Digiscoping set up - Impossible focus/shake problems?

[Lin Evans]

Hi Jay,

Another way to go for your situation (won't work for the OP) would be to use the Harbortronics Digisnap. I've used these with my CP990 and CP4500 for years and they also work with the 5000. These electronic releases do not impart "any" movement at all, even the small amount generated by depressing the shutter with the remote release. They allow half-press and full press as well as other neat features.

http://www.harbortronics.com

Best regards,

Lin

 

[Jay Turberville]

The links I have been
finding indicate it should be at least 18-20 inches long, and this
one is only 12. Also, this link does not indicate it will work with
my camera:

The length doesn't matter too much. What's important is technique,
and that's quickly figured out when you start using one.

I disagree a bit. There are ergonomics issues that make some lengths better than others. It matters for convenient stowage of the release end when carrying the rig and for appropriate location of the shutter release end when shooting. Each rig will have lengths that work better and worse. But at the low price of a cable release, I'd suggest just buying one and seeing how the length works out. Go shorter or longer based on how the one you buy works.

I don't know which company started the trend, but Canon abandoned the
shutter release cable in 1983 with the introduction of the T50. If
you look at pictures of the old Canon A-1, AE-1, F-1, etc you'll see
a threaded hole in the middle of the shutter button. The T50 doesn't
have one.

Which would have been fine if everyone else would have come up with a standard plug and switch to follow suit. I find it madenning what the camera companies have done with electronic and electric releases. Many require a USB connection with electronics in the cable when a simple two position electrical switch (in parallel with the shutter/switch on the camera and a mini-plug is all that is necessary. It really does irritate the heck out of me. I usually don't rail in a "consumerist" way against manufacturers, but this is a classic case of rotten customer support. Every camera with a release should accept such a simple remote switch.

OK - I'm off my stinkin' soapbox now.

I think it would be foolish for Kowa to use some non-standard
thread...especially if they're not even telling you what thread it is.

Right. Also, the tread is tapered. Thread fit should not be a problem/issue.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

Another way to go for your situation (won't work for the OP) would be
to use the Harbortronics Digisnap. I've used these with my CP990 and
CP4500 for years and they also work with the 5000.

I use the Digisnap adapter for the Coolpix 5000. It uses the shutter release contacts to break out a simple miniplug that accepts a standard Canon DC two-position switch/release. No solid state eletronics are needed. Just a stinkin' switch - which is what every camera with a release should have.

But I no longer use the Coolpix 5000 for digiscoping. I prefer the C7070. The Coolpix 8400 is somewhat better in picture quality, but the raw is far slower and I just don't like the feature set as well. So I use the C7070 and the manual cable release.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Lin Evans]

Hi Jay,

I think they have a Digisnap which also works with the C7070 now. I don't know how many features you get such as zoom, etc...

Best regards,

Lin

Another way to go for your situation (won't work for the OP) would be
to use the Harbortronics Digisnap. I've used these with my CP990 and
CP4500 for years and they also work with the 5000.

I use the Digisnap adapter for the Coolpix 5000. It uses the shutter
release contacts to break out a simple miniplug that accepts a
standard Canon DC two-position switch/release. No solid state
eletronics are needed. Just a stinkin' switch - which is what every
camera with a release should have.

But I no longer use the Coolpix 5000 for digiscoping. I prefer the
C7070. The Coolpix 8400 is somewhat better in picture quality, but
the raw is far slower and I just don't like the feature set as well.
So I use the C7070 and the manual cable release.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Graystar]

I don't understand why people are telling the OP to get a cable
release when he's already stated he's using a Kowa DA4
adapter...which contains a cable release.

Did you read his original post? He indicated that he didn't have a
manual cable release for the camera. I and others clearly relied on
the OP to understand what options his particular rig offered.

Actually he only said that Canon doesn't make a camera with a manual shutter release.

"They indicated Canon does not make a point and shoot with a manual shutter release cable."

If that release bracket will work with his camera, then of course he
should use that.

Exactly. That's why I was confused. I was under the impression that the adapter came with a cable release because it is always shown with a cable in pictures. Also, this web page has a "product profile" that actually shows, what's supposed to be, the contents of the DA4 kit and there's a cable release.

http://www.birddigiscoping.com/2007/02/kowas-tsn-da4-universal-adapter.html

This situation just seems so absurd. First, how the DA4 can be sold without a cable release is simply beyond me. Second, I don't understand how in the world a sales person would tell the OP that he didn't need a remote release...

“I was specifically told by the retailer http://www.opticsplanet.com that I should ignore manual shutter releases as they were not needed.”

In any case, the OP said he's got the cable holder...

“I have the TSN-DA10 and the TSN-DA4, which appears to also have the DA4-RS SHUTTER CABLE HOLDER AND AIMING SIGHT ASSEMBLY”

...so hopefully he'll get a cable and move the next step.

 

[Jay Turberville]

I don't understand why people are telling the OP to get a cable
release when he's already stated he's using a Kowa DA4
adapter...which contains a cable release.

Did you read his original post? He indicated that he didn't have a
manual cable release for the camera. I and others clearly relied on
the OP to understand what options his particular rig offered.

Actually he only said that Canon doesn't make a camera with a manual
shutter release.

I understand that. But I try to put comments into context. Why worry about Canon not making cameras that take a manual release if your rig supplies that function? It would be irrelevant. His comments sends the message that his rig doesn't support a cable release - even if he did not explicitly say that. So it is natural that he got comments suggesting how to add the feature.

In any case, the OP said he's got the cable holder...

“I have the TSN-DA10 and the TSN-DA4, which appears to also have the
DA4-RS SHUTTER CABLE HOLDER AND AIMING SIGHT ASSEMBLY”

...so hopefully he'll get a cable and move the next step.

Yep. That's good information and should save him some trouble.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Chato]

Each approach has its place and which to use depends a lot on your
situation and your birding skills. When looking for quality images,
nothing beats getting close to your subject with a high quality DSLR
and top notch optics. But the getting close part is often hard and
the top notch optics are often expensive.

This is true. Getting close is more an art than a science...
But the below images, part of a larger series, shot at dawn, would
simply be impossible for any digicam rig...

Those are images of large birds that aren't particularly elusive and
are pretty easy to approach. So typically there would be little need
for the long range of a digiscope to get those pictures. But even
so, my bet is that you could easily manage that digiscoping at lower
magnification. Of course it is hard to say for sure since there is
no camera exposure info in the EXIF. Also, I would probably opt for
a DSLR setup of some form for that kind of shot - the exception would
be if the distance over the water was too great.

These shots were taken from about 125 feet. Perhaps a little more.

Given the same light, effective shutter speed is essentially a
function of aperture size and magnification. So big objectives and
low magnification are the way to go if you want fast shutter speeds.

All in all, whatever advantages there are to a digicam rig, are
simply to small to justify the many restrictions. If I had to I could
match those small advantages with my Nikon 2x tele converter, and the
use of two tripods. One attached to the camera, the other attached to
the 'Scope.

I can't agree. I carry both a digiscope and a DSLR with long lens
when I'm in the field. Carrying two tripods and having to set them
up for a shot would be far more restrictive. I can carry my
digiscope setup on my shoulder with a strap and can go from hiking on
a trail to set up and on a bird in about 15 seconds.

While I don't find the weight of the tripods a problem, it would certainly take me a hell of a lot more than 15 seconds to set up.

Of course, with the rig I use there is No Set Up Time. The camera, mounted on my monopode is instantly available, and light enough so that I can shoot handheld. And while you are quite right 1/5 of a second is also out of the question - but 1/60 is not.

I'm guessing
that would be very difficult to duplicate if I had to set up two
tripods. Further, my experience is that no amount of tripod
sturdiness eliminates shake due to mirror vibrations. I strongly
suspect (based on my tests and reports from others) that there's a
range of shutter speeds where the two tripod rig is going to have
problems.

I believe you to be mistaken on that. My set-up is very solid, and I don't notice any mirror vibration.

This image was taken at (as I recall) 1/5 of a second at a focal
length equivalence of around 2000mm at dawn. I think this shot is
barely feasible with an SLR. You'd need mirror lockup which would
cut down on your shot rate and choosing the moment of exposure.
Every rig has its strong and weak points.

Quite right, I DID uuse mirror lock-up on these two shots. Both taken from about half a mile away, and at 1/15

Not great pictures, not even good pictures, but at half a mile, you can see that there was no camera skake. Atmosphere actually affected these shots, taken right after I bought the Swarovski back in 2002. The first is a close crop, and the second a Very close crop.



It was a very hot humid day, and the two chicks were actually passed out from the heat. The parents tool turns barfing fresh water on them.



Dave

 

[Chato]

That ALL of the following shots would not have been taken if I needed ANY set-up time...

(Although, yes, they were taken at 1/640 and up)

















Dave

 

[Jay Turberville]

the exception would
be if the distance over the water was too great.

These shots were taken from about 125 feet. Perhaps a little more.

At around that distance, I shoot much smaller birds with my digiscoping rig.

All in all, whatever advantages there are to a digicam rig, are
simply to small to justify the many restrictions. If I had to I could
match those small advantages with my Nikon 2x tele converter, and the
use of two tripods. One attached to the camera, the other attached to
the 'Scope.

I can't agree. I carry both a digiscope and a DSLR with long lens
when I'm in the field. Carrying two tripods and having to set them
up for a shot would be far more restrictive. I can carry my
digiscope setup on my shoulder with a strap and can go from hiking on
a trail to set up and on a bird in about 15 seconds.

While I don't find the weight of the tripods a problem, it would
certainly take me a hell of a lot more than 15 seconds to set up.
Of course, with the rig I use there is No Set Up Time. The camera,
mounted on my monopode is instantly available, and light enough so
that I can shoot handheld. And while you are quite right 1/5 of a
second is also out of the question - but 1/60 is not.

"Setup" may not be a good description. The 15 seconds I'm referring to is the time to set the tripod down, get sighted on the bird, get focus, and then shoot the first picture. Even with a handheld camera, this takes a few seconds. And if you are manually focusing a scope that is on a monopod - I don't think you get "instant" shots. At a 1000mm equivalence, simply getting on the bird won't be instant and you still need to get accurate focus with no AF assist if you are using a scope with adapter. Accurate focus usually means some rocking back and forth on the focus in my experience.

Frankly, I wouldn't mind a setup in the 1000mm or so range. Right now I'm covered from 140-600mm equivalent and about 1600mm to 2500mm. So something around 1000-1200mm equivalent would be nice to have.

I strongly
suspect (based on my tests and reports from others) that there's a
range of shutter speeds where the two tripod rig is going to have
problems.

I believe you to be mistaken on that. My set-up is very solid, and I
don't notice any mirror vibration.

Mirror vibration problems usually shows up in the range that you indicate is already a problem for your monopod - 1/60th and below.

Not great pictures, not even good pictures, but at half a mile, you
can see that there was no camera skake. Atmosphere actually affected
these shots, taken right after I bought the Swarovski back in 2002.
The first is a close crop, and the second a Very close crop.

Atmosphere can be an issue at high magnifications with distances as short as 75 feet. It is one reason why getting close is almost always better than using a longer lens. But digiscoping remains a perfectly good approach to bird photography. The trick is to understand its strengths and weaknesses and to not rely on digiscoping reach above all else. Getting close to the bird is still important and why I now digiscope with a DSLR and long lens at the ready as well.





--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Chato]

the exception would
be if the distance over the water was too great.

These shots were taken from about 125 feet. Perhaps a little more.

At around that distance, I shoot much smaller birds with my
digiscoping rig.

And I'm not surprised. My normal rig is either 800 or 1100mm, not 2000.

On the other hand in my last post to you I include a number of "smaller birds" Tell me about shooting up into a tree to catch a shot with your tripod? I posted some of them as well.

(More nice shots, which I'm brutally deleting in my answer)

While I don't find the weight of the tripods a problem, it would
certainly take me a hell of a lot more than 15 seconds to set up.
Of course, with the rig I use there is No Set Up Time.

"Setup" may not be a good description. The 15 seconds I'm referring
to is the time to set the tripod down, get sighted on the bird, get
focus, and then shoot the first picture. Even with a handheld
camera, this takes a few seconds. And if you are manually focusing a
scope that is on a monopod - I don't think you get "instant" shots.
At a 1000mm equivalence, simply getting on the bird won't be instant
and you still need to get accurate focus with no AF assist if you are
using a scope with adapter. Accurate focus usually means some
rocking back and forth on the focus in my experience.

In find this a semantic statement. I walk, I see a bird, I either lean on the monopode focus and shoot, or lift the camera and monopode and focus and shoot. There is no "set-up" time involved. It takes me as long to get off a shot as it would take if I was shooting a 55mm prime. Since all I do is manual focus, I strongly doubt if it takes me longer than with auto-focus. Indeed often LESS time since I shoot into trees and bush, and don't lose shots due to focus hunt.
Thus my use of the expression "no set up time."

Frankly, I wouldn't mind a setup in the 1000mm or so range. Right
now I'm covered from 140-600mm equivalent and about 1600mm to 2500mm.
So something around 1000-1200mm equivalent would be nice to have.

I think you would find my basic rig, of a Scope mounted directly to a dSLR, along with a carbon monopode a delight.

I strongly
suspect (based on my tests and reports from others) that there's a
range of shutter speeds where the two tripod rig is going to have
problems.

I believe you to be mistaken on that. My set-up is very solid, and I
don't notice any mirror vibration.

Mirror vibration problems usually shows up in the range that you
indicate is already a problem for your monopod - 1/60th and below.

You're confusing my two set's of equipment.

I rarely use the two tripod rig. It is 2200mm, and as you can see there was no mirror vibration. If there was mirror vibration you would not be able to make out the twigs of the nest at half a mile.

As for mirror vibration with my normal rig - You have to be kidding me. Camera shake is my problem, not mirror vibration.

Not great pictures, not even good pictures, but at half a mile, you
can see that there was no camera skake. Atmosphere actually affected
these shots, taken right after I bought the Swarovski back in 2002.
The first is a close crop, and the second a Very close crop.

Atmosphere can be an issue at high magnifications with distances as
short as 75 feet. It is one reason why getting close is almost
always better than using a longer lens. But digiscoping remains a
perfectly good approach to bird photography. The trick is to
understand its strengths and weaknesses and to not rely on
digiscoping reach above all else. Getting close to the bird is still
important and why I now digiscope with a DSLR and long lens at the
ready as well.

Err, isn't that my point?

If all you want to tell me is that you are a better photographer than I, I'll concede the point. But arguing that shooting with a tripod and a digicam loses you no shots, than you're just kidding yourself, not me. I know damn well how many shots I get because I DON'T use a tripod. Let me know when you start getting shots of birds flying past your head with your tripod rig.

Dave

 

[Jay Turberville]

At around that distance, I shoot much smaller birds with my
digiscoping rig.

And I'm not surprised. My normal rig is either 800 or 1100mm, not 2000.
On the other hand in my last post to you I include a number of
"smaller birds" Tell me about shooting up into a tree to catch a shot
with your tripod? I posted some of them as well.

The only small birds that give be trouble with the digiscoping rig are certain small birds that don't stay put for more than a second or so. These are typically gnatcatchers or the very small and active Verdin. Other than that, no problem with small birds digiscoping.

As for shooting up into a tree, didn't I post a couple of those? One of the things I like about a digiscoping rig is that with the high magnification, the angle of view for a bird that is fairly high up can be fairly shallow.

Perhaps you are referring to awkward angles? No problem. I use a camera with a tilt/swivel LCD - something I strongly recommend for digiscoping.

In find this a semantic statement. I walk, I see a bird, I either
lean on the monopode focus and shoot, or lift the camera and monopode
and focus and shoot. There is no "set-up" time involved. It takes me
as long to get off a shot as it would take if I was shooting a 55mm
prime. Since all I do is manual focus, I strongly doubt if it takes
me longer than with auto-focus. Indeed often LESS time since I shoot
into trees and bush, and don't lose shots due to focus hunt.
Thus my use of the expression "no set up time."

I'm just trying to provide context since my use of "set up" was obviously different than yours.

I think you would find my basic rig, of a Scope mounted directly to a
dSLR, along with a carbon monopode a delight.

I might. I'd really like to see it with a Panasonic DMC-L1.

I rarely use the two tripod rig. It is 2200mm, and as you can see
there was no mirror vibration. If there was mirror vibration you
would not be able to make out the twigs of the nest at half a mile.
As for mirror vibration with my normal rig - You have to be kidding
me. Camera shake is my problem, not mirror vibration.

Sure. With mirror lockup or mirror pre-fire, you can eliminate the mirror vibrations. But as I mentioned, that gets in the way of the flow of taking pictures.

Atmosphere can be an issue at high magnifications with distances as
short as 75 feet. It is one reason why getting close is almost
always better than using a longer lens. But digiscoping remains a
perfectly good approach to bird photography. The trick is to
understand its strengths and weaknesses and to not rely on
digiscoping reach above all else. Getting close to the bird is still
important and why I now digiscope with a DSLR and long lens at the
ready as well.

Err, isn't that my point?

I don't think so. This whole sub-thread was started based on your suggestion that the digiscoper "switch to a DSLR." I'm saying "Add a DSLR. Use both."

If all you want to tell me is that you are a better photographer than
I, I'll concede the point. But arguing that shooting with a tripod
and a digicam loses you no shots, than you're just kidding yourself,
not me.

Um ... I've never even suggested that I'm a better or worse bird photographer. I'm not sure where that comes from. Also, I've been consistently pointing out that each rig has its advantages and disadvantages. Arguing that a digiscope setup loses no shots is as silly as arguing that a DSLR setup loses you no shots. It isn't an argument I've ever made. Why you suddenly suggest that this is my position is beyond me.

I know damn well how many shots I get because I DON'T use a
tripod. Let me know when you start getting shots of birds flying past
your head with your tripod rig.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I might be suggesting to always use a tripod. In my first response to you I said, "Each approach has its place and which to use depends a lot on your situation and your birding skills." I've advocated using both kinds of rigs - shorter reach with DSLR and longer reach with digiscope - in every post. So I'm confused that you are attributing such a narrow view to me.

So let me sum up. To the original poster:

No, don't switch to a DSLR. But yes, consider including a DSLR to your arsenal. Use the DSLR with a long lens and/or use it with the scope and camera adapter.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Code3Collector]

Some of the posts on here are regarding birds at 100 feet. We are trying to get shots of ducks that won't seem to sit still for a second, at > 100 yards, and some probably at about 300 yards. Due to restricted areas, there is no other way of "getting close".

I will also admit is a little awkward moving this whole "set-up" through brush or even unlevel ground, so many times we have to drive to as close as we can get and setup from there, due to the surroundings. Also, good luck trying to get a shot with ANY wind at all.

For SPOTTING purposes only, this is the best scope we have used anywhere near this price range. It was rated the 2008 scope of the year by some international wildlife magazine (I forget the name).

We have made some further adjustments to the camera settings, and will try from there. Thanks again for everyone's input.

 

[Chato]

Some of the posts on here are regarding birds at 100 feet. We are
trying to get shots of ducks that won't seem to sit still for a
second, at > 100 yards, and some probably at about 300 yards. Due to
restricted areas, there is no other way of "getting close".

I will also admit is a little awkward moving this whole "set-up"
through brush or even unlevel ground, so many times we have to drive
to as close as we can get and setup from there, due to the
surroundings. Also, good luck trying to get a shot with ANY wind at
all.

For SPOTTING purposes only, this is the best scope we have used
anywhere near this price range. It was rated the 2008 scope of the
year by some international wildlife magazine (I forget the name).

We have made some further adjustments to the camera settings, and
will try from there. Thanks again for everyone's input.

Although I shoot with a Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss and others are easily comparable.

The first two shots are very close crops from about a hundred yards, three and four are full frame, and the last a very close crop.











Dave

 

[Tmblweed]

Code3Collector wrote:

Summary - I need the best point & shoot out there with

We tried again today. We are using the Kowa 883, angled, with the fluorite crystal zoom. It is on 20x. We are using the da4&d10 kowa adapter combo. The camera is a Canon SD890IS.

We have tried fully auto and manual modes. Our best shots to date have been when we use the timer at 1 second. However, birds and ducks all move within 1 sec, so 95%+ pics are no good.

We were told by the retailer who sold us this whole combo, that it was the best setup on the market. They indicated Canon does not make a point and shoot with a manual shutter release cable.

After reviewing everything, we think the problem is just that. If we don't use the timer, the pictures are beyond photoshop salvagable. If we do use a timer and the bird or ducks are moving, theres about a 5% chance we might salvage. Is there any other P&S camera that is considered one of the best, that has a cable release capability? We have both tried numerous times and think it is a physical impossibility of using this particular setup and not getting scope shake when pressing the shutter button. It requires way too much downward pressure, even when already 50% pushed. Now add in that the scope is angled and the camera is on the kowa adapter, it requires even more pressure.

We have a sturdy tripod and head and took pictures on a windless day, so we have ruled out those as well.

Kowa makes a point and shoot adapter with a built in cable that you position over your shutter so you just push the other end and to take the picture. Its high dollar but maybe your only solution for a point and shoot. We are thinking of getting one for our Kowa 883 / Sony RX100 combo. I'll try to post a link. http://www.eagleoptics.com/digital-camera-adapters/kowa/kowa-da4-universal-digital-camera-adapter