Anyone up on digiscoping?

[Abinoone]

After a recent trip to Yellowstone, while watching wolves a mile or more out - I saw that images from my 600TC + 2x + 1.4x were garbage compared to the guys digiscoping with their phones and swarovski scopes.

I think the one guy I spoke to the most was using an ATX 95mm setup and his 4k 60 fps phone footage was incredible.

I started down the rabbit hole of research, and figured I'd come to the experts and see if anyone has experience with digiscoping.

I saw one post on this forum from 2021 with not much traction. I've found various other forums, but a lot of them are budget constrained or just very old.

For anyone with experience - if budget was no constraint, what setup would you get?

What factors are most important?

Is Swarovski really the end all be all, or are there any other brands that can compete?

Anything you wished you knew when you started? Buy once, cry once?

If you have any good youtubers or forums with info as well, I'm more than happy to do my own research - just figured I'd start here.

Cheers

I'm certainly no expert in this area but a good friend of mine has an inexpensive iPhone adaptor (forgot the brand), which he attaches to his Swarovski spotting scope, and his photos and videos are very respectable. The spotting scopes can be expensive (with Swarovski leading the pack) but for a cheaper alternative, you can rent or borrow one from any number of outfitters in the YNP area (I mention borrow, which is what I do when staying in Silver Gate, as a free Swarovski scope loaner is one of the benefits when you rent a cabin).

 

[WcWarren]

Mag view and Ollin make magnetic phone adapters, I don’t own either but when I buy it will be either of those. I’ve seen them in action and they are very easy to align. I’ve used so called universal adapters that supposedly work for all phones but I couldn’t get them to work. Own a vortex ultra hd 65x85 scope, been really happy with it.

 

[Capmike]

Interesting topic. About 5 years ago, we had joined the local bird club, and on outings I would be photographing, while all the other members were scoping. My wife was stuck with a pair of binoculars. So, as I had also been very interested in digiscoping, I did a very hard target search about how good the photos using a scope could be. Lots and lots of talk, zero actual photos to examine. So we pulled the trigger and bought a Swarovski 95 mm, and a tripod, our first. As well as the 30mm Nikon D850 adaptor. We got the angled model to help offset the weight of the camera.

Tried it out at the house, found out that as soon as I attached the D850, the scope would not hold its posit on the tripod. Not to worry, Swarovski had the solution. A rail attachment that pushed the scope further out on the tripod to offset the weight of the camera. So, long story short, shooting a bird, no matter whether it’s a plover or a GBH, the image did not hold a candle to the photos I was used to with the D850. Granted, had I shot with the D850 at that distance it would not be any good either.
So I experimented with birds at a closer distance, and those were quite good through the scope, but really no better than the D850 with a 500m PF.

The D850 is history, now a Z9 with the 600mm PF. My experience is that it is quite impossible to get the photos you want from a great distance. Just not possible. Photos for ID, no problem, but photos for the wall, never going to happen.

In case anyone is interested, I still have the 30mm Nikon adaptor for the Swaovski.

Good luck

CM

 

[daran]

I saw that images from my 600TC + 2x + 1.4x were garbage

Yeah, obviously. Each TC degrades the IQ and with that TC stack of yours you are well into diffraction territory, where there are no more details to be had as optical resolution is limited by your lens diameter. Besides the usual limit for wildlife isn't optical resolution but seeing conditions, which is one of the reasons why a short focal length at close distance looks way better than a long one on a distant subject (assuming same framing).

compared to the guys digiscoping with their phones and swarovski scopes.

I'll assume you were not shooting the same scene standing next to those guys. What you are seeing is not a benefit of digiscoping but of fieldcraft. Most importantly you were too far away, while they were not. Which seems obvious because of that TC stack of yours.

I think the one guy I spoke to the most was using an ATX 95mm setup and his 4k 60 fps phone footage was incredible.

That I can readily believe. Its just not due to him digiscoping. 4k60 from a modern camera has essentially the same IQ as that of a modern phone. But no 95mm digiscope can touch your lens in terms of optical resolution. Digiscoping certainly has its benefits. But image quality isn't it.

 

[Sawdustman]

I bought a high end vortex this year but haven’t used it much. Took it to Yellowstone and enjoyed it. Things to consider. Really steady tripod of which I already had a couple. Most important is the digiscope adapter. Lots of research led me to Ollin. Quick magnetic auto alignment. Only downside is it only aligns with one lens on my iPhone but not a big issue. Just upgraded to an iPhone 16 pro so just purchased a new adapter half for the phone. Swarovski is great but unless you’re going to really use it a lot I can’t justify the price. Most people I meet with them are serious birders not necessarily photographers.

 

[nmerc_photos]

Yeah, obviously. Each TC degrades the IQ and with that TC stack of yours you are well into diffraction territory, where there are no more details to be had as optical resolution is limited by your lens diameter. Besides the usual limit for wildlife isn't optical resolution but seeing conditions, which is one of the reasons why a short focal length at close distance looks way better than a long one on a distant subject (assuming same framing).

I'll assume you were not shooting the same scene standing next to those guys. What you are seeing is not a benefit of digiscoping but of fieldcraft. Most importantly you were too far away, while they were not. Which seems obvious because of that TC stack of yours.

That I can readily believe. Its just not due to him digiscoping. 4k60 from a modern camera has essentially the same IQ as that of a modern phone. But no 95mm digiscope can touch your lens in terms of optical resolution. Digiscoping certainly has its benefits. But image quality isn't it.

FWIW, it's very doable to get good images with TC stacks so "yes obviously" isn't obvious at all in that regard.. specific to this situation, MY images were garbage mainly due to the subject distance being miles out. Which was expected. I just didn't expect the digiscope setup to be so much better.

Yes I was standing at the same scene, less than 3' away from the guys who were digiscoping the same subject at the same distance. Our range finders couldn't reach out to what we were shooting, but we estimate the wolves were about 1.5 - 2 miles away.

Perhaps it was specifically because it was video, not stills - but there was a significant difference with the IQ from the scope blowing away the 600TC combo (at all focal lengths, naked, 1.4x, 1.4x + 1.4x, 2x, 2x + 1.4x)

I wish I had gotten the guy's name or had him text me one of his video files.

 

[daran]

FWIW, it's very doable to get good images with TC stacks so "yes obviously" isn't obvious at all in that regard..

Well, "good" is not a well defined term. I'd just say it is impossible to get anywhere near the IQ otherwise possible with that lens of yours.

specific to this situation, MY images were garbage mainly due to the subject distance being miles out. Which was expected. I just didn't expect the digiscope setup to be so much better.

That may be smart phones doing their post processing thing. Essentially inventing details and contrast where the capture isn't providing any. Of course you could do the same in post. I'm not really into video, but for stills it is trivial to get perfect images from garbage and I hear video is about the same. Of course then most of what you are looking at is AI, not nature. Personally I don't see the point of that.

 

[O]

Interesting times, wouldn't it be amazing if you could adapt your I phone 16 or Google Pixel pro with all the AI editing software features directly to your existing Z lenses.

 

[Redbeard the Cameraguy]

Zeiss Harpia 95 spotting scope 23x70 eye piece with the Ollin magnetic mount specific to this scope and your model phone. This is the gold standard for digiscoping. this scope's eyepiece is designed around didgscoping so there is no intrusive vignette you have to crop past. then the Ollin mount is the only self aligning magnetic digiscoping mount available. if you look into this solution I'm sure you will come to the same conclusion. Wyoming Camera Outfitters in Jackson carries this Zeiss scope if you wanna shop small / local.

 

[nmerc_photos]

Zeiss Harpia 95 spotting scope 23x70 eye piece with the Ollin magnetic mount specific to this scope and your model phone. This is the gold standard for digiscoping. this scope's eyepiece is designed around didgscoping so there is no intrusive vignette you have to crop past. then the Ollin mount is the only self aligning magnetic digiscoping mount available. if you look into this solution I'm sure you will come to the same conclusion. Wyoming Camera Outfitters in Jackson carries this Zeiss scope if you wanna shop small / local.

now this is the type of feedback I was looking to hear

pretty cool how that Harpia eyepiece works

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

the scope I saw in Yellowstone I believe was the ATX 95. I was considering the ATX 115 thinking "mo money mo betta", but it seems a lot of the "top" digiscopers really like the 85 instead. and some prefer the Harpia for that increased FOV