds given the adapter attached? (C) is this set up more for long distance waterfoul and birds or for any type of birding? (d) will my birding change to more sitting and waiting with my scope already adjusted and ready to take a shot as opposed to walking around with my camera and taking shots...so more of a sit and wait (although not in a blind or any thing of the sort). .....
More later as I post and update my blog thru more field work.