Nikon spotting scopes plus DSLR attachments???

[Coxy914]

Not sure where best to put this but thought I'd start in here.

Firstly, I'm a Nikon man, so Nikon only discussion on this one I'm afraid!

Where we live, we get a superb variety of birds in our garden from sparrows, swallows, woodpeckers, finches, nuthatches, to Buzzards, Partridge and Pheasant and my monthly bird food spend has now passed my beer spend!

I can spend hours just watching them and taking the few odd photo's or just sitting with my pair of binoculars.
I bought a cheap spotting scope from Jessops last year but the glass is awful to be fair and have started hunting for a decent spotting scope and I came across a few nice Nikon ones.
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-fieldscope-ed82-angled-spotting-scope-body/p1002436

I then noticed these (and I will admit, I didn't realise you could get adaptors to use the spotting scopes as lenses)
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-fieldscope-digital-slr-attachment-fsa-l1/p1005528

and basically was wondering how this set up actually stands up as a decent lens alternative? My normal lens would be a Nikon AF VR 80-400mm ED f4.5-5.6D.

 

[footman]

I was looking into this recently but I wasn't blown away by most of the images I've seen online.
There is however at least one member of this forum who does some cracking work with digiscoping.
You've chosen a superb scope there, I use a much older Nikon ed60, your choice would be more suitable for digiscoping. To get a decent shot you would also need a very stable tripod. Most digiscopers seem to use much smaller compact cameras.

I've decided that after making a very big investment in a long Canon lens, 500mm, I'm not going to mix the two modes.
For observation I'm sticking to a scope, for photography I'm sticking to my Canon gear.
Just my two pennyworth

 

[D3S]

Hi - I tried a Nikon EDG65 and FSA-L2 DSLR adapter early last year; the sheer wonder of equivalent focal lengths meant it had to be tried! I did post some shots in the Bird sub-forum, where you can judge for yourself:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=317340
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=317341
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=317342


At the end of the day, the IQ was never going to be the same as a prime lens - indeed since then I've moved to a Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AF-SII with TC-20EIII converter and love that combo - again see some of my recent shots in the Bird forum. Although I'm lucky to have a D3S where ISO doesn't really matter until you get upwards of 3200/6400, and the fact that I could use the scope/adapter/D3S as a hand-held combo of the great light in Arizona, it still wasn't enough to hold onto it in favour of better non-scope based kit.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Coxy914]

For observation I'm sticking to a scope, for photography I'm sticking to my Canon gear.
Just my two pennyworth

That was my initial intention when looking for a decent scope but it's only when I saw the DSLR adaptors that I thought........and ended up here asking questions!

Normally, I'd have my Nikon set up with the 400mm lens and I currently use my binoculars to have a look at what's around, and to be honest, they'd probably do the job, but having looked at higher end scopes, it has got me thinking.

 

[hollis_f]

I would imagine that trying to get a decent shutter speed on a 1200mm f13 lens (which is what you'll have) would try the patience of Job. You'd probably be better off putting a 2x on your 80-400 for an 800mm f11 lens. At least that would have VR to help.

But it would still be crap.

 

[footman]

As you've posted the identical question in another section perhaps you could ask the mods if it's possible to merge the threads.
It's a fascinating subject and if all the replies were together we could all benefit.