Use of Top Quality Spotting Scope as Super Telephoto Lens

awe-struck · October 1, 2008

****** http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">****** name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">****** name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">****** name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CGLENAN%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><style>  </style> Like many, my longest lens is a 300mm f/4. IS L lens; a terrific lens at that. So, I max out at 420mm with the 1.4tc, and could go to 600mm with a 2.0x tc. But, like everyone, I want to get those great close-ups captured with the big 400-600mm f/4 IS lens with $4000-7000 price tags. Like many, I can't afford to go there.. if I do, I will have no money to travel.[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] <o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
I have been considering using a spotting scope as a super telephoto lens on my camera. The top-of-the-line Swarovski, Kowa, Zeiss, Leica and Nikon spotting scopes have big objective lenses with extra-low dispersion , fluorite or apochromatic elements (77-85 mm) so the optical quality is equal to or better than those big telephotos. Using the appropriate manufacturer’s photoadapter and your dSLR, you have a combo that results in a 600-1100mm f/8-13 lens weighing 4 lbs with a minimum focusing distance of 16 feet. What’s more, the scope is rugged and fully weather-proof. You can use your camera’s metering system, but loose autofocus and must focus with the scope. You don’t have IS, but on a quality dSLR, you can crank up the ISO to 800 or more to compensate with little or no penalty.
<o:p> </o:p>
It would not be ideal, but it would be a practical solution. You could purchase such a scope and adapter for, at the most, half the price of a super-telephoto, and would have a great scope to enhance your bird watching experience, the best scope to digiscope (@1000-6000mm), and a high quality 600-1100mm telephoto. That’s the theory, anyway!
<o:p> </o:p>
Do any of you have real-world experience using such a combo? What is the image quality like? What are the limitations? Is this a viable solution?
<o:p> </o:p>
Awe-struck.<o:p></o:p>
[FONT=&quot]<o:p> </o:p>[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Glen Fox,<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">[FONT=&quot]Ottawa[/FONT]</st1:city>[FONT=&quot], <st1:state w:st="on">ON</st1:state>[/FONT]</st1:place>[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]EOS XTi, 40D, 70-200 and 300mm f/4 IS<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]

Harryb · October 1, 2008

Hi Glen,

You're talking about digiscoping. I haven't done it but know a few photogs who do. The IQ is OK but not up to a DSLR with a camera lens. You gain tremendous reach but lose in iQ and the ability to get action captures.

If you google digiscoping you will find tons of info on it.

awe-struck · October 1, 2008

No, Harry, I mean afocal photography

Harryb wrote:

Hi Glen,

You're talking about digiscoping. I haven't done it but know a few photogs who do. The IQ is OK but not up to a DSLR with a camera lens. You gain tremendous reach but lose in iQ and the ability to get action captures.

If you google digiscoping you will find tons of info on it.

What I am referring to is the use of the scope, without eye piece, a scope-specific camera adapter with a "T" mount, mounted on your dSLR body instead of a long lens. (in digiscoping you use the scope with eyepiece and a point and shoot or dSLR fitted over the eye-piece). I have to say I have seen a lot of digiscoped photos with IQ that would rival a dSLR+Long telephoto. I admit they are taken by very experienced digiscopers.

Glen

evil eggplant · October 1, 2008

IMO Harry is spot on. The scope is small and doesn't gather much light compared to a telephoto lens. For the money you can buy a 400 f/5.6L and a 2X converter. This combo will give you 800mm at f/11. Factor in the crop factor of the DSLR (in my case 1.6X) and you really have some legs.

Depending on what you shoot this may or may not work for you. If you're shooting birds you can basically forget about it, if the bird moves you lose focus. In fact, getting razor sharp focus digiscoping is an excersize in frustration, I've tried it, I know. I occasionally shoot 400mm with a 2X, manual focus is tough, and I only use this combo as a last resort.

Cheers

awe-struck wrote:

****** http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">****** name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">****** name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">****** name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><LINK href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CGLENAN%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel=File-List><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:smarttagtype name="State" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="City" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="place" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><OBJECT id=ieooui classid=clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D></OBJECT><STYLE> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </STYLE><STYLE>  </STYLE>Like many, my longest lens is a 300mm f/4. IS L lens; a terrific lens at that. So, I max out at 420mm with the 1.4tc, and could go to 600mm with a 2.0x tc. But, like everyone, I want to get those great close-ups captured with the big 400-600mm f/4 IS lens with $4000-7000 price tags. Like many, I can't afford to go there.. if I do, I will have no money to travel.[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
I have been considering using a spotting scope as a super telephoto lens on my camera. The top-of-the-line Swarovski, Kowa, Zeiss, Leica and Nikon spotting scopes have big objective lenses with extra-low dispersion , fluorite or apochromatic elements (77-85 mm) so the optical quality is equal to or better than those big telephotos. Using the appropriate manufacturer’s photoadapter and your dSLR, you have a combo that results in a 600-1100mm f/8-13 lens weighing 4 lbs with a minimum focusing distance of 16 feet. What’s more, the scope is rugged and fully weather-proof. You can use your camera’s metering system, but loose autofocus and must focus with the scope. You don’t have IS, but on a quality dSLR, you can crank up the ISO to 800 or more to compensate with little or no penalty.
<o:p></o:p>
It would not be ideal, but it would be a practical solution. You could purchase such a scope and adapter for, at the most, half the price of a super-telephoto, and would have a great scope to enhance your bird watching experience, the best scope to digiscope (@1000-6000mm), and a high quality 600-1100mm telephoto. That’s the theory, anyway!
<o:p></o:p>
Do any of you have real-world experience using such a combo? What is the image quality like? What are the limitations? Is this a viable solution?
<o:p></o:p>
Awe-struck.<o:p></o:p>
[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Glen Fox,<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">[FONT=&quot]Ottawa[/FONT]</st1:city>[FONT=&quot], <st1:state w:st="on">ON</st1:state>[/FONT]</st1:place>[FONT=&quot]<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]EOS XTi, 40D, 70-200 and 300mm f/4 IS<o:p></o:p>[/FONT]

Harryb · October 1, 2008

I read some stuff on afocal photography where its been used for astrophotography but I haven't run across anything where it has been used for wildlife photography.

The IQ on some digiscope captures is fine but I can't say that for the majority of digiscoped wildlife images I've seen. It works fine for stationary subjects but I've yet to see anyone get good quality BIFs with such a set-up.

jwear · October 1, 2008

do you have any sites that we could view these shots ?? I have not seen any that are that good ?

Harryb · October 2, 2008

jwear wrote:

do you have any sites that we could view these shots ?? I have not seen any that are that good ?

Here's one http://www.birddigiscoping.com/avian.html

davidweaver · October 3, 2008

I bought a piece of gym gear: The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 lens. On a dx it is a 180-450 @ f2.8. Now with the 2x TC I have an effective 360-900mm @f/5.6. All this for around $3000. Something else to think about. Haven't done any wildlife with if but the AF is very important to me even when shooting a large music festival.

A David Byrne wildlife shot last week with the Sigma at 900mm.

Cheers,
David

pyry · October 3, 2008

I've tried using a 1500/12 maksutov-cassegrain scope made for astronomy as a birding lens. I found that getting it pointed the right way was tricky and finding critical focus nearly impossible with moving targets not making things any easier. You would also need a very sturdy tripod and head.

I suppose if I had a camera with magnifying live view it would make it a more viable option.

awe-struck · October 9, 2008

Some Great Digiscoped Bird Images
****** http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">****** name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">****** name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">****** name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CGLENAN%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><style>  </style> Here are some of the best examples of digiscoped images of birds I am aware of.
<o:p> </o:p>
Ann Cook’s fantastic digiscoped images: http://www.mts.net/~acook/index.htm
<o:p> </o:p>
Mike McDowell’s fabulous images: http://www.Birddigiscoping.com check out his galleries
<o:p> </o:p>
Jeff Bouton’s digiscoped images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/16435490@N00/
<o:p> </o:p>
Ben Lizdas’s images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/benjaminlizdas/ . Ben digiscopes using a pentax dSLR
<o:p> </o:p>
Gerd Rossen (German) http://www.digital-nature-photography.com . Gerd’s site was where I first saw images captured with a dSLR + spotting scope combo, what Gerd refers to DSLR-Scoping to differentiate it from digiscoping. Look under : Some Interesting Information -> Technics -> Digiscoping -> Spotting Scopes -> Kowa TSN-884 and Hints and Infos -> DSLR-Scoping.
<o:p> </o:p>
Ann Cook and Mike McDowell captured their images using Nikon’s very early digital Point and Shoot cameras, the Cool Pix 990 and 995. These are 3 MP cameras with no image stabilization. These, and similar P&S cameras are still in use by some digiscopers. Many are now using 6-8 MP cameras, with image stabilization or vibration reduction. However, these cameras, for the most part, only provide quality images at ISO 50-200! So, most of these images are captured at shutter speeds of 1/30 - 1/125 of a second, with the rig mounted on a sturdy tripod, which I think is utterly amazing considering that they are working at the equivalent of 1000-5000 mm!!
<o:p> </o:p>
Jeff Bouton works with a much more sophisticated Leica P&S, which has image stabilization and higher ISO capability. So he can work at higher shutter speeds. Ben Lizdas uses a dSLR and has 10 MP, lots of ISO capability, IS, and can work at higher shutter speeds. Mirror slap is a problem with dSLRs, so some use “live view”.
<o:p> </o:p>
Most digiscopers are keen bird watchers who use spotting scopes all the time. So digiscoping is a natural for them. I have identified only a few of many very fine digiscopers, to give you a flavour of what they can capture using the technique. Some also work with dSLRs and long lenses. However, the two “communities” seem to be quite distinct. We could learn a lot from one another!. Patience if nothing else!

Awe-Struck

jwear wrote:

do you have any sites that we could view these shots ?? I have not seen any that are that good ?

Harryb · October 9, 2008

awe-struck wrote:

****** http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">****** name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">****** name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">****** name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><LINK href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CGLENAN%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel=File-List><STYLE>  </STYLE> Here are some of the best examples of digiscoped images of birds I am aware of.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p>
Ann Cook’s fantastic digiscoped images: http://www.mts.net/~acook/index.htm
<o:p></o:p>
Mike McDowell’s fabulous images: http://www.Birddigiscoping.com check out his galleries
<o:p></o:p>
Jeff Bouton’s digiscoped images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/16435490@N00/
<o:p></o:p>
Ben Lizdas’s images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/benjaminlizdas/ . Ben digiscopes using a pentax dSLR
<o:p></o:p>
Gerd Rossen (German) http://www.digital-nature-photography.com . Gerd’s site was where I first saw images captured with a dSLR + spotting scope combo, what Gerd refers to DSLR-Scoping to differentiate it from digiscoping. Look under : Some Interesting Information -> Technics -> Digiscoping -> Spotting Scopes -> Kowa TSN-884 and Hints and Infos -> DSLR-Scoping.
<o:p></o:p>
Ann Cook and Mike McDowell captured their images using Nikon’s very early digital Point and Shoot cameras, the Cool Pix 990 and 995. These are 3 MP cameras with no image stabilization. These, and similar P&S cameras are still in use by some digiscopers. Many are now using 6-8 MP cameras, with image stabilization or vibration reduction. However, these cameras, for the most part, only provide quality images at ISO 50-200! So, most of these images are captured at shutter speeds of 1/30 - 1/125 of a second, with the rig mounted on a sturdy tripod, which I think is utterly amazing considering that they are working at the equivalent of 1000-5000 mm!!
<o:p></o:p>
Jeff Bouton works with a much more sophisticated Leica P&S, which has image stabilization and higher ISO capability. So he can work at higher shutter speeds. Ben Lizdas uses a dSLR and has 10 MP, lots of ISO capability, IS, and can work at higher shutter speeds. Mirror slap is a problem with dSLRs, so some use “live view”.
<o:p></o:p>
Most digiscopers are keen bird watchers who use spotting scopes all the time. So digiscoping is a natural for them. I have identified only a few of many very fine digiscopers, to give you a flavour of what they can capture using the technique. Some also work with dSLRs and long lenses. However, the two “communities” seem to be quite distinct. We could learn a lot from one another!. Patience if nothing else!

Awe-Struck

Birders and photographers have two very different goals. The birder wants to view his/her subject. The photographer wants to capture an image in a way that the capture is an expression of art. I will pass on a capture if I don't like the lighting, the background or the subject's pose. These are factors that birders don't consider (nor should they). One thing photographers should do more often is to be more careful so that their subject is not responding to them. I'm 100% satisifed when I get my capture w/o my subject reacting to my presence.

That said the inages in the above galleries are quite good but not up to the quality of images captured with a DSLR and camera lens. When you view them at a larger size many of them are rather soft. Considering the equipment used and the shooting conditions they are excellent captures but not on par with the work of many photographers I know.

This is not a knock on the digiscope images because lots of those captures would not have been possible with a camera and lens.

jwear · October 10, 2008

Most digiscopers are keen bird watchers who use spotting scopes all the time. So digiscoping is a natural for them. I have identified only a few of many very fine digiscopers, to give you a flavour of what they can capture using the technique. Some also work with dSLRs and long lenses. However, the two “communities” seem to be quite distinct. We could learn a lot from one another!. Patience if nothing else!

This comment you posted [last] and the last post Harry put up
I am in agreement with. I read your first post wrong that is why I ask to see the work. The link Harry posted I have seen and others like those you posted.
I try to get shots that I call captures --action to or that define the bird. The shots I see that they get are more what I call id shots. Some are very good. I do my best to leave nature as I found it every time I go out and let folks know who do not. But I have pushed the rules some times but to no harm I hope.
Your last two sentences -- we could learn from one another is very true but all I ever see is walls from the folks I meet. They seam to look at guys with cameras as killers of birds ??? and the last thing is after all these years something I just can not get a handle on --- Patience --is there a book at that one

This hobby has given me a bit but not enough yet !
Very interesting thread you started thanks Jeff

Foochar · October 10, 2008

If you wanted to try this out without buying all the parts and pieces, lensrentals.com has both a spotting scope and the adapters for both Nikon and Canon in their rental inventory. Looks like about $150 to rent the equipment for a week.

Use of Top Quality Spotting Scope as Super Telephoto Lens

Comments