Advice please for a newbie

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ASAAR, May 18, 2007.

  1. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 19 May 2007 05:06:00 GMT, WILLIAM HERSHMAN, not willing to
    take shots of birds of paradise, wrote:

    >>>What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?

    >>
    >> What in the dickens is Google?
    >>

    >
    > Who in the dickens was Dickens?


    Little Jimmy. The plot thickens.
     
    ASAAR, May 18, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ASAAR

    Golden Oldie Guest

    What is the best camera currently available to buy today that would be most
    suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second hand one only new. I believe
    that my current camera is unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently
    too powerful for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions that
    anyone has.
     
    Golden Oldie, May 18, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    Today, Golden Oldie made this profound pronouncement

    > What is the best camera currently available to buy today that
    > would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second
    > hand one only new. I believe that my current camera is
    > unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too powerful
    > for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions
    > that anyone has.
    >

    What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?

    --
    HP, aka Jerry
     
    HEMI-Powered, May 18, 2007
    #3
  4. ASAAR

    John Bean Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:28:47 GMT, "HEMI-Powered"
    <> wrote:

    >Today, Golden Oldie made this profound pronouncement
    >
    >> What is the best camera currently available to buy today that
    >> would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second
    >> hand one only new. I believe that my current camera is
    >> unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too powerful
    >> for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions
    >> that anyone has.
    >>

    >What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?


    What in the dickens is Google?

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, May 18, 2007
    #4
  5. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:28:47 GMT, HEMI-Powered wrote:

    >> What is the best camera currently available to buy today that
    >> would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second
    >> hand one only new. I believe that my current camera is
    >> unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too powerful
    >> for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions
    >> that anyone has.

    >
    > What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?


    It's the subject that you'll be authoritatively lecturing us about
    in future messages as soon as one or more of rpd's several
    digiscopers clue you in. There were a couple of recent, moderately
    long threads on it while you slept. Hint: Are you a birder?
     
    ASAAR, May 18, 2007
    #5
  6. ASAAR

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    Today, ASAAR made this profound pronouncement

    > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:28:47 GMT, HEMI-Powered wrote:
    >
    >>> What is the best camera currently available to buy today
    >>> that would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a
    >>> second hand one only new. I believe that my current camera
    >>> is unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too
    >>> powerful for this purpose). I would appreciate any
    >>> thought\opinions that anyone has.

    >>
    >> What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?

    >
    > It's the subject that you'll be authoritatively lecturing us
    > about
    > in future messages as soon as one or more of rpd's several
    > digiscopers clue you in. There were a couple of recent,
    > moderately long threads on it while you slept. Hint: Are you
    > a birder?
    >

    a) I see no need to Google for your brand of photography, b) no, I
    am not a birder, whatever that is, but most importantly, c) if you
    are too lazy to provide more than a generic but rediculous
    description of what you want to do, fail to describe it yet want to
    get "thought\opinions" on that, you may find yourself being
    rediculed as a newbie who has no clue as to what is out there, what
    his true needs vs wants are, or any other relevant criteria such as
    size, complexity, technology and price point. But, if you want to
    make sport of my apparent ignorance, than you should not be at all
    surprise that you get no help from me, and will likely get some
    verbal abuse if you're also ignorant of people skills and attempt
    to start a flame war. EOT.

    --
    HP, aka Jerry
     
    HEMI-Powered, May 18, 2007
    #6
  7. "HEMI-Powered" <> wrote:

    > you get no help from me, and will likely get some
    > verbal abuse if you're also ignorant of people skills and attempt
    > to start a flame war. EOT.
    > --
    > HP, aka Jerry


    To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for "Ever
    Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who wages scorched-
    earth flame wars whenever he feels his great intelligence and experience
    has been doubted His chief expertise is in verbal abuse.
     
    Charles Gillen, May 18, 2007
    #7
  8. ASAAR

    Golden Oldie Guest

    Never mind. I will find somewhere more willing to help with my question. I
    thought the purpose of groups like this was to help people!
     
    Golden Oldie, May 18, 2007
    #8
  9. ASAAR

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    Today, Charles Gillen made this profound pronouncement

    > "HEMI-Powered" <> wrote:
    >
    >> you get no help from me, and will likely get some
    >> verbal abuse if you're also ignorant of people skills and
    >> attempt to start a flame war. EOT.
    >> --
    >> HP, aka Jerry

    >
    > To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for
    > "Ever Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who
    > wages scorched- earth flame wars whenever he feels his great
    > intelligence and experience has been doubted His chief
    > expertise is in verbal abuse.
    >

    try "End Of Transmission", imbecile


    --
    HP, aka Jerry
     
    HEMI-Powered, May 18, 2007
    #9
  10. ASAAR

    BaumBadier Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 19:24:02 GMT, Golden Oldie <> wrote:

    >Never mind. I will find somewhere more willing to help with my question. I
    >thought the purpose of groups like this was to help people!


    You have to understand that most long-term residents of newsgroups that are the
    first to reply and continually reply have absolutely no life outside of text on
    their screens -- the living-dead. They just post for the attention without ever
    providing any helpful info to anyone. Most of them probably don't even own
    cameras or know what photography really is. They just spew what they heard
    someone else write on the net one time. Low-life armchair photographers. This
    newsgroup is infested with them.

    For digiscoping, you'll have to find a camera with the smallest front lens
    element with the features you require. The front lens element of your camera
    should be equal to or less in diameter than the exit-lens of your particular
    scope's most often used eyepiece. I use an old Fuji Finepix for this purpose
    because all my newer cameras have much larger lenses on them. There are some
    adapters available that reconfigure the exit-pupil size for most cameras with
    larger lenses ( http://www.scopetronix.com/dtsystems.htm ) but they are quite
    costly. It might end up being a search for you by measuring the front element
    lens diameter on all the photos of the different models at review sites. Taking
    the body measurement as your base measure and figuring it from there. Then
    weighing features against lens diameter to find "the best" for your needs.

    Hopefully, some of the people who are not the 'online living-dead' will be able
    to provide more ready answers for you than this. With luck, they may actually
    take a break from photography one day and return to their keyboards for a
    moment, sifting through the tomes of arm-chair-photographer trolls in this
    newsgroup to find something worth replying to, and happen upon your post and
    answer it. In-spite of the trolls that try to grab attention for themselves.
     
    BaumBadier, May 18, 2007
    #10
  11. ASAAR

    John Bean Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 20:22:56 GMT, "HEMI-Powered"
    <> wrote:

    >Today, Charles Gillen made this profound pronouncement
    >
    >> "HEMI-Powered" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> you get no help from me, and will likely get some
    >>> verbal abuse if you're also ignorant of people skills and
    >>> attempt to start a flame war. EOT.
    >>> --
    >>> HP, aka Jerry

    >>
    >> To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for
    >> "Ever Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who
    >> wages scorched- earth flame wars whenever he feels his great
    >> intelligence and experience has been doubted His chief
    >> expertise is in verbal abuse.
    >>

    >try "End Of Transmission", imbecile


    What a shame it wasn't.

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, May 18, 2007
    #11
  12. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 20:22:56 GMT, HEMI-Powered wrote:

    >> To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for
    >> "Ever Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who
    >> wages scorched- earth flame wars whenever he feels his great
    >> intelligence and experience has been doubted His chief
    >> expertise is in verbal abuse.
    >>

    > try "End Of Transmission", imbecile


    Or more often and/or more accurately, <End Of Text>, Hemi head. :)
     
    ASAAR, May 18, 2007
    #12
  13. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 19:24:02 GMT, Golden Oldie wrote:

    > Never mind. I will find somewhere more willing to help with my question.
    > I thought the purpose of groups like this was to help people!


    It is and it will. I hope you'll stick around at least a little
    bit longer. But there are only a few people that have the
    experience to accurately answer your question. It may take several
    days before they visit this newsgroup and have a chance to see your
    question. The title of this thread also minimizes the chance that
    they'll see your question, since "digiscoping" wasn't mentioned
    anywhere in the Subject/Title of the thread. For what it's worth,
    one of the experienced digiscopers is Mike Myers. Unfortunately, he
    was last seen in these parts about 3 weeks ago. He has posted many
    links to photos taken with Nikon's 82mm Fieldscope, and whose
    messages may be identified thusly (i.j.) :

    > From: M-M <>


    You can get some more information by retrieving old messages in
    this newsgroup. Below are a few quotes from some of the older
    messages I've archived. Again, I have no digiscoping experience, so
    wait for the 'experts' to answer any specific questions. You may
    want to ask your question again, starting a new thread using a more
    'attractive' title.

    ===============================================

    > From: (Olin K. McDaniel)
    > Subject: Re: Is 12x optical zoom ona 10 mp digital camera good enough
    > for shooting surfers from the beach? Thanks!
    > Message-ID: <>
    > Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 18:51:30 GMT
    > . . .
    > Not saying that the several different viewpoints discussed here are
    > wrong, just that they are based on different criteria. My older Nikon
    > CoolPix 995 claims to have a 4X optical zoom. And the actual range of
    > focal lengths is from 8 to 32 mm, which they say is equivalent in 35mm
    > camera terms to 38 to 152 mm. So as others have pointed out, if the
    > 50mm point is considered the reference or starting point, this lens
    > really has an EFFECTIVE telephoto multiplier of just over 3X. More
    > important, to me at least, when I attach it to my Swarovski spotting
    > scope having an additional 20X to 60X, and set the camera at max.,
    > zoom which itself is equiv. to 152 mm, then the combo is effectively a
    > 3040 mm to 9120 mm telephoto lens - again based on 35mm film camera
    > lenses.
    >
    > From a practical standpoint, I've learned that anything over about 30X
    > on the spotting scope is not very useful, due to reduced sharpness.
    > But from 20 to 30X, this digiscoping technique works extremely well
    > for me in my wildlife photography efforts. And is much lighter and
    > less expensive than a standalone 3000 mm telephoto lens.
    >
    > Olin McDaniel


    ===============================================

    > From: "professorpaul" <>
    > Subject: Re: Question about digiscoping.
    > Date: 11 Feb 2007 09:04:30 -0800
    > Message-ID: <>
    > . . .
    >> I am considering getting a Nikon Coolpix L5 camera to use for digiscoping.
    >> Does anyone have any opinions about this camera for this activity?

    >
    > Check out this link... The adapter seems to be the issue.
    >
    > I have a Olympus C-5000 which has a threaded lens, so might look into
    > the idea
    >
    > http://www.shortcourses.com/how/digiscoping/digiscoping.htm


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: Saturn at 9000mm
    > Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 20:15:34 -0400
    > Message-ID: <>
    > . . .
    > I just received my Nikon 82mm Fieldscope and attaching my Coolpix 990
    > gives an effective focal length of 9000mm. Here is a 50% crop of Saturn
    > last night.
    >
    > Through the eyepiece I was able to see the Cassini division as a solid
    > black line, like it was drawn with a fine felt tip marker. The photo
    > though is not as clear
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSCN3405w.jpg


    and from another of his messages in this thread :

    >> Personally, I find these home-made images just as interesting as the
    >> high-res ones...on a different level. There's something fun about feeling
    >> as they these celestial objects are "within reach" of even basic photography
    >> techniques...even if the clarity isn't the greatest.

    >
    >
    > Yes, that was me with the little picture. And you're right how
    > satisfying it is to be able to stretch what we have into the next level.
    >
    > You should see what I had to do to get the camera attached to the
    > Fieldscope: oak, silicone tubing, velcro. And the homemade shutter
    > release works better than Nikon's electronic wired one:
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/camera/DSC_0897.jpg


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: Re: Is a UV filter still needed on a digital lens?
    > Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:31:51 -0500
    > Message-ID: <>
    > . . .
    > I am using Nikon's 18-135mm and a 70-300mm VR on a D80.
    >
    > I'm moving from digiscoping with a Coolpix 990. See www.mhmyers.com


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: "That's a REALLY nice 1500mm lens you have there"
    > Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:23:03 -0400
    > Message-ID: <>
    > That's what this cardinal looks to be saying.
    >
    > Nikon Fieldscope 82mm + D80 = 1500mm (equiv) of exquisite optics and
    > rendition.
    >
    > Full frame, no post-camera processing except to reduce in size to 18% of
    > original.
    >
    > Check it out:
    >
    > <http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_1516w.jpg>


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: Re: "That's a REALLY nice 1500mm lens you have there"
    > Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:09:49 -0400
    > Message-ID: <>
    > . . .
    > Nikon makes an connector specifically for their DSLR's that replaces the
    > eyepiece of the scope. It meters and displays all EXIF data accurately.
    >
    > Here's a photo of the setup, except today I used my Bogen fluid-head:
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/camera/DSCN3280.jpg
    >
    > I set it to Aperture priority (it's fixed at f/13), minimum shutter
    > 1/125 and the camera bumped the ISO to 900 to achieve that. (Try
    > THAT with your Canon :)


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: Re: "That's a REALLY nice 1500mm lens you have there"
    > Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:23:33 -0400
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    > I'll tell you this from experience:
    >
    > An 82mm Spotting Scope is way better than a 60mm one. The images are
    > much brighter.
    >
    > A $1500 scope is way better than a $300 scope. It's like the difference
    > between looking through a clean window or looking through a dirty foggy
    > one, not to mention the CA you will see all over in the cheaper scope.
    >
    > I used a 60mm Swift Telemaster for 25 years and I used to think I got
    > good photos through it. Not.
    >
    > Here is one of my best shots with that $300 Swift Scope:
    >
    > http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/cdjpgs/eagle1L.jpg
    >
    > Note the lack of definition and the extreme CA.
    >
    > m-m


    ===============================================

    > From: M-M <>
    > Subject: Re: Saturn's Rings Handheld at 300mm
    > Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:11:51 -0500
    > Message-ID: <>
    > . . .
    > Thank you for redeeming me, Roger. Your images are quite impressive, as
    > are your mathematical calculations.
    >
    > I just ordered a Nikon 82mm Fieldscope with a SLR adapter for my D80
    > which will give me 1500mm equiv at f13.3. The beauty of it is the glass
    > is completely color corrected and it is a fine instrument even if half
    > of what I read about it is true.
    >
    > I can also connect my Coolpix 4500 to a 75X eyepiece which should enable
    > me to capture the Cassini division in Saturn's rings.
    >
    > The rings are becoming more edge-on every year so by 2011 they will be
    > only a thin line and they will not be this open again until 2015.


    ===============================================

    One message had a digiscoping link but I haven't checked it out :

    http://www.digiscoping.co.uk/
     
    ASAAR, May 18, 2007
    #13
  14. ASAAR

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    Today, ASAAR uttered these immortal words, such was the
    importance of this profound pronouncement, that is is being
    saved for future reference

    >> try "End Of Transmission", imbecile

    >
    > Or more often and/or more accurately, <End Of Text>, Hemi
    > head. :)
    >

    I just love to death the elitists in this NG who believe that they,
    and they alone, have all the stored knowledge of the universe at
    they fingertips on any and all aspects of photography from the
    early Matthew Brady days to todays 45 MP+ cameras utilizing the
    most advance electronic technology barely out of the laboratory.
    What makes these people so valuable is that they have a unique
    ability to continue to drone on and on and on, digging deeper and
    deeper and deeper into the farthest regious of esoteric
    developments in photographic equipment and its optimum use. Without
    such dedicated people, the ordinary folk coming here for some
    simple to understand help in using their new camera, asking for
    advice on what to purchase next, or trying to find a solution to a
    vexing problem would go away frustrated and helpless. So, my hat is
    off to the elitist theoroticians of the world and especially those
    that inhabit this NG, you are truly worth your weight in gold.

    Now, for some other definitions:

    EOR: End Of Record
    EOF: End Of File
    EOT: End Of Text and End Of Transmission

    --
    HP, aka Jerry
     
    HEMI-Powered, May 18, 2007
    #14
  15. ASAAR

    Allen Guest

    HEMI-Powered wrote:
    > Today, Charles Gillen made this profound pronouncement
    >
    >> "HEMI-Powered" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> you get no help from me, and will likely get some
    >>> verbal abuse if you're also ignorant of people skills and
    >>> attempt to start a flame war. EOT.
    >>> --
    >>> HP, aka Jerry

    >> To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for
    >> "Ever Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who
    >> wages scorched- earth flame wars whenever he feels his great
    >> intelligence and experience has been doubted His chief
    >> expertise is in verbal abuse.
    >>

    > try "End Of Transmission", imbecile
    >
    >

    EORYP, Hemi.
     
    Allen, May 18, 2007
    #15
  16. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 21:27:18 -0000, HEMI-Powered wrote:

    > I just love to death the elitists in this NG who believe that they,
    > and they alone, have all the stored knowledge of the universe at
    > they fingertips on any and all aspects of photography from the
    > early Matthew Brady days to todays 45 MP+ cameras utilizing the
    > most advance electronic technology barely out of the laboratory.


    Displaying your vast knowledge again, my fine feathered elitist?


    > What makes these people so valuable is that they have a unique
    > ability to continue to drone on and on and on, digging deeper and
    > deeper and deeper into the farthest regious of esoteric
    > developments in photographic equipment and its optimum use.


    Thank you for showing us again how you do drone on . . .


    > Now, for some other definitions:
    >
    > EOR: End Of Record
    > EOF: End Of File
    > EOT: End Of Text and End Of Transmission


    Showing off your elitist knowledge again are you? You've been
    describing yourself perfectly and don't even realize it. <g>
     
    ASAAR, May 19, 2007
    #16
  17. "HEMI-Powered" <> wrote:

    > try "End Of Transmission", imbecile


    You poor thing... has your Detroit-built hemi-powered transmission busted a
    gear again?

    But thanks for your new demonstration of how apt my original comments were
    :^)
     
    Charles Gillen, May 19, 2007
    #17
  18. "John Bean" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:28:47 GMT, "HEMI-Powered"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Today, Golden Oldie made this profound pronouncement
    >>
    >>> What is the best camera currently available to buy today that
    >>> would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second
    >>> hand one only new. I believe that my current camera is
    >>> unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too powerful
    >>> for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions
    >>> that anyone has.
    >>>

    >>What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?

    >
    > What in the dickens is Google?
    >


    Who in the dickens was Dickens?
     
    WILLIAM HERSHMAN, May 19, 2007
    #18
  19. ASAAR

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    On Fri, 18 May 2007 20:22:56 +0000, HEMI-Powered wrote:

    >>> HP, aka Jerry

    >>
    >> To newbies unfamiliar with HP aka Jerry, his "EOT" stands for "Ever
    >> Obnoxious Twit" or an "Equal Opportunity Terrorist" who wages scorched-
    >> earth flame wars whenever he feels his great intelligence and
    >> experience has been doubted His chief expertise is in verbal abuse.
    >>

    > try "End Of Transmission", imbecile


    I always wondered what your real name is....

    --
    Neil
    reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email
     
    Neil Ellwood, May 19, 2007
    #19
  20. ASAAR

    John Bean Guest

    On Sat, 19 May 2007 05:06:00 GMT, "WILLIAM HERSHMAN"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"John Bean" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:28:47 GMT, "HEMI-Powered"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Today, Golden Oldie made this profound pronouncement
    >>>
    >>>> What is the best camera currently available to buy today that
    >>>> would be most suitable for digiscoping. I dont want a second
    >>>> hand one only new. I believe that my current camera is
    >>>> unsuitable because of the zoom (10x is apparently too powerful
    >>>> for this purpose). I would appreciate any thought\opinions
    >>>> that anyone has.
    >>>>
    >>>What in the dickens is "digiscoping"?

    >>
    >> What in the dickens is Google?
    >>

    >
    >Who in the dickens was Dickens?


    You may well ask. In any case who the dickens uses the
    phrase "what/who *in* the dickens..."?

    I think we should be told.

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, May 19, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robert11
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    552
  2. Shawk

    Newbie - some advice please

    Shawk, Jul 5, 2006, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    459
    Shawk
    Jul 5, 2006
  3. MarkI
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    298
    Mark I
    Jan 3, 2007
  4. Ian Richardson

    Advice please: VOIP newbie

    Ian Richardson, Mar 10, 2007, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,414
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,418
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page