General Photography thread

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in


P

PeterOut

Well-known member
Aug 16, 2016
1,238
1066familyman said:
Very briefly, anyone able to give a bare minimum budget please, and recommendations, on a decent camera and telephoto lens for detailed long range shots of birds, using a tripod.

The set up would have to match or better a spotting scope with an 80mm objective lens and 20-60x magnification, paired with a basic phone for digiscoping.

Happy to go second hand, in fact would prefer it.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you are going to get a 60x magnification lens for a DSLR camera.
See https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Magnification-Value.aspx for an explanation...
 




Surf's Up

Surf's Up

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2011
10,202
Here
F8E9A61A-0204-46AA-BA13-FE73F43ABDE4_1_201_a.jpeg

Wasdale, in the Lakes, with my iPhone SE
 


M

MattBackHome

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
11,743
1066familyman said:
Very briefly, anyone able to give a bare minimum budget please, and recommendations, on a decent camera and telephoto lens for detailed long range shots of birds, using a tripod.

The set up would have to match or better a spotting scope with an 80mm objective lens and 20-60x magnification, paired with a basic phone for digiscoping.

Happy to go second hand, in fact would prefer it.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
In terms of glass, you'll get loads more value for money going for either the Tamron or Sigma 150-600s instead of a C/N tele prime. Won't be quite as sharp, but that's what I'd go for.
 




perseus

perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,459
Sūþseaxna
Results with the modern mirrorless interchangable lens camera are better than my Nikon DX SLR
 






W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,495
perseus said:
Results with the modern mirrorless interchangable lens camera are better than my Nikon DX SLR
Click to expand...

I guess it depends which mirrorless you use. A full frame camera will give you more surface to collect light and potentially more pixels to play with so yes it should be better. Panasonic & Olympus also do mirrorless but use a micro 4/3 sensor which is pretty small and whilst good are not as good as an aspc.


If I had the money I would probably buy the latest sony a7which i think is a mk4 and one of the sony 100-400mm lenses but that would cost nearly£4k new and even if you bought a second hand mk2 at £600 you still would have to pay £1200+ for the lens as there are very few on the second hand market. Which is 3 or 4 times the guys budget. Note as things keep moving there is probably better kit out there BUT it gets very expensive.

Most people seem to recommend a nikkon/cannon aspc with sigma 150-500 type lens for sport/wildlife/birds as they have fast focus and being aspc give that extra reach over FF cameras due to the sensor crop ratio and because this is 'older' and more common technology there is a fair bit on second hand market at good prices. Not sure if you could get it for £500 the pair though.
 


W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,495
PeterOut said:
Not sure how you are going to get a 60x magnification lens for a DSLR camera.
See https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Magnification-Value.aspx for an explanation...
Click to expand...

I read these things , understand them to a point but don't really understand them as I could not explain it to someone else.

I guess what it is saying is there is a 'physical' point where you cannot increase the magnification which is the limit of the light through the lens to the sensor. It would be good if it just said that and what the magnification factor is. I have seen articles where people have use a 30x scope on a sony A7 full frame but that i am sure has some caveats and limitations.

The OP really wants to know the pros and cons of the options ; digi scope with cell phone, digiscope with dslr (ormirrorless) , camera options based on people's actual experience.

I gave some views on the bird spotting thread but thought we should move over here as this is more about technology.

Some examples of feathered birds taken would give him a view of the potential.
 




1066familyman

1066familyman

Radio User
Jan 15, 2008
15,185
Wardy's twin said:
I guess it depends which mirrorless you use. A full frame camera will give you more surface to collect light and potentially more pixels to play with so yes it should be better. Panasonic & Olympus also do mirrorless but use a micro 4/3 sensor which is pretty small and whilst good are not as good as an aspc.


If I had the money I would probably buy the latest sony a7which i think is a mk4 and one of the sony 100-400mm lenses but that would cost nearly£4k new and even if you bought a second hand mk2 at £600 you still would have to pay £1200+ for the lens as there are very few on the second hand market. Which is 3 or 4 times the guys budget. Note as things keep moving there is probably better kit out there BUT it gets very expensive.

Most people seem to recommend a nikkon/cannon aspc with sigma 150-500 type lens for sport/wildlife/birds as they have fast focus and being aspc give that extra reach over FF cameras due to the sensor crop ratio and because this is 'older' and more common technology there is a fair bit on second hand market at good prices. Not sure if you could get it for £500 the pair though.
Click to expand...

I've seen a Canon EOS 1200D, with 18-55mm lens and 75-300mm lens.

£230 secondhand.

Worth it or not?

I see that model is about 8 years old.
 


W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,495
1066familyman said:
I've seen a Canon EOS 1200D, with 18-55mm lens and 75-300mm lens.

£230 secondhand.

Worth it or not?

I see that model is about 8 years old.
Click to expand...

Difficult to say as I have not used that kit or indeed much canon kit. I have used the pentax equivalent and was pleased with it. Might be worth having a look at flickr to see if someone has posted bird images using that combo (the 70-300 lense). Does that zoom range give you enough range.

One big difference between CANON and Pentax is that image stabilisation is in-built in the Pentax camera body and will give you better images for canon it was in the lens and if they are not marked IS then might not give you quite a good results.
 


perseus

perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,459
Sūþseaxna
Wardy's twin said:
I guess it depends which mirrorless you use. A full frame camera will give you more surface to collect light and potentially more pixels to play with so yes it should be better. Panasonic & Olympus also do mirrorless but use a micro 4/3 sensor which is pretty small and whilst good are not as good as an aspc.


If I had the money I would probably buy the latest sony a7which i think is a mk4 and one of the sony 100-400mm lenses but that would cost nearly£4k new and even if you bought a second hand mk2 at £600 you still would have to pay £1200+ for the lens as there are very few on the second hand market. Which is 3 or 4 times the guys budget. Note as things keep moving there is probably better kit out there BUT it gets very expensive.

Most people seem to recommend a nikkon/cannon aspc with sigma 150-500 type lens for sport/wildlife/birds as they have fast focus and being aspc give that extra reach over FF cameras due to the sensor crop ratio and because this is 'older' and more common technology there is a fair bit on second hand market at good prices. Not sure if you could get it for £500 the pair though.
Click to expand...

That's what I use - the top mirrorless get better results even in poor light. Even with my vision deficiency I would go the mirrorless route if I stated out now.
 




perseus

perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,459
Sūþseaxna
1066familyman said:
I've seen a Canon EOS 1200D, with 18-55mm lens and 75-300mm lens.

£230 secondhand.

Worth it or not?

I see that model is about 8 years old.
Click to expand...

I use the Nikon equivalent. Good general purpose buy, but not good enough for birds.

Attached picture is x65 Canon Sx70 bridge camera cropped image, but not really good enough!

Magpies_2991 (3e).jpg
 


Wozza

Wozza

Shite Supporter
Jul 6, 2003
23,718
Online
1066familyman said:
I've seen a Canon EOS 1200D, with 18-55mm lens and 75-300mm lens.

£230 secondhand.

Worth it or not?

I see that model is about 8 years old.
Click to expand...

It's good value - so a reasonable place to start - as long as you know it's very low end. Camera is literally bottom of the Canon range.
 






1066familyman

1066familyman

Radio User
Jan 15, 2008
15,185
Wozza said:
It's good value - so a reasonable place to start - as long as you know it's very low end. Camera is literally bottom of the Canon range.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that about being bottom of their range when I did a bit of research. Plus it's old. On the other hand, it would be my first dslr camera, so it'll probably still impress me. It's also good that no one here so far has said to avoid it.

The lenses would be quite useful for some bird and wildlife photography reasonably close I suppose, and then for the really long reach I could attach just the body to my spotting scope which will be an improvement over my phone digiscoping.

If I'm happy with the quality of it then future investment would just go into upgrading the spotting scope to get even further reach, seeing as I'm clearly not going to get anywhere near the same reach from a camera telephoto lens without spending an absolute fortune.

I think that's right from what I've understood so far?
 


W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,495
1066familyman said:
Yeah, I saw that about being bottom of their range when I did a bit of research. Plus it's old. On the other hand, it would be my first dslr camera, so it'll probably still impress me. It's also good that no one here so far has said to avoid it.

The lenses would be quite useful for some bird and wildlife photography reasonably close I suppose, and then for the really long reach I could attach just the body to my spotting scope which will be an improvement over my phone digiscoping.

If I'm happy with the quality of it then future investment would just go into upgrading the spotting scope to get even further reach, seeing as I'm clearly not going to get anywhere near the same reach from a camera telephoto lens without spending an absolute fortune.

I think that's right from what I've understood so far?
Click to expand...

I have just remembered I do have a canon DSLR but its converted to infrared and is very old. I bought it recently for some solar stuff. its a 450 so way before the 1200 but I might be able to give it a test on a scope...
 












You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top