Digiscoping: Thoughts and Suggestions

[woodsxc]

Since I can't afford a DSLR and associated lenses but still want good shots of animals and far-off places, I've resorted to shooting through a spotting scope with a digital point-and-shoot. This one came out beautifully (linked due to size), but sometimes digiscoping results in some kinda unfortunate side effects in the pictures- lens glare, blacked out corners, imprecise focus, etc...

These are pictures that I want to like, but just can't. So, what do you recommend to get better results? How can I stop the camera from focusing on the surface of one of the telescope lenses and get it to focus through all the lenses? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[nartreb]

You run into similar problems whether you're using an SLR lens or a spotting scope.

The green arc in the first photo looks like lens flare - an internal reflection within the lens. Those are almost unavoidable when your photograph contains a very bright spot, but that's not the case here. So I suspect that stray light is getting into the system from the side. The obvious suspects are at either end of the scope. Make sure you have a good hood over the "big end", and see if you can rig up some sort of light-excluding coupling for the "little end" too.

The second image has a couple of problems, but the one that strikes me most is the purple tinge to all the edges. That looks like chromatic aberration. It'll be most obvious when shooting against a bright cloudy sky like this. It will be reduced with a better (more expensive) lens.

The third shot might be out of focus, but I bet the blurring is actually due to motion of the camera/scope. At long distances (except in the most extremely bright light) you need to use a tripod *and* have the camera rigidly mounted to the scope in such a way that you can't move it while pressing the shutter. If your P&S has a remote shutter capability, use it.

Even with a rock-solid tripod setup, your subject may move during the shot if the exposure is too slow. Therefore:

If your P&S has manual controls, you want the fastest shutter times you can get (i.e., high ISO, wide aperture -- once you've got the shot, take a couple more at lower ISO for the most vivid color and reduced noise).

Edit: I usually do NOT shoot in "exposure priority" - if you dictate an exposure of ,say 1/1000 sec, and there's not enough light at the widest aperture, you end up with a badly underexposed shot. If instead you specify the widest aperture, the camera will calculate that it needs, say, 1/100 of a second, and the shot will be correctly exposed. The shot may still be unusable due to motion blur, but every once in a while you'll get lucky and miraculously keep the camera steady. (I usually shoot hand-held; with a tripod "every once in a while" becomes "almost always".)

 

[woodsxc]

The green arc in the first photo looks like lens flare - an internal reflection within the lens. Those are almost unavoidable when your photograph contains a very bright spot, but that's not the case here. So I suspect that stray light is getting into the system from the side. The obvious suspects are at either end of the scope. Make sure you have a good hood over the "big end", and see if you can rig up some sort of light-excluding coupling for the "little end" too.

Could I just use a spare layer from my pack and drape it over the camera-scope junction to eliminate that?

The second image has a couple of problems, but the one that strikes me most is the purple tinge to all the edges. That looks like chromatic aberration. It'll be most obvious when shooting against a bright cloudy sky like this. It will be reduced with a better (more expensive) lens.

I guess I'll have to just live with it then...

The third shot might be out of focus, but I bet the blurring is actually due to motion of the camera/scope. At long distances (except in the most extremely bright light) you need to use a tripod *and* have the camera rigidly mounted to the scope in such a way that you can't move it while pressing the shutter. If your P&S has a remote shutter capability, use it.

I always have the scope on a tripod, but how do I mount the camera to the scope? Or, if I can't do it myself, where can I get a pre-made coupling for a rigid mount?

Here's the camera:

and here's the scope:

The scope is a 20-60x80.

 

[nartreb]

I always have the scope on a tripod, but how do I mount the camera to the scope? Or, if I can't do it myself, where can I get a pre-made coupling for a rigid mount?

Definitely worth Googling for, maybe it exists already. I bet your camera has a threaded hole in the bottom that fits a standard tripod head; that's just a standard screw so if you build your own contraption out of wood or rigid plastic, you can easily use a wing-nut screw to attach or detach the camera. Or, cannibalize a camera tripod for the clamp-down tray that has the screw threaded through it, for even faster setup. You could attach your mount to the scope with superglue, but that will make it hard to pack up the scope. Some sort of frame that clamps over the sides would be removable, but bulky. Hm, maybe velcro would be good enough...

Could I just use a spare layer from my pack and drape it over the camera-scope junction to eliminate that?

Yep. Or drape a cloth over your whole head and shoulders and the camera, like in the good old days. But I wonder if the problem is on the other end - the sunshade on the "big end" looks awfully small. Do you ever see such an arc when viewing with your eyes? If not, the problem is on the "little end".

 

[woodsxc]

Yep. Or drape a cloth over your whole head and shoulders and the camera, like in the good old days. But I wonder if the problem is on the other end - the sunshade on the "big end" looks awfully small. Do you ever see such an arc when viewing with your eyes? If not, the problem is on the "little end".

The black piece on the end slides out to extend the sunshade. Usually when I'm shooting through the scope I extend it and flatten the eye cup.

 

[BorealChickadee]

Is that a quetzel in the linked photo? I've never been down down south so that's purely a guess.

My digiscoped photos also have a lot of flaring. But I'm usually taking through my binoculars which is even worse than a scope.

Try the forums on Birder's World for advice on a coupler from camera to scope. I know that a lot of the guys around here use spice caps, lemonade caps etc to block the light. There was a link to a universal swing away coupler that was just the ticket, except for the price.

 

[woodsxc]

Is that a quetzel in the linked photo? I've never been down down south so that's purely a guess.

My digiscoped photos also have a lot of flaring. But I'm usually taking through my binoculars which is even worse than a scope.

Try the forums on Birder's World for advice on a coupler from camera to scope. I know that a lot of the guys around here use spice caps, lemonade caps etc to block the light. There was a link to a universal swing away coupler that was just the ticket, except for the price.

That is indeed a Resplendent Quetzal. We took a family trip down to Costa Rica a few years ago (it was cheaper than going to Big Bend). The Quetzal is probably the most beautiful bird I have ever seen. We saw males twice on our trip, on the last and second-to-last days and that just made it even more special.

Thanks for the Birder's World tip, I'll check it out.