Birdingonthe.Net Recent Postings from Digi-Scoping > Home > Mail > Alerts Updated on Tuesday, February 9 at 06:14 AM ET The most recently received Mail is at the top.	Firethroat,©BirdQuest

9 Feb Re: vignetting [] 9 Feb Canon Ixus 200 IS for digiscoping. [neilfif11 ] 8 Feb vignetting [Nader Shaikh ] 8 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [] 8 Feb Re: Swarovski HD80/Nikon P6000 Digiscoping [neilfif11 ] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["Scott Walker" ] 07 Feb Swarovski HD80/Nikon P6000 Digiscoping ["Ted" ] 7 Feb RE: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO ["Tara T" ] 7 Feb Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [Bruce deGraaf ] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 7 Feb Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [] 7 Feb Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Bruce deGraaf ] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [] 7 Feb Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [Bruce deGraaf ] 07 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 6 Feb RE: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO ["Tara T" ] 6 Feb RE: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["Tara T" ] 6 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 6 Feb Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [Roy Halpin ] 7 Feb Re: Where to start? [neilfif11 ] 06 Feb Where to start? ["mydoghowdy" ] 07 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 7 Feb Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO [] 7 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [] 6 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Bruce deGraaf ] 06 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 06 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["h2otara" ] 6 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 6 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 5 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning ["Scott Walker" ] 5 Feb Re: Zeiss Digiscoping Tip [Debbie Z ] 5 Feb Re: Digiscoping Beginner - Canon 450D (Rebel XSi), Advice Please? [Frank Barkhofen ] 5 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [Frank Barkhofen ] 5 Feb Zeiss Digiscoping Tip [Stephen Ingraham ] 05 Feb Digiscoping Beginner - Canon 450D (Rebel XSi), Advice Please? ["bingersgolf88" ] 05 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [bom ] 04 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [Rick ] 05 Feb Re: Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 ["wturber" ] 04 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [bom ] 5 Feb Re: Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 [Bob Thompson ] 05 Feb C-a590is power hog ["jwjenks2001" ] 4 Feb Re: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? [Len Blumin ] 4 Feb RE: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? ["Tara T" ] 04 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [Rick ] 4 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [Don Morgan ] 04 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning [bom ] 04 Feb Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? ["wturber" ] 04 Feb Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? ["John" ] 04 Feb Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping ["wturber" ] 4 Feb Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping [neilfif11 ] 03 Feb Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping ["wturber" ] 03 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 4 Feb Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping [neilfif11 ] 4 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [neilfif11 ] 3 Feb Re: Off Topic: New website [Frank Barkhofen ] 03 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Steve Sosensky ] 3 Feb Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [] 3 Feb Re: PhotoScoped Anhingas (Zeiss Digiscope Blog) [Gina Cicotello ] 03 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 03 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["wturber" ] 3 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Mike Grant ] 02 Feb Off Topic: New website ["xmartinezperona" ] 2 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Mike Grant ] 2 Feb thirty power digital cameras [] 2 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [Roy Halpin ] 2 Feb Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 [] 1 Feb Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 ["Mike Grant" ] 1 Feb PhotoScoped Anhingas (Zeiss Digiscope Blog) [Stephen Ingraham ] 01 Feb Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 ["wturber" ] 31 Jan Re: Lumix GH1 vs. G1 ["wturber" ] 31 Jan Re: Camera aperture question ["wturber" ] 31 Jan Lumix GH1 vs. G1 [Mike Blatchley ] 31 Jan RE: Re: Camera aperture question ["Tara T" ] 31 Jan Re: Camera aperture question ["wturber" ] Subject: Re: vignetting From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:13:57 +0000 (UTC) Hi Nader, I have the Kowa 884 and use it with the 25LER and the DA-10.  With the P6000, sharply defined vignetting completely disappears around 8mm (per EXIF data, not 35mm equiv.).  To minimize vignetting with the DA-10 and this camera, I fully seat the DA-10, barely tighten the set screw, then back the DA-10 up until it catches, then tighten the screw.  I've found that if I take photos (even using Manual Focus) more zoomed in than what would be the green zone in Macro Mode, the pictures aren't at all sharp, even though I don't see any shadowing.  I have no idea why. With the G1 (kit lens) and DA-10, I fully seat the DA-10, and sharply defined vignetting disappears around 24mm, and then start to experience shadowing around 30mm.  I mainly shoot around 24-26mm.  I don't have the 20-60x zoom, but Roy tested it and found it unusable with the DA-10, but usable in some range with the TSN-DA3. Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nader Shaikh" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 8, 2010 11:23:19 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [digiscopingbirds] vignetting   Can someone help me figure out how much vignetting is expected with different camera and scope combinations? I have a 88mm Kowa scope. 1) What is minimum amount zoom that will make vignetting disappear when using a P6000 and the Kowa 20x60 zoom? How about with the 25LER? (I get 13.8 and 10mm, respectively, but maybe I am doing something wrong?) 2) What about the G1 plus the kit lens with the 25LER?  The reason I ask is because I am figuring that with vignetting at the lower end, and diffraction at the higher end of the zoom range, one is left with a very limited range of zoom to work with. Is this true? For those who use zoom lenses, do you do most of your work at about the same in-camera zoom?  Is there a point and shoot/eyepiece combo that has allows you to zoom in/out more effectively?  Subject: Canon Ixus 200 IS for digiscoping. From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:37:55 +0800 A friend lent me the Ixus 200 IS for testing today. Has a nice 24 - 120 zoom lens and a touch screen for selecting focus points and using as a shutter when the camera is in vertical mode. Not many features as it's designed for the casual user but with 12 megs should give ok results. Set it up on the Swarovski UCA adapter as the lens needed a lot of adjusting when zoomed. Vignetting in wide format ( I hadn't worked out how to change formats during the testing ) disappears about 1/3 into the zoom at 25x on the new zoom. At 1/4 zoom very little vignetting. Neil ps the attached photo was at 24 mm (wide) on the camera zoom. Canon Ixus 200IS on Swarovski STS80HD scope and Sw 25-50 zoom and UCA adapter Hong Kong, China. Feb 2010 Subject: vignetting From: Nader Shaikh <nader.shaikh AT yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 20:23:19 -0800 (PST) Can someone help me figure out how much vignetting is expected with different camera and scope combinations? I have a 88mm Kowa scope. 1) What is minimum amount zoom that will make vignetting disappear when using a P6000 and the Kowa 20x60 zoom? How about with the 25LER? (I get 13.8 and 10mm, respectively, but maybe I am doing something wrong?) 2) What about the G1 plus the kit lens with the 25LER?  The reason I ask is because I am figuring that with vignetting at the lower end, and diffraction at the higher end of the zoom range, one is left with a very limited range of zoom to work with. Is this true? For those who use zoom lenses, do you do most of your work at about the same in-camera zoom?  Is there a point and shoot/eyepiece combo that has allows you to zoom in/out more effectively?  Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 13:38:53 +0000 (UTC) Thanks for the additional info Scott.  It's great to be learning the physics behind the results! Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Walker" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 8, 2010 12:20:45 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1   Here is another short cut. Take the pixels spacing in micrometers and multiply by 2.2. This is the approximate f# where the blur due to diffraction is about equal to the blur due to the sensor. Both have a 50% MTF at the same frequency under this condition. For the 4/3 sensor which has a 4.3 micro-meter spacing the f# is 9.5. For the Canon G9 with a 1.9 micro-meter spacing the f# is 4.2. This 2.2 number is based on the design of sensors and the measured MTF for the Canon Rebel XT sensor system. Different cameras may vary somewhat from this figure depending on the sensor prefilter used. This also assumes that a Bayer mask is used. For many point and shoot cameras the diffraction blur is more than the sensor blur when shooting at full zoom with the camera along. For example my Canon s80 at maximum zoom and wide open is f/5.3. With its 2.2 micro-meter spacing a f# of 4.4 is required to match the sensor blur. With my digiscope setup the exit pupil of the scope is 2.6mm. This limits the aperture at full camera zoom to f/7.9. Here the blur due to diffraction is almost twice that of the sensor. This is why at this reach( about 3000mm) the results are somewhat soft. When the camera is de-zoomed the system f# decreases; therefore the blur due to diffraction decreases and the image improves. Scott Walker ----- Original Message ----- From: "wturber" < jay AT studio522.com > To: < digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 10:36 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 > Well, diffraction wasn't on my radar screen, but I sure learned a lot. I > think I may have also learned why I'm getting sharper pictures with the > kit > lens than with the ultra-sharp as tested (but not on a scope) Olympus > 50/2.0. My 88mm obj lens w/25x eyepiece using a 25mm focal length yields > an > f7.1 - not too bad. My 50mm however yields twice that. Exactly!! One way to think about this is that the total possible amount of detail that can be collected by a lens is determined by its entrance pupil. With a telescope, that is usually its front objective diameter. So the more megapixels our sensors have, the less magnification we can tolerate if we are going to match the sensor's ability to record detail. With the 25mm lens, your equivalent focal length is 1250mm. That's not particularly long by the standards of traditional digiscoping that started mostly with 2-3Mp cameras. But it isn't too far from the limits of what you can reasonably record with a 12mp sensor and an 88mm objective. You can calculate all this stuff if you'd like by using my online digiscoping calculator. I just updated it to include the new micro-fourthirds cameras as well as the Nikon P6000. http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/digiscope_calc.html The shortcut for a 12Mp 4/3" camera is to ensure that the calculated f-number isn't much bigger than f/9. Of course, you can stretch things beyond that, but understand that you will necessarily not have results as sharp as you can get from a good lens alone. That said, careful sharpening and good technique still delivers decent results even if you push the boundaries a bit. Jay www.jayandwanda.com ------------------------------------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogroups.com.Yahoo ! Groups Links Subject: Re: Swarovski HD80/Nikon P6000 Digiscoping From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 17:18:02 +0800 Ted, The adapter for the P6000 is the E21 (43 mm thread ). The E20 is for the P5100 and is 28 mm. I use third party adapters for my Nikons as I like to have a standard 52 mm thread to attach to the DCA. This is typical of them and they are easy to find http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Adapter-Coolpix-Digital-Camera/dp/B001MRZM8K Neil. >I have the above combination with the DCA Zoom adapter and the Nikon >URE20 adapter to fit the DCA to the spotting scope. I need one more >adapter to "marry" these units together. Dose anyone out there have >these combinations and are able to put them together to digiscope? I >have been in-touch with Clay Taylor or Swarovski and found him no >help. Anyone out there that has experienced these problems and fixed >them? Thanks! Ted Wyman > > Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "Scott Walker" <sdwalker AT cox.net> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 21:20:45 -0800 Here is another short cut. Take the pixels spacing in micrometers and multiply by 2.2. This is the approximate f# where the blur due to diffraction is about equal to the blur due to the sensor. Both have a 50% MTF at the same frequency under this condition. For the 4/3 sensor which has a 4.3 micro-meter spacing the f# is 9.5. For the Canon G9 with a 1.9 micro-meter spacing the f# is 4.2. This 2.2 number is based on the design of sensors and the measured MTF for the Canon Rebel XT sensor system. Different cameras may vary somewhat from this figure depending on the sensor prefilter used. This also assumes that a Bayer mask is used. For many point and shoot cameras the diffraction blur is more than the sensor blur when shooting at full zoom with the camera along. For example my Canon s80 at maximum zoom and wide open is f/5.3. With its 2.2 micro-meter spacing a f# of 4.4 is required to match the sensor blur. With my digiscope setup the exit pupil of the scope is 2.6mm. This limits the aperture at full camera zoom to f/7.9. Here the blur due to diffraction is almost twice that of the sensor. This is why at this reach( about 3000mm) the results are somewhat soft. When the camera is de-zoomed the system f# decreases; therefore the blur due to diffraction decreases and the image improves. Scott Walker ----- Original Message ----- From: "wturber" To: Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 10:36 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 > Well, diffraction wasn't on my radar screen, but I sure learned a lot. I > think I may have also learned why I'm getting sharper pictures with the > kit > lens than with the ultra-sharp as tested (but not on a scope) Olympus > 50/2.0. My 88mm obj lens w/25x eyepiece using a 25mm focal length yields > an > f7.1 - not too bad. My 50mm however yields twice that. Exactly!! One way to think about this is that the total possible amount of detail that can be collected by a lens is determined by its entrance pupil. With a telescope, that is usually its front objective diameter. So the more megapixels our sensors have, the less magnification we can tolerate if we are going to match the sensor's ability to record detail. With the 25mm lens, your equivalent focal length is 1250mm. That's not particularly long by the standards of traditional digiscoping that started mostly with 2-3Mp cameras. But it isn't too far from the limits of what you can reasonably record with a 12mp sensor and an 88mm objective. You can calculate all this stuff if you'd like by using my online digiscoping calculator. I just updated it to include the new micro-fourthirds cameras as well as the Nikon P6000. http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/digiscope_calc.html The shortcut for a 12Mp 4/3" camera is to ensure that the calculated f-number isn't much bigger than f/9. Of course, you can stretch things beyond that, but understand that you will necessarily not have results as sharp as you can get from a good lens alone. That said, careful sharpening and good technique still delivers decent results even if you push the boundaries a bit. Jay www.jayandwanda.com ------------------------------------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogroups.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Swarovski HD80/Nikon P6000 Digiscoping From: "Ted" <got2digiscope AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:01:44 -0000 I have the above combination with the DCA Zoom adapter and the Nikon URE20 adapter to fit the DCA to the spotting scope. I need one more adapter to "marry" these units together. Dose anyone out there have these combinations and are able to put them together to digiscope? I have been in-touch with Clay Taylor or Swarovski and found him no help. Anyone out there that has experienced these problems and fixed them? Thanks! Ted Wyman Subject: RE: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: "Tara T" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 21:15:30 -0500 Bruce, Thank you so much for taking the time to give me such detailed instructions. You've been my Silkypix mentor from the beginning. It would be great to use software I already have and am familiar with, so I'll give it a try. I didn't realize you could use it for downloading photos. The software is considerably better than the documentation. I do really like the batch processing capabilities of Silkypix. Thanks again Bruce! Tara _____ From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce deGraaf Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 2:49 PM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Tara, You can use either Windows Explorer or even do it directly from Silypix. I use Silypix to copy the files taken with my DMC-G1 from the memory card to my PC. To do this, open Silkypix and select "File(F)" in the menu bar, the select "Open folder(D)". This will bring up a browser window. (There is also a Open folder icon on the icon bar. Next, browse to your memory card (e.g. "E", or another drive letter as shown in the "Autoplay" window that normally pops up on Windows systems when you insert the memory card). Expand the drive contents by double-clicking on the drive (e.g. "Removable Disk (E)"), so that the "DCIM" folder opens and double-clicking on the next level folder entitled "###_PANA" where "###" is a sequential folder number that increments periodically (every 1000 images or so). Your Raw images should then come up and be viewable as either thumbnails or thumbnails and a preview pane (you can select the viewing options on the icon bar). From within Silkypix, you can then mark the files that you want to move as you review them by right clicking on either the image in the preview pain or its thumbnail, then selecting "Copy/Move Mark" (alternately you can depress F7 while viewing an image). This will mark the image as one you want to either move or copy later. When you are ready to move the images you have selected, click the menu bar item "Edit(E)" then select "Select marked scene" then "Select copy/move marked scene". Next click "File(F)" menu bar item, then select "Copy selected scene". You can then use Silkypix to browse to the directory where you want the scenes/pictures to be stored on your computer or even create a new folder wherever you would like. I normally have a master directory by year of for images with each outing stored by date with a short description in the name ... such as "2010_01_01 Sturbridge, MA". Within the directory, I have a separate subfolder for the Raw Silkypix files. Alternately, as you review the images, you can delete the ones you don't want and then select all of the files after you have deleted the bad ones. There are several strategies you can use by setting the quality and other markers that Silkypix supports. The selection tools also allow you to batch process the images to create the image as JPEG, TIFF or other formatted files. Canon DPP (Digital Photo Professional) has a built in browser that lets you similarly move Raw files to directories you can create. I like moving the files under my control so I know where things are for backup purposes. If you need more help, let me know. Good luck, Bruce _____ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, February 7, 2010 9:32:06 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Hi Bruce, When you plug the card in, what do you use to transfer to your PC--Windows Explorer? When I did that with the P6000 I discovered that it stores the photos in multiple folders and was very tedious to manually move the photos from every folder. I also like to rename them with the date and time appended to the number, and use Nikon Transfer for that, but it won't recognize RW2's, so I've been using Photofunstudio for the G1. If you're using Windows Explorer, is there a way to rename when you download them? I used SilkyPix (and the Pro version) for everything for most of last year, but then switched to Photoshop Elements for my editing. Since I'm not using Silkypix for editing, I guess I could adjust the settings so that it doesn't do any preliminary editing and it would no doubt be faster opening photos. I do like that you can F6 a photo (mark for deletion) and then easily change your mind and go back and un-F6 it. Easier than restoring from the Recycle Bin if you're going too fast and realize you made a mistake. That's interesting that you weren't satisfied w/Lightroom. What didn't you like? Which flavor of Photoshop are you using? Thanks, Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce deGraaf" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 8:27:22 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Tara, Is your problem with Silkypix, or Photo Fun Studio? I have installed Photo Fun Studio but have never used it. I only shoot in Raw and view the image in Raw using Silkypix, which (at least on my system) is quite speedy for the initial pass. I always plug the memory card directly into my computer and then cull out the bad ones and then transfer the ones I want to keep into a folder (batch mode) on my hard drive where I actually do the editing (a folder dedicated to the Raw images). I then edit the Raw settings and crop as desired in Silypix (it conveniently will crop and rotate images at any degree from -180 to +180 in 0.1 degree increments). I then do any in further enhancements in Photoshop, if necessary. I have used Lightroom, but I was not satisfied with the results either for the Panasonic G1 or any of my Canon camera (Canon's DPP provides much better results in my opinion). Bruce deGraaf brucedegraaf. zenfolio. com/ _____ From: "h2otara AT comcast. net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder. Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery. It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo. Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer? The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: Bruce deGraaf <brucedegraaf AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 11:48:38 -0800 (PST) Tara, You can use either Windows Explorer or even do it directly from Silypix. I use Silypix to copy the files taken with my DMC-G1 from the memory card to my PC. To do this, open Silkypix and select "File(F)" in the menu bar, the select "Open folder(D)". This will bring up a browser window. (There is also a Open folder icon on the icon bar. Next, browse to your memory card (e.g. "E", or another drive letter as shown in the "Autoplay" window that normally pops up on Windows systems when you insert the memory card). Expand the drive contents by double-clicking on the drive (e.g. "Removable Disk (E)"), so that the "DCIM" folder opens and double-clicking on the next level folder entitled "###_PANA" where "###" is a sequential folder number that increments periodically (every 1000 images or so). Your Raw images should then come up and be viewable as either thumbnails or thumbnails and a preview pane (you can select the viewing options on the icon bar). From within Silkypix, you can then mark the files that you want to move as you review them by right clicking on either the image in the preview pain or its thumbnail, then selecting "Copy/Move Mark" (alternately you can depress F7 while viewing an image). This will mark the image as one you want to either move or copy later. When you are ready to move the images you have selected, click the menu bar item "Edit(E)" then select "Select marked scene" then "Select copy/move marked scene". Next click "File(F)" menu bar item, then select "Copy selected scene". You can then use Silkypix to browse to the directory where you want the scenes/pictures to be stored on your computer or even create a new folder wherever you would like. I normally have a master directory by year of for images with each outing stored by date with a short description in the name ... such as "2010_01_01 Sturbridge, MA". Within the directory, I have a separate subfolder for the Raw Silkypix files. Alternately, as you review the images, you can delete the ones you don't want and then select all of the files after you have deleted the bad ones. There are several strategies you can use by setting the quality and other markers that Silkypix supports. The selection tools also allow you to batch process the images to create the image as JPEG, TIFF or other formatted files. Canon DPP (Digital Photo Professional) has a built in browser that lets you similarly move Raw files to directories you can create. I like moving the files under my control so I know where things are for backup purposes. If you need more help, let me know. Good luck, Bruce ________________________________ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, February 7, 2010 9:32:06 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Hi Bruce, When you plug the card in, what do you use to transfer to your PC--Windows Explorer? When I did that with the P6000 I discovered that it stores the photos in multiple folders and was very tedious to manually move the photos from every folder. I also like to rename them with the date and time appended to the number, and use Nikon Transfer for that, but it won't recognize RW2's, so I've been using Photofunstudio for the G1. If you're using Windows Explorer, is there a way to rename when you download them? I used SilkyPix (and the Pro version) for everything for most of last year, but then switched to Photoshop Elements for my editing. Since I'm not using Silkypix for editing, I guess I could adjust the settings so that it doesn't do any preliminary editing and it would no doubt be faster opening photos. I do like that you can F6 a photo (mark for deletion) and then easily change your mind and go back and un-F6 it. Easier than restoring from the Recycle Bin if you're going too fast and realize you made a mistake. That's interesting that you weren't satisfied w/Lightroom. What didn't you like? Which flavor of Photoshop are you using? Thanks, Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce deGraaf" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 8:27:22 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Tara, Is your problem with Silkypix, or Photo Fun Studio? I have installed Photo Fun Studio but have never used it. I only shoot in Raw and view the image in Raw using Silkypix, which (at least on my system) is quite speedy for the initial pass. I always plug the memory card directly into my computer and then cull out the bad ones and then transfer the ones I want to keep into a folder (batch mode) on my hard drive where I actually do the editing (a folder dedicated to the Raw images). I then edit the Raw settings and crop as desired in Silypix (it conveniently will crop and rotate images at any degree from -180 to +180 in 0.1 degree increments). I then do any in further enhancements in Photoshop, if necessary. I have used Lightroom, but I was not satisfied with the results either for the Panasonic G1 or any of my Canon camera (Canon's DPP provides much better results in my opinion). Bruce deGraaf brucedegraaf. zenfolio. com/ ________________________________ From: "h2otara AT comcast. net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder. Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery. It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo. Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer? The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:41:57 -0800 (PST) That is a problem with Borg, it was developed for Astronomy not for snap shots. The one I purchased from eBay works to infinity. Some one is making an adapter where the f stop can be mechanically adjusted on the camera but it is for Nikon only at this time. The plastic works good for me. Roy ________________________________ From: Bruce deGraaf To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, February 7, 2010 9:15:06 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, Thanks for the reply. Does this adapter allow you to control the aperture of the Pentax 40mm pancake lens, or would I still have to insert a piece of plastic to hold it wide open? Does it allow you to focus the lens across the entire range, from close to infinity? (The Borg adapter is good for digiscoping, but when used alone only allows the lens to be used to focus on objects that are less than about 10 feet away.) Thanks, Bruce ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, February 7, 2010 8:52:42 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Bruce you may have been asking about the micro 4/3 adapter if so I purchased it from eBay. This is the guy's site. http://photography. shop.ebay. com/Lenses- Filters-/ 78997/i.html? _catref=1&_fln=1&_ssn=gifts_hunter&_trksid=p3911. c0.m282 Roy ________________________________ From: Bruce deGraaf To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 6:23:59 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, What adapter did you buy for the SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm lens? Thanks, Bruce deGraaf Shrewsbury, MA brucedegraaf. zenfolio. com ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:35:34 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda. com ------------ --------- --------- ------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogrou ps.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 14:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Hi Roy, Thanks for all the additional information.  I'll be checking out FastStone and RawTherapee as well as what Bruce is suggesting.  I think that one piece of software that's completely intuitive for one person might not fit the way another thinks, so I'd like to check them all out.  I find I'm spending more and more time heads down at the computer, so I want to make a wise choice (you'd think this was a JOB!!) Thanks for the Windows 7 warning.  I hope to keep our 2 PC's going for a while longer so we don't have to be on the bleeding edge of a new operating system. Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roy Halpin" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 9:14:55 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO   Hi Tara, Jay turned me on to FastStone several years ago.  It views all Raw files, a great organizer and some of the batch features are very useful.  Very easy to learn. I just recently discovered RAW Therapee.  I use CS3, to view Panasonic RAW files I had to upgrade to CS4 or go to Light Room.  I did not want to upgrade because I'm saving for a MAC and Lightroom's learning curve requires a lot of time.  So I chose to look for an alternative.  The reviews on RAW Therapee were good so I tried it.  Downloaded the 2.4 it is very nice.  It is just not a viewer but also a great editor.  The 3.0 is a Beta for the most part it doesn't function well with Windows 7.  It crashes a lot.  The writer warned it had to be worked on some what.  The writer asked for a $10 or more donation.  It is worth the price.  It come with a PFD file as a owners manual that is easy to use and it is very informative.  Steven Ingrahams loves light room.  The filing system is really creepy for me.  When Windows 2000NT was introduced that had a great filing system, lodgical and easy to use.  Since every one want to fix something that isn't broke including Adobe.  On reason I like Faststone instead of Bridge.  Roy Halpin From: Tara T To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 10:43:52 PM Subject: RE: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Roy , Thanks!  I’ll check them out.  I saw some freeware on the web, but was hesitant to just start downloading something I didn’t know anything about.  I appreciate the recommendations. Tara From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Roy Halpin Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 10:02 PM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO   Tara , I like this viewer for all files: http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm This is a really neat view and RAW converter.  I like it better than Light Room.   http://www.rawtherapee.com/   2.4 version.  The 3.0 I am having trouble Window 7. Both are free ware, but they ask for a donation.  Both programs are worth much more than I paid them. Roy Halpin From: " h2otara AT comcast. net " < h2otara AT comcast. net > To: digiscopingbirds < digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com > Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder.  Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery.  It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo.  Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer?  The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 14:32:06 +0000 (UTC) Hi Bruce, When you plug the card in, what do you use to transfer to your PC--Windows Explorer?  When I did that with the P6000 I discovered that it stores the photos in multiple folders and was very tedious to manually move the photos from every folder .  I also like to rename them with the date and time appended to the number, and use Nikon Transfer for that, but it won't recognize RW2's, so I've been using Photofunstudio for the G1.  If you're using Windows Explorer, is there a way to rename when you download them?  I used SilkyPix (and the Pro version) for everything for most of last year, but then switched to Photoshop Elements for my editing.  Since I'm not using Silkypix for editing, I guess I could adjust the settings so that it doesn't do any preliminary editing and it would no doubt be faster opening photos.  I do like that you can F6 a photo (mark for deletion) and then easily change your mind and go back and un-F6 it.  Easier than restoring from the Recycle Bin if you're going too fast and realize you made a mistake.  That's interesting that you weren't satisfied w/Lightroom.  What didn't you like?  Which flavor of Photoshop are you using? Thanks, Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce deGraaf" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 8:27:22 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO   Tara, Is your problem with Silkypix, or Photo Fun Studio? I have installed Photo Fun Studio but have never used it. I only shoot in Raw and view the image in Raw using Silkypix, which (at least on my system) is quite speedy for the initial pass. I always plug the memory card directly into my computer and then cull out the bad ones and then transfer the ones I want to keep into a folder (batch mode) on my hard drive where I actually do the editing (a folder dedicated to the Raw images). I then edit the Raw settings and crop as desired in Silypix (it conveniently will crop and rotate images at any degree from -180 to +180 in 0.1 degree increments). I then do any in further enhancements in Photoshop, if necessary. I have used Lightroom, but I was not satisfied with the results either for the Panasonic G1 or any of my Canon camera (Canon's DPP provides much better results in my opinion). Bruce deGraaf brucedegraaf.zenfolio.com/ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO   I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder.  Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery.  It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo.  Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer?  The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Bruce deGraaf <brucedegraaf AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 06:15:06 -0800 (PST) Roy, Thanks for the reply. Does this adapter allow you to control the aperture of the Pentax 40mm pancake lens, or would I still have to insert a piece of plastic to hold it wide open? Does it allow you to focus the lens across the entire range, from close to infinity? (The Borg adapter is good for digiscoping, but when used alone only allows the lens to be used to focus on objects that are less than about 10 feet away.) Thanks, Bruce ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, February 7, 2010 8:52:42 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Bruce you may have been asking about the micro 4/3 adapter if so I purchased it from eBay. This is the guy's site. http://photography. shop.ebay. com/Lenses- Filters-/ 78997/i.html? _catref=1&_fln=1&_ssn=gifts_hunter&_trksid=p3911. c0.m282 Roy ________________________________ From: Bruce deGraaf To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 6:23:59 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, What adapter did you buy for the SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm lens? Thanks, Bruce deGraaf Shrewsbury, MA brucedegraaf. zenfolio. com ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:35:34 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda. com ------------ --------- --------- ------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogrou ps.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 05:52:42 -0800 (PST) Bruce you may have been asking about the micro 4/3 adapter if so I purchased it from eBay. This is the guy's site. http://photography.shop.ebay.com/Lenses-Filters-/78997/i.html?_catref=1&_fln=1&_ssn=gifts_hunter&_trksid=p3911.c0.m282 Roy ________________________________ From: Bruce deGraaf To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 6:23:59 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, What adapter did you buy for the SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm lens? Thanks, Bruce deGraaf Shrewsbury, MA brucedegraaf.zenfolio.com ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:35:34 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda. com ------------ --------- --------- ------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogrou ps.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 13:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Jay, I learned a lot more from this than I'd ever expected. I found your wonderful digiscoping calculator about 6 months ago, but it didn't have my camera.  Thanks for updating it--I'm going to plug in my cameras and see what I get. Thanks again Jay! Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "wturber" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 1:36:20 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1   > Well, diffraction wasn't on my radar screen, but I sure learned a lot. I > think I may have also learned why I'm getting sharper pictures with the kit > lens than with the ultra-sharp as tested (but not on a scope) Olympus > 50/2.0. My 88mm obj lens w/25x eyepiece using a 25mm focal length yields an > f7.1 – not too bad. My 50mm however yields twice that. Exactly!! One way to think about this is that the total possible amount of detail that can be collected by a lens is determined by its entrance pupil. With a telescope, that is usually its front objective diameter. So the more megapixels our sensors have, the less magnification we can tolerate if we are going to match the sensor's ability to record detail. With the 25mm lens, your equivalent focal length is 1250mm. That's not particularly long by the standards of traditional digiscoping that started mostly with 2-3Mp cameras. But it isn't too far from the limits of what you can reasonably record with a 12mp sensor and an 88mm objective. You can calculate all this stuff if you'd like by using my online digiscoping calculator. I just updated it to include the new micro-fourthirds cameras as well as the Nikon P6000. http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/digiscope_calc.html The shortcut for a 12Mp 4/3" camera is to ensure that the calculated f-number isn't much bigger than f/9. Of course, you can stretch things beyond that, but understand that you will necessarily not have results as sharp as you can get from a good lens alone. That said, careful sharpening and good technique still delivers decent results even if you push the boundaries a bit. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: Bruce deGraaf <brucedegraaf AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 05:27:22 -0800 (PST) Tara, Is your problem with Silkypix, or Photo Fun Studio? I have installed Photo Fun Studio but have never used it. I only shoot in Raw and view the image in Raw using Silkypix, which (at least on my system) is quite speedy for the initial pass. I always plug the memory card directly into my computer and then cull out the bad ones and then transfer the ones I want to keep into a folder (batch mode) on my hard drive where I actually do the editing (a folder dedicated to the Raw images). I then edit the Raw settings and crop as desired in Silypix (it conveniently will crop and rotate images at any degree from -180 to +180 in 0.1 degree increments). I then do any in further enhancements in Photoshop, if necessary. I have used Lightroom, but I was not satisfied with the results either for the Panasonic G1 or any of my Canon camera (Canon's DPP provides much better results in my opinion). Bruce deGraaf brucedegraaf.zenfolio.com/ ________________________________ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder. Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery. It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo. Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer? The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 06:36:20 -0000 > Well, diffraction wasn't on my radar screen, but I sure learned a lot. I > think I may have also learned why I'm getting sharper pictures with the kit > lens than with the ultra-sharp as tested (but not on a scope) Olympus > 50/2.0. My 88mm obj lens w/25x eyepiece using a 25mm focal length yields an > f7.1 – not too bad. My 50mm however yields twice that. Exactly!! One way to think about this is that the total possible amount of detail that can be collected by a lens is determined by its entrance pupil. With a telescope, that is usually its front objective diameter. So the more megapixels our sensors have, the less magnification we can tolerate if we are going to match the sensor's ability to record detail. With the 25mm lens, your equivalent focal length is 1250mm. That's not particularly long by the standards of traditional digiscoping that started mostly with 2-3Mp cameras. But it isn't too far from the limits of what you can reasonably record with a 12mp sensor and an 88mm objective. You can calculate all this stuff if you'd like by using my online digiscoping calculator. I just updated it to include the new micro-fourthirds cameras as well as the Nikon P6000. http://www.jayandwanda.com/digiscope/digiscope_calc.html The shortcut for a 12Mp 4/3" camera is to ensure that the calculated f-number isn't much bigger than f/9. Of course, you can stretch things beyond that, but understand that you will necessarily not have results as sharp as you can get from a good lens alone. That said, careful sharpening and good technique still delivers decent results even if you push the boundaries a bit. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: RE: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: "Tara T" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 22:43:52 -0500 Roy, Thanks! I'll check them out. I saw some freeware on the web, but was hesitant to just start downloading something I didn't know anything about. I appreciate the recommendations. Tara _____ From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roy Halpin Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 10:02 PM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO Tara, I like this viewer for all files: http://www.fastston e.org/FSViewerDetail.htm This is a really neat view and RAW converter. I like it better than Light Room. http://www.rawthera pee.com/ 2.4 version. The 3.0 I am having trouble Window 7. Both are free ware, but they ask for a donation. Both programs are worth much more than I paid them. Roy Halpin _____ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder. Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery. It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo. Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer? The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: RE: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "Tara T" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 22:39:52 -0500 Thanks for rephrasing that “light going through the lens” statement—makes sense now. I’m curious to see what my results are tomorrow running your test… Well, diffraction wasn’t on my radar screen, but I sure learned a lot. I think I may have also learned why I’m getting sharper pictures with the kit lens than with the ultra-sharp as tested (but not on a scope) Olympus 50/2.0. My 88mm obj lens w/25x eyepiece using a 25mm focal length yields an f7.1 – not too bad. My 50mm however yields twice that. Jay, thank you very much for taking the time to explain all of that—twice. I don’t claim to understand every word, but will do some research to fill in my knowledge gaps, as I really like understanding what it takes to put together a system that’s capable of taking really sharp images. Tara _____ From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wturber Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 9:08 PM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 > Tomorrow I'll run the test you mentioned, but I'm not understanding what you mean when you say " If so, that means that some of the light is going through the lens at that prior aperture." The fact that vignetting begins to set in at some aperture (in my case, f/5.6) tells us that the aperture blades must be blocking some light that would otherwise have gotten through. Otherwise, there would be no vignetting (reduction of light at the edges). So some of the light is clearly using the larger opening, but most of the light is traveling along a more narrow path that is closer to f/15. > The next paragraph makes sense except the conclusion I'm drawing based on what I think you said. If the pupils lined up perfectly, you would get the performance of the lens at f15. But they're not lining up perfectly so you're getting performance equal to some larger aperture. Your lens isn't one reviewed by dpreview, but using the Olympus 50/2.0 review as an example  ( http://www.dpreview .com/lensreviews/olympus_50_2_o20/page3.asp  ), the performance of the lens is significantly better at f5 than at f15. So I think you're saying that if the pupils were lined up perfectly you'd get worse performance than if they were not lined up perfectly... Not really. The explanation I gave was a bit simplistic and either misleading in its implications or possibly even wrong depending on how you read it. Yes, some of the light is going through the f/4.8 (larger than f/15) opening in the example I gave. But the simple fact is that diffraction has already taken its toll due to the 30x power we are using. The fact that some of the 30x light happens to go through f/4.8 parts of the lens does not undo the effects of diffraction already experienced. (The one thing that could counter it would be a shorter focal length camera lens which would reduce our overall "magnification.") Diffraction is the reason you see the ZD50 lens performing poorly at f/15. All lenses will perform poorly at f/16 with a 12Mp 4/3" sensor. The physics of the situation dictate this. Basically, the fact that some of the light goes through the larger opening of a lens can only act to make matters even worse, since a lens tends to be more poorly corrected at wider apertures. Actual lens performance usually peaks between f/5.6 and f/8 because this is the area where stopping down reduces the effects of lens aberrations before diffraction effects start dominating. Really top notch optics like the ZD50 don't have much of a peak since they are so well corrected. So basically what this tells us is that shooting at 30x with my 40mm Hexanon on a GH1 virtually guarantees me a somewhat soft image when viewed at the pixel level - even if the air is perfectly calm and my optics are "perfect." At 20x with the 40mm, which should yield a best case f/10 number, very good results are probably possible - if I have excellent optics and good clear air. In most cases today with large megapixel camera our digiscoping rigs are limited in image quality by diffraction. We stopped getting significant benefits from more megapixels on our sensors when we went much beyond 7-8Mp. With that pixel count and digiscoping equivalents of around 2000mm, we had reached the point where we were pretty much able to record all the detail that a top-notch 80mm objective could deliver within the known laws of physics. More megapixels doesn't hurt anything, but it doesn't help much either. It just means that the sensor can "see" the diffraction that's been there all along but was made less easy to see with lower pixel count cameras. So basically, unless the theoretical f-number of the rig is around f/5.6 or so (on a GH1 or other 12Mp 4/3" sensor camera), it probably doesn't make much sense concern ourselves about the degree to which the camera lens is acting like the theoretical f-number or the f-number set by the camera/lens. With my rig, f/5.6 would occur if I used an 11x eyepiece which would give me an equivalent focal length of 880mm. At that level of magnification, the camera optics will be a much more significant factor in overall image quality. We should see excellent results given a good camera lens. But, of course, we don't have that long "digiscoping" reach any more. Phew! I hope that clears things up. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 19:10:35 -0800 (PST) Hi Bruce, I use the Kowa DA10 with the 25X LER eyepiece. With the Zoom eyepiece I prefer not to use a adapter but rather The Kowa TSN DA3 Bracket. With the bracket I can safely get the lens and eyepiece close enough to remove all vignetting. It locks down nicely and stray light is not a problem. Roy Halpin ________________________________ From: Bruce deGraaf To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 6:23:59 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, What adapter did you buy for the SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm lens? Thanks, Bruce deGraaf Shrewsbury, MA brucedegraaf.zenfolio.com ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:35:34 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda. com ------------ --------- --------- ------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogrou ps.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 19:01:48 -0800 (PST) Tara, I like this viewer for all files: http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm This is a really neat view and RAW converter. I like it better than Light Room. http://www.rawtherapee.com/ 2.4 version. The 3.0 I am having trouble Window 7. Both are free ware, but they ask for a donation. Both programs are worth much more than I paid them. Roy Halpin ________________________________ From: "h2otara AT comcast.net" To: digiscopingbirds Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:00:06 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder. Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from Panasonic that lets you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery. It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo. Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer? The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Where to start? From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:32:14 +0800 Jill, If any of your p & s cameras have a thread for an adapter you could use then using the Swarovski DCA adapter. If they don't you could get the Swarovski UCA adapter http://www.swoptics.co.uk/view.asp?KEY=3195 which will let you use any of them as well as the Rebel. You can use the Rebel with a 50 mm lens on the DCA adapter but it needs the Swarovski Telescope Rail to balance the setup ( the camera plus lens is a bit heavy for stability ). To test your cameras just setup the scope on a tripod in your garden and insert the camera lens into the rubber eyecup of your eyepiece and take some test photos at various zoom positions. Neil. >Is there somebody out there, please, who could advise a wanna-be >digiscoper where and how to start? I'm a relatively capable >photographer using a Rebel Xsi and various p& s cameras that I've >acquired through the years, have a great Swarovski 80 ATS HD angled >scope with the 20-60 zoom and have been birding all my life. Now- >what do I need and where do I get it? Any help would be >appreciated. Jill > Subject: Where to start? From: "mydoghowdy" <llhowdreth AT gmail.com> Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:57:50 -0000 Is there somebody out there, please, who could advise a wanna-be digiscoper where and how to start? I'm a relatively capable photographer using a Rebel Xsi and various p& s cameras that I've acquired through the years, have a great Swarovski 80 ATS HD angled scope with the 20-60 zoom and have been birding all my life. Now- what do I need and where do I get it? Any help would be appreciated. Jill Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 02:08:04 -0000 > Tomorrow I'll run the test you mentioned, but I'm not  understanding what you mean when you say " If so, that means that some of the light is going through the lens at that prior aperture." The fact that vignetting begins to set in at some aperture (in my case, f/5.6) tells us that the aperture blades must be blocking some light that would otherwise have gotten through. Otherwise, there would be no vignetting (reduction of light at the edges). So some of the light is clearly using the larger opening, but most of the light is traveling along a more narrow path that is closer to f/15. > The next paragraph makes sense except the conclusion I'm drawing  based on what I think you said.  If the pupils lined up perfectly, you would get the performance of the lens at f15.  But they're not lining up perfectly so you're getting performance equal to some larger aperture.  Your lens isn't one reviewed by dpreview, but using the Olympus 50/2.0 review as an example  ( http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_50_2_o20/page3.asp  ), the performance of the lens is significantly better at f5 than at f15.  So I think you're saying that if the pupils were lined up perfectly you'd get worse performance than if they were not lined up perfectly... Not really. The explanation I gave was a bit simplistic and either misleading in its implications or possibly even wrong depending on how you read it. Yes, some of the light is going through the f/4.8 (larger than f/15) opening in the example I gave. But the simple fact is that diffraction has already taken its toll due to the 30x power we are using. The fact that some of the 30x light happens to go through f/4.8 parts of the lens does not undo the effects of diffraction already experienced. (The one thing that could counter it would be a shorter focal length camera lens which would reduce our overall "magnification.") Diffraction is the reason you see the ZD50 lens performing poorly at f/15. All lenses will perform poorly at f/16 with a 12Mp 4/3" sensor. The physics of the situation dictate this. Basically, the fact that some of the light goes through the larger opening of a lens can only act to make matters even worse, since a lens tends to be more poorly corrected at wider apertures. Actual lens performance usually peaks between f/5.6 and f/8 because this is the area where stopping down reduces the effects of lens aberrations before diffraction effects start dominating. Really top notch optics like the ZD50 don't have much of a peak since they are so well corrected. So basically what this tells us is that shooting at 30x with my 40mm Hexanon on a GH1 virtually guarantees me a somewhat soft image when viewed at the pixel level - even if the air is perfectly calm and my optics are "perfect." At 20x with the 40mm, which should yield a best case f/10 number, very good results are probably possible - if I have excellent optics and good clear air. In most cases today with large megapixel camera our digiscoping rigs are limited in image quality by diffraction. We stopped getting significant benefits from more megapixels on our sensors when we went much beyond 7-8Mp. With that pixel count and digiscoping equivalents of around 2000mm, we had reached the point where we were pretty much able to record all the detail that a top-notch 80mm objective could deliver within the known laws of physics. More megapixels doesn't hurt anything, but it doesn't help much either. It just means that the sensor can "see" the diffraction that's been there all along but was made less easy to see with lower pixel count cameras. So basically, unless the theoretical f-number of the rig is around f/5.6 or so (on a GH1 or other 12Mp 4/3" sensor camera), it probably doesn't make much sense concern ourselves about the degree to which the camera lens is acting like the theoretical f-number or the f-number set by the camera/lens. With my rig, f/5.6 would occur if I used an 11x eyepiece which would give me an equivalent focal length of 880mm. At that level of magnification, the camera optics will be a much more significant factor in overall image quality. We should see excellent results given a good camera lens. But, of course, we don't have that long "digiscoping" reach any more. Phew! I hope that clears things up. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Looking for replacement for PHOTO(NOT)funSTUDIO From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 01:00:06 +0000 (UTC) I've never liked the transfer/viewer software that came with the G1, but yesterday it seemed to "hold on" to some file pointers so that when I moved files from one folder to another, Windows kept thinking they were in the original folder.  Today I searched the web and found some Raw Codec thing from P anasonic that lets  you open .rw2 files with Windows Photo Gallery.  It said it was slow to open .rw2 files, but I never imagined they meant 30-45 seconds per photo .  Is anyone using some other software that will download .rw2 files and that has a decent viewer?  The ideal would be a plug-in that would allow Nikon Transfer to handle .rw2 files, but if there is such a thing I can't find it. Thanks, Tara Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 00:46:03 +0000 (UTC) Jay, Tomorrow I'll run the test you mentioned, but I'm not  understanding what you mean when you say " If so, that means that some of the light is going through the lens at that prior aperture." The next paragraph makes sense except the conclusion I'm drawing  based on what I think you said.  If the pupils lined up perfectly, you would get the performance of the lens at f15.  But they're not lining up perfectly so you're getting performance equal to some larger aperture.  Your lens isn't one reviewed by dpreview, but using the Olympus 50/2.0 review as an example  ( http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_50_2_o20/page3.asp  ), the performance of the lens is significantly better at f5 than at f15.  So I think you're saying that if the pupils were lined up perfectly you'd get worse performance than if they were not lined up perfectly... One more time please . Thanks, Tara   ----- Original Message ----- From: "wturber" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 6, 2010 5:33:45 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1   > Since the effective aperture is determined by the scope and eyepiece, when you spin the little aperture dial at the bottom of the test page, should you be looking at the results for f2.8 (if you're going to shoot wide open), or should you calculate the effective f value for your scope + eyepiece + lens and look at the test results for that f stop? Assuming that you have the pupils perfectly coincident (fore/aft), then the image quality from the effective aperture would give accurate performance info. But we often don't have perfect or near perfect pupil matching. One thing you can do is to shoot a picture of the even blue sky or some other evenly lit surface or area. Now take a series of pictures, stopping the aperture down a bit for each picture. Is there a place where the image starts to become unevenly illuminated? If so, that means that some of the light is going through the lens at that prior aperture. So when you shoot, the lens performance is a mix of the theoretical f-number and this larger aperture, smaller f-number. As an example, when I shoot with the ATS80HD at 30x with the 40mm f/1.8 Hexanon, the scope's exit pupil is 2.67mm (80mm/30power = 2.67mm). That equates to an f-number of f/15 (40mm/2.67mm = 14.98). But I know that the pupils don't match up perfectly because I get vignetting that begins at f/5.6. So the real lens performance is some mix of about f/4.8 and f/15 with the center image performance being more like you'd expect from f/15 and the edge performance being more of a mix. If the lens does not vignette when you stop down, then the pupils are probably pretty close to coincident and the calculated f-number is probably about right. I hope that clarifies more than it confuses. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Bruce deGraaf <brucedegraaf AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:23:59 -0800 (PST) Roy, What adapter did you buy for the SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm lens? Thanks, Bruce deGraaf Shrewsbury, MA brucedegraaf.zenfolio.com ________________________________ From: Roy Halpin To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 8:35:34 AM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda. com ------------ --------- --------- ------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogrou ps.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:33:45 -0000 > Since the effective aperture is determined by the scope and eyepiece, when you spin the little aperture dial at the bottom of the test page, should you be looking at the results for f2.8 (if you're going to shoot wide open), or should you calculate the effective f value for your scope + eyepiece + lens and look at the test results for that f stop? Assuming that you have the pupils perfectly coincident (fore/aft), then the image quality from the effective aperture would give accurate performance info. But we often don't have perfect or near perfect pupil matching. One thing you can do is to shoot a picture of the even blue sky or some other evenly lit surface or area. Now take a series of pictures, stopping the aperture down a bit for each picture. Is there a place where the image starts to become unevenly illuminated? If so, that means that some of the light is going through the lens at that prior aperture. So when you shoot, the lens performance is a mix of the theoretical f-number and this larger aperture, smaller f-number. As an example, when I shoot with the ATS80HD at 30x with the 40mm f/1.8 Hexanon, the scope's exit pupil is 2.67mm (80mm/30power = 2.67mm). That equates to an f-number of f/15 (40mm/2.67mm = 14.98). But I know that the pupils don't match up perfectly because I get vignetting that begins at f/5.6. So the real lens performance is some mix of about f/4.8 and f/15 with the center image performance being more like you'd expect from f/15 and the edge performance being more of a mix. If the lens does not vignette when you stop down, then the pupils are probably pretty close to coincident and the calculated f-number is probably about right. I hope that clarifies more than it confuses. Jay www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "h2otara" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:22:31 -0000 Jay, I checked that lens on dpreview and it tests as having quite a bit of chromatic abberation: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_25_2p8_o20/page3.asp ...which brings up a question I thought of when I was looking at the test data and thought "Jay will know the answer to this." Since the effective aperture is determined by the scope and eyepiece, when you spin the little aperture dial at the bottom of the test page, should you be looking at the results for f2.8 (if you're going to shoot wide open), or should you calculate the effective f value for your scope + eyepiece + lens and look at the test results for that f stop? Thanks. You are a wealth of useful information! Tara --- In digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com, "wturber" wrote: > > Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. > > Jay Turberville > www.jayandwanda.com > Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 05:35:34 -0800 (PST) Hello Jay, Good to hear from you. I know some folk have a problem with Pentax lenses, they are rarely mentioned. At one time they were a great company that made super products, I worked for them for many years. There problem is that they never spoke of their accomplishments. Like they invented anti reflective coatings that every one uses today with variations. It was developed for NASA, instead of filing for an international patten Pentax gave the discover to the world. Pentax invented the Point and Shoot camera back in the 35mm days, Canon marketed the idea and the world thinks they developed that concept. You are asking yourself what's the point? There is an incredible K mount lens that is available as a used lens. SMC Pentax-M 1:3.5 28mm. I use it alot with my G1 and a dumb adapter that I purchased from eBay. It is as sharp as my 40mm pancake Pentax lens. $64 for the lens and $30 for the adapter. I think it would be hard pressed to get a lens that is 5% better for any price. Roy Halpin Florida ________________________________ From: wturber To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com ------------------------------------ Please post bird photos to our other group birds-pix AT yahoogroups.com.Yahoo! Groups Links Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 05:15:23 -0800 (PST) Hi Mike Thanks for the clarification. I must learn to read more carfully. Roy ________________________________ From: Mike Grant To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, February 2, 2010 12:54:41 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 Roy, I actually spent 5-6 hours with Clay. I was on his Friday afternoon Digiscoping trek and spent an hour or so at the Swarovski booth checking out their Universal Camera Adapter on Saturday. I did not say that the Summilux was 'too' fast, rather extremely fast. I was amazed at the pictures that I could take inside my house after dark without a flash. The Summilux does support AutoFocus Single (AFS) on the G1 with the Panasonic four thirds to micro four thirds adapter. It does not support AutoFocus Continuous (AFC). I can get vignette free images by using the Olympus 50mm four thirds lens that I have so the 'least expensive' thing for me to do is to return the 25mm, but I don't think that I will do that. fEven if it doens't work well for digiscoping I will use the 25mm lens for other things as it is so much better than the kit lens. I do intend to shoot some digiscoping test shots to compare usable width of picture and shutter speeds to what I get with the 50mm. My guess is that I am going to be happier with the 20mm F/1.7 pancake because of its size, weight and compatibility for digiscoping. And the 25mm really looks impressive on the G1 with the lens hood attached. Somebody might mistake me for a real photographer... ;-) Mike Grant --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Roy Halpin wrote: >From: Roy Halpin >Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 >To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com >Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 3:29 PM > > > >Hi Mike > >I didn't see you at the Space Coast Festival. Angie, Tara, Clay Taylor and Jeff were there, any of us could have help you one on one. > >I do not understand about your comment the Summilux being too fast. Please explain. > >I never expected the Summilux lens to Auto Focus, may be there is firm ware that will make the correction, I don't know if it is available. > >As far as the vignetting is concerned there is a problem with wide angle lenses needing more eye relief than a standard lens. > > * A 40mm lens like the Konica or Pentax should provide a vignette free image but no auto focusing. > * I know that there is no problem with the Kowa 25X long eye relief eyepiece and a 25mm lens. > * A bracket like the Kowa TSN-DA3 or TSN-DA3st gives more flexibility to adjust the distance between the lens and eyepiece. (this would be used instead of the DCA). >The least expensive thing to do is to crop you photos. One can crop 50% and still have 6MP to work with. Ten years ago when I started my first camera was 2.1MP and I shot nice photos. > >Roy Halpin > > > > > > ________________________________ From: Mike Grant >To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com >Sent: Mon, February 1, 2010 10:36:36 PM >Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 > > > > >I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening. I could not make the vignette go away. Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won’t make the vignette go away. > >It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have. It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider. However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens. The extra length means that it doesn’t fit my custom camera adapter either. That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway. > >I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast. > >I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend. I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots. While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped. I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price. > >Mike Grant >Chesterfield, MO > > > Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: "Scott Walker" <sdwalker AT cox.net> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 11:55:33 -0800 Different battery chemistries respond differently to peak power draws. Alkaline batteries store a fair amount of energy but do not like to give it up quickly. NiMH are much less sensitive to the power draw. Whether one draws .1 amps off a NiMH or .5 amps, the amount of amp-hrs that can be drawn off the NiMH battery is about the same. Scott Walker ----- Original Message ----- From: bom To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning Hi Rick I used rechargeable 2700mAh NiMH batteries with my previous camera (Canon A560) and these worked fine (i.e acceptable battery life both in terms of days active when not in use as well as numbers of pics with or without flash) in the A590 for a few months. Then three sets of these same batteries failed in one weekend. Newly-purchased Kodak brand single-use batteries failed similarly. I purchased new rechargeables from a reliable camera shop and these also failed in double-quick time. When I refer to the manual it says I should expect to get approx 200 pics using the single-use batteries supplied with the camera under stated test conditions ( flash, zoom, etc). I got less than half of that quantity without using the flash and zoom as often as I should. Batteries rejected as flat by the A590 show good voltage on the voltmeter and continue to work in the A560 and various other appliances. If you haven't had these problems I can see why you would question my statements. On the other hand, if you did have these problems........... I had higher expectations of the Canon brand and will happily swap mine for yours. I guess you won't grab that opportunity but I'd be very interested in knowing what battery you suggest I should use. All the best barry Rick wrote: I have been using that camera for several years so I would question you statements about the A590, I have never encountered a battery problem, I suspect that folks were not using batteries designed for digital cameras. bom wrote: Hi John Whatever you choose to do, make absolutely sure that the Canon A590IS is NOWHERE NEAR your list of considerations. I know it is often recommended here as a digiscoping point 'n' shoot with excellent specs, and while that may well be true, it is poxed with a power problem that seriously limits the number of pics per set of batteries - sometimes as little as 30 pics per set!! Don't touch it with a barge-pole! (don't even think of touching it with somone else's barge pole). Good luck with a better choice and bon voyage to CR barry John wrote: I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not taking my DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD angled and the DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good point and shoot as a digiscoping camera. Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I can spend about $400 if necessary. Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the scope at home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure would like to cut down a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking the XL2 vid camera as well! Thanks. John Lowry -- Barry O'Mahony Cork, Ireland __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4836 (20100204) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com -- Rick Fargo, ND N 46°53'251" W 096°48'279" Remember the USS Liberty http://www.ussliberty.org/ Reply to: fholbrookatcableone.net -- Barry O'Mahony Cork, Ireland Subject: Re: Zeiss Digiscoping Tip From: Debbie Z <queeniequilter AT yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:11:20 -0800 (PST) Steve, I think there are a lot of members of this forum who are still rank beginners like me, and appreciate reading about the basics anytime; and there must be new members joining every day.  So much of the recent lens discussions are WAY over my head . . . I was glad to read about something that makes sense to me.  Thanks for thinking of us so we can continue to learn from those with more experience. Debbie Z --- On Fri, 2/5/10, Stephen Ingraham wrote: From: Stephen Ingraham Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Zeiss Digiscoping Tip To: "digiscopingbirds" Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 7:50 AM   Prefocus/Selective Focus. Be ready for the action. http://zeisssports. wordpress. com/2010/ 02/05/digiscopin g-tip-25/ I know this is kind of teaching your grandmother to suck eggs to you frequent flyers on here...but someone might find it useful. -- Steve Ingraham lightshedder: www.lightshedder. com Point and Shoot Landscape: Pic of the Day Cloudy Days and Netbook Nights: Subject: Re: Digiscoping Beginner - Canon 450D (Rebel XSi), Advice Please? From: Frank Barkhofen <pieczy AT googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 18:11:49 +0100 On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 5:59 AM, bingersgolf88 wrote: > > > Would it be advisable to digiscope for bird photography or to purchase a > lens such as the sigma 150-500? Thanks! > Hi, I started to take pictures of birds with a 520mm focus length bridge cam. During that I realized that 500mm is not enough. You can't take pictures without disturbing the birds. I tried - take a picture, two steps closer, next picture .... May be waiting in some hides. That was my personal reason to start with digiscoping. I suggest to borrow the lens you want for your cam and try it over a weekend. That is not cheap, but you will get a better feeling, what is possible and what not and avoid a mispurchase. Digiscoping on the other hand is not _that_ easy, it's hard to take shots of flying birds, which is may be possible with a long lens. Just my 2 cents, Frank Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: Frank Barkhofen <pieczy AT googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 17:57:52 +0100 On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:04 PM, bom wrote: > THanks for that info. John (jwjenks) recently recommended Sanyo Eneloop and > Rayovac so I have a few positive options. > I wanted also suggest the Eneloop, but noticed, this was already done. I've read in a test report (model flying usage) about that cells, that the Eneloop are still NiMH and not with the highest available capacity, but better characteristics. Sanyo has not enhanced the best properties of NiMh, but enhanced the weak points (e.g. self-discharge and voltage during usage). I have used such cells in a A590 without problems. Regards Frank Subject: Zeiss Digiscoping Tip From: Stephen Ingraham <lightshedder AT gmail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 10:50:37 -0500 Prefocus/Selective Focus. Be ready for the action. http://zeisssports.wordpress.com/2010/02/05/digiscoping-tip-25/ I know this is kind of* teaching your grandmother to suck eggs* to you frequent flyers on here...but someone might find it useful. -- Steve Ingraham lightshedder: www.lightshedder.com Point and Shoot Landscape: Pic of the Day Cloudy Days and Netbook Nights: Subject: Digiscoping Beginner - Canon 450D (Rebel XSi), Advice Please? From: "bingersgolf88" <j_low01 AT hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:59:05 -0000 Hi, I just joined this group after figuring out what digiscoping really is. I currently have a Canon 450D with the kit lens, 17-40mm f4.0 L lens, and 55-250 f/4-5.6 lens. Does someone have advice on which spotting scope to use and how to properly hook up my camera with it? Would it be advisable to digiscope for bird photography or to purchase a lens such as the sigma 150-500? Thanks! Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: bom <bomah AT eircom.net> Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:04:57 +0000 Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: Rick <FHolbrook AT cableone.net> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:30:36 -0600 Hi Barry, I have been using Duracell rechargeable AA's (Mignon/HR6/DX1500). I have also used Duracell AA Power PIX. the latter did not last as long as the former. I found that a lot --almost all rechargeable batteries gave very poor service. I am guessing that I have gotten at least 200 pictures with the rechargeable Duracells. bom wrote: > > > Hi Rick > > I used rechargeable 2700mAh NiMH batteries with my previous camera > (Canon A560) and these worked fine (i.e acceptable battery life both > in terms of days active when not in use as well as numbers of pics > with or without flash) in the A590 for a few months. Then three sets > of these same batteries failed in one weekend. Newly-purchased Kodak > brand single-use batteries failed similarly. I purchased new > rechargeables from a reliable camera shop and these also failed in > double-quick time. > > When I refer to the manual it says I should expect to get approx 200 > pics using the single-use batteries supplied with the camera under > stated test conditions ( flash, zoom, etc). I got less than half of > that quantity without using the flash and zoom as often as I should. > Batteries rejected as flat by the A590 show good voltage on the > voltmeter and continue to work in the A560 and various other > appliances. If you haven't had these problems I can see why you would > question my statements. On the other hand, if you did have these > problems........... > > I had higher expectations of the Canon brand and will happily swap > mine for yours. > > I guess you won't grab that opportunity but I'd be very interested in > knowing what battery you suggest I should use. > > > All the best > > barry > > > > > > Rick wrote: > >> >> >> >> I have been using that camera for several years so I would question >> you statements about the A590, I have never encountered a battery >> problem, I suspect that folks were not using batteries designed for >> digital cameras. >> >> bom wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Hi John >>> >>> Whatever you choose to do, make absolutely sure that the Canon >>> A590IS is NOWHERE NEAR your list of considerations. I know it is >>> often recommended here as a digiscoping point 'n' shoot with >>> excellent specs, and while that may well be true, it is poxed with a >>> power problem that seriously limits the number of pics per set of >>> batteries - sometimes as little as 30 pics per set!! >>> >>> Don't touch it with a barge-pole! (don't even think of touching it >>> with somone else's barge pole). >>> >>> Good luck with a better choice and bon voyage to CR >>> >>> barry >>> >>> >>> John wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not >>>> taking my DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD >>>> angled and the DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good >>>> point and shoot as a digiscoping camera. >>>> >>>> Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I >>>> can spend about $400 if necessary. >>>> >>>> Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the >>>> scope at home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure >>>> would like to cut down a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking >>>> the XL2 vid camera as well! >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> John Lowry >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Barry O'Mahony >>> Cork, Ireland >>> >>> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >>> signature database 4836 (20100204) __________ >>> >>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >>> >>> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> -- >> >> Rick >> Fargo, ND >> N 46°53'251" >> W 096°48'279" >> >> >> Remember the USS Liberty >> http://www.ussliberty.org/ >> >> Reply to: fholbrookatcableone.net >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Barry O'Mahony > Cork, Ireland > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 4836 (20100204) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com -- Rick Fargo, ND N 46°53'251" W 096°48'279" Remember the USS Liberty http://www.ussliberty.org/ Reply to: fholbrookatcableone.net Subject: Re: Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:29:35 -0000 > The shots look sharp but is there some vignetting. > > Bob Yes. This was my second outing with the GH1 and I had concluded that vignetting was gone or at least gone enough with the 40mm Hexanon stopped down to f/5.6. Closer examination shows that is not the case. f/4 seems more like it. I was hoping to do more trials this weekend, but realize I have a table tennis tournament. I'll look at some of my shots to see if I have some that will confirm whether or not vignetting goes away at larger apertures. I think it does based on how I saw the histogram give a nice narrow band at f/4 and below. Jay Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: bom <bomah AT eircom.net> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:55:34 +0000 Subject: Re: Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 From: Bob Thompson <jingbar AT gmail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:43:25 +0800 Jay, The shots look sharp but is there some vignetting. Bob On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM, wturber wrote: > > > OK - I uploaded some of the clips I shot this morning using the GH1 The rig > consisted of: > GH1 > 4/3s to m4/3s adapter (the Panasonic one) > 40mm f/1.8 Hexanon lens - crude home-brew adaptation > Swarovski ATS 80 HD with 20-60x eyepiece. > Swarovski DCA adapter with homebrew step up ring from 52mm to 55mm. > > None of the clips were post processed. > > I shot at either 20x (1600mm equivalent)or 30x (2400mm equivalent). It is > super important to have clear air. Turbulence shows up quickly. 30x over > distance tends to be soft due to turbulence. It isn't too bad at closer > distances. 20x is pretty good and actually quite nice at close distances. I > expected better performance than I got. Right now I think the difference > between expectations and reality come down to air quality issues. Today's > results were much better than last Sunday's. > > You can find the five clips at: > http://www.youtube.com/wturber > > > Subject: C-a590is power hog From: "jwjenks2001" <jwjenks AT netzero.net> Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:14:01 -0000 Since I'm too embarrassed to post my digiscoping shots with my low rent Celestron 100ED, I'll comment on something I know a little about. Yes the Canon A590is is an energy hog that demands higher current than most. But..... Oh those of you with little electrical storage experience. There are several rechargables that can handle the Canon 590is; They are from; My top 2 to just good: 1. NiMH chemistry, enelope from Sanyo, yes the first letter in the name is lower case. These pack good power and have a shelf life of 6 months and can handle the higher current requirements it's only 1.2 volts but works well. Amazon - of course 2. Then there is the new kid on the block. A rechargable battery that is a virtual dynamo and pushes 1.6 volts out the ends - as much as your regular alkaline cells. It's the PowerGenix, with NiZn chemistry, my preference, and I have it in my C-590is. And it still has plenty of power after 200 shots, about 50 with flash. It's been in my 590 camera about a month. Just to be sure I just took 30 more flash pictures with it while writing this. Still no low battery symbol. Amazon again. 3. Then there is the "good" RAYOVAC Hybrid rechargable, good power, long shelf life. NIMH 1.2 v. Some are suggesting it's a relabeled Sanyo enelope. RAYOVAC makes two rechargables, don't get the cheapies. It's got to say Hybrid. Target in the Phila area. I have all three and many more brands. These are on the top of my list. I'm giving away my other brands of rechargables to my mother and children for their remotes. Done lots of tests.... These are significantly better than the other rechargable NiMHs out there. Hey, as the previous post noted, there are many of the regular alkaline cells can't handle the power hungry PS cameras. John Subject: Re: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? From: Len Blumin <Len.blumin AT gmail.com> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 14:31:48 -0800 Jay/others- There were new "Body Only" GH1's on ebay today from an authorized dealer for $750! Dealer has 100% positive feedback. see: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140380667158&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1123#ht_9630wt_743 Len On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:12 AM, wturber wrote: > > > This doesn't exactly answer your question since it is well outside of the > price ceiling you mentioned. But with a GH1 w/14-140mm HD lens, 70-300mm ZD > lens, 4/3s to m4/3s adapter, Konica 40mm f/1.8 lens and adapter, you'd have > all your digiscoping, telephoto and video needs well in hand. > > OK -that's lots more than you want to spend, of course. But with that kind > of multi-purpose capability in mind, I'd be thinking about maybe getting a > G1 (or a GH1 body only if I could locate such a deal) with the idea in mind > of expanding the system over time. It's still over you budget. But with my > recent experiences using the GH1, I'm not sure if I'll be using my CP8400 or > C7070 (two cameras I've liked a lot) much in the future. I'm still > experimenting and exploring a bit, but that's where my head is right now. > > For some reason Panasonic is releasing "body only" GH1s in the UK but > apparently not anywhere else. I'd rather like to have an extra body at some > time in the future. Hopefully a new and improved G2. > > Jay Turberville > www.jayandwanda.com > > > -- Cheers, Len Blumin, Mill Valley, California len.blumin AT gmail.com Swaro 80 HD, 30X, DCA, CoolPix 8400 http://www.flickriver.com/photos/lenblumin/sets/72157614994688364/ Subject: RE: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? From: "Tara T" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 14:37:23 -0500 Hi John, I can't tell from your post if you've done much digiscoping, but if it were me, I don't think I'd want to have the opportunities you'll have in Costa Rica and have gear that I wasn't very familiar with. If you haven't digiscoped much, I would really consider taking the long lens instead. If I'm not mistaken, many of your shots there will be in relatively low light, which would make the 400 lens a better option for being able to get acceptable shutter speeds. If you were to get a digisoping camera, I would recommend the Panasonic G1 or Nikon P6000, which would both run you more than $400, plus you'd need adapters. I don't have an SLR or long lens, and digiscope exclusively, but it took me a while to start getting photos I was happy with. Have a wonderful trip-I hear this is the best time of year for birds. Tara Tanaka http://www.flickr.com/photos/focused-on-birds _____ From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:55 AM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not taking my DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD angled and the DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good point and shoot as a digiscoping camera. Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I can spend about $400 if necessary. Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the scope at home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure would like to cut down a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking the XL2 vid camera as well! Thanks. John Lowry Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: Rick <FHolbrook AT cableone.net> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 13:30:42 -0600 I have been using that camera for several years so I would question you statements about the A590, I have never encountered a battery problem, I suspect that folks were not using batteries designed for digital cameras. bom wrote: > > > Hi John > > Whatever you choose to do, make absolutely sure that the Canon A590IS > is NOWHERE NEAR your list of considerations. I know it is often > recommended here as a digiscoping point 'n' shoot with excellent > specs, and while that may well be true, it is poxed with a power > problem that seriously limits the number of pics per set of batteries > - sometimes as little as 30 pics per set!! > > Don't touch it with a barge-pole! (don't even think of touching it > with somone else's barge pole). > > Good luck with a better choice and bon voyage to CR > > barry > > > John wrote: > >> >> >> I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not taking >> my DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD angled >> and the DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good point and >> shoot as a digiscoping camera. >> >> Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I >> can spend about $400 if necessary. >> >> Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the >> scope at home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure would >> like to cut down a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking the XL2 >> vid camera as well! >> >> Thanks. >> >> John Lowry >> > > -- > Barry O'Mahony > Cork, Ireland > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 4836 (20100204) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com -- Rick Fargo, ND N 46°53'251" W 096°48'279" Remember the USS Liberty http://www.ussliberty.org/ Reply to: fholbrookatcableone.net Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: Don Morgan <mntncougar AT gmail.com> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 14:14:23 -0500 I don't recommend the A590 because I think others like the Nikon P6000 are much better, but I solved the battery problem by switching to good quality rechargeable batteries. I could leave the camera on for a couple of hours and take one hundred or more pics - and I agree that alkaline would only get 30 or so. Don Coventry, Ct On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:10 PM, bom wrote: > > > Hi John > > Whatever you choose to do, make absolutely sure that the Canon A590IS is > NOWHERE NEAR your list of considerations. I know it is often recommended > here as a digiscoping point 'n' shoot with excellent specs, and while that > may well be true, it is poxed with a power problem that seriously limits the > number of pics per set of batteries - sometimes as little as 30 pics per > set!! > > Don't touch it with a barge-pole! (don't even think of touching it with > somone else's barge pole). > > Good luck with a better choice and bon voyage to CR > > barry > > > John wrote: > > > > I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not taking my > DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD angled and the > DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good point and shoot as a > digiscoping camera. > > Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I can > spend about $400 if necessary. > > Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the scope at > home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure would like to cut down > a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking the XL2 vid camera as well! > > Thanks. > > John Lowry > > > -- > Barry O'Mahony > Cork, Ireland > > > Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? - a warning From: bom <bomah AT eircom.net> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:10:57 +0000 Subject: Re: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:12:16 -0000 This doesn't exactly answer your question since it is well outside of the price ceiling you mentioned. But with a GH1 w/14-140mm HD lens, 70-300mm ZD lens, 4/3s to m4/3s adapter, Konica 40mm f/1.8 lens and adapter, you'd have all your digiscoping, telephoto and video needs well in hand. OK -that's lots more than you want to spend, of course. But with that kind of multi-purpose capability in mind, I'd be thinking about maybe getting a G1 (or a GH1 body only if I could locate such a deal) with the idea in mind of expanding the system over time. It's still over you budget. But with my recent experiences using the GH1, I'm not sure if I'll be using my CP8400 or C7070 (two cameras I've liked a lot) much in the future. I'm still experimenting and exploring a bit, but that's where my head is right now. For some reason Panasonic is releasing "body only" GH1s in the UK but apparently not anywhere else. I'd rather like to have an extra body at some time in the future. Hopefully a new and improved G2. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Swaro scope / DCA...but what camera? From: "John" <john AT kingbird.org> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:54:40 -0000 I'm preparing for a trip to Costa Rica and I'm considering not taking my DSLR and Tamron 400 lens at all. I have a Swarovski 80 HD angled and the DCA, but I've never really felt like I had a good point and shoot as a digiscoping camera. Are there two or three cameras I should closely consider? I think I can spend about $400 if necessary. Or am I going about this wrong, and should I consider leaving the scope at home and taking the long lens with the camera. I sure would like to cut down a bit on the extra stuff. I will be taking the XL2 vid camera as well! Thanks. John Lowry Subject: Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:54:25 -0000 The flange to focal length distance on a Nikon is a bit more than 40mm as I recall. Now the rear lens element can protrude into the mirror chamber a bit, but not a whole lot or else the mirror will it it. A 35mm lens isn't very far off from that distance, so its design can be one that isn't very retro-focus. But a 25mm lens is lots shorter. Now add to this that the retro-focus part has to cover a relatively wide format (over 42mm on the diagonal for 35mm film) and you end up with a pretty big front lens and possibly a recessed entrance pupil. One of the advantages of micro 4/3s is that the flange to focal distance is short. So a 25mm lens can be made that is very close to symmetrical. That means you should be able to get very good performance from it with just a few small and rather non-exotic elements. An old Pen-F lens might exist that would fit the bill very nicely. Of course, it wouldn't autofocus. The same might go for a rangefinder lens since they don't have to clear a flippin' mirror. The ability to mount the lens closer is why wides for rangefinders could be so much smaller. The same goes for micro 4/3s. And, of course, by all means investigate the 25-50mm lens. Maybe it will be great. I'm just not hopeful. In the meantime, I'm thinking about enlarger lenses. :^) > Jay, > I have a Nikon 35 -70/3.3-4.5 AIS zoom which will work ok > although the lens is recessed about a 1/2 inch. It's only rated > 3.5 though whereas the 25 - 50 zoom is rated 4.5. I prefer the range > of 25 - 50 too as 70 mm is way too much on the G1. I won't buy one > sight-unseen though as I almost made that mistake with the Olympus 35 > mm Macro which is seriously recessed. > Neil > > > >My concern would be that it is a wide of retrofocus design and that > >the entrance pupil might be inset fairly deeply. Of course, you > >just don't know until you look down the barrel and/or try one. If > >something like this were to be made specifically for micro 4/3s, it > >would be a more likely winner. > > > >Jay > > > > > Subject: Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 14:49:03 +0800 Jay, I have a Nikon 35 -70/3.3-4.5 AIS zoom which will work ok although the lens is recessed about a 1/2 inch. It's only rated 3.5 though whereas the 25 - 50 zoom is rated 4.5. I prefer the range of 25 - 50 too as 70 mm is way too much on the G1. I won't buy one sight-unseen though as I almost made that mistake with the Olympus 35 mm Macro which is seriously recessed. Neil >My concern would be that it is a wide of retrofocus design and that >the entrance pupil might be inset fairly deeply. Of course, you >just don't know until you look down the barrel and/or try one. If >something like this were to be made specifically for micro 4/3s, it >would be a more likely winner. > >Jay > > Subject: Re: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:53:31 -0000 My concern would be that it is a wide of retrofocus design and that the entrance pupil might be inset fairly deeply. Of course, you just don't know until you look down the barrel and/or try one. If something like this were to be made specifically for micro 4/3s, it would be a more likely winner. Jay Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:44:06 -0000 Thanks for the info, Neil. I'm not sure if you looked at that Black-throated sparrow I posted a link to a few days ago (my website is currently down though - I hope to have it back up tonight), but that was taken with the 40mm Hexanon and I was pretty pleased - especially when the image was sized down closer to the pixel count of the 8400 and C7070. But I haven't done a side-by-side comparison yet. In fact, I've been using the Swarovski ATS80HD because it focuses so much nicer than the Rubinar lens. Maybe I'll do a careful comparison in the next couple of weeks. Even though I'd prefer a shorter focal length, it still gives me about a 1600mm to 2400mm working range when used with the 20-60x eyepiece. Jay > I did some tests early on with the Olympus 25/2.8 P against > the Panasonic kit zoom. There was little in it but the 25/2.8 > doesn't AF internally so needs to be mounted separately. > Quality-wise the 20/1.7 P seems a little better than the 25/2.8 P . > None are as good as the Nikon 8400 and Olympus 7070wz lenses. The > Nikon 20/2.8 D is still the best I've tested for digiscoping on the > G1,although a little short. > I'd love to have the Leica. > Neil Subject: Nikon 25-50/f4 for digiscoping From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:55:05 +0800 This MF zoom gets a good rap and could be worthwhile for digiscoping. I'll try and find one here . Neil " Zoom-Nikkor 25-50 mm f/4 Never a volume seller in its days, this long discontinued lens exemplifies the good qualities achievable by a zoom without colour aberrations. Images are sharp corner-to-corner and light fall-off is very low even wide open. It quickly attains peak sharpness at f/5.6 and the image quality holds up well when the lens is stopped down, so even f/16 delivers good results. Compared to e.g. the 20-35 Nikkor, centre sharpness is slightly lower, but corners are much better. Field curvature is moderate and the same holds for the barrel distortion. A crisp rendition extends into the depth-of-field zone to make this an excellent choice for landscape photography. In fact, this was my preferred lens against modern zooms for this very application. Compared to most zooms, the 25-50 is very resistant to flare and ghosting is kept to low levels whenever the front element is carefully cleaned. This is one of my favourite lenses for the F2, F4 and F5 cameras, and it handles nicely, too. You could complain about a rotating front end but that's just nit-picking. A great lens that is sold cheap on the second-hand market. My F2 Titan would be naked without this zoom lens. Later development shows this even might apply to the D2X for landscape work. Thus, the venerable 25-50 is able to produce silky-smooth images when it is attached to the D2X. There is a roundness and tactility to the image that makes the 25-50 downright enchanting. You might get slightly sharper images with other lenses, but hardly more pleasing to the photographic, inner eye. The virtual lack of distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberration helps the 25-50 to project its endearing image quality onto the imaging sensor of the D2X. On the D3, the 25-50 interacts less gracefully and if you intend to use it on the FX camera, near subjects probably will come out better than landscapes." http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_01.html#MF25-50 Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: neilfif11 <neilfif11 AT yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:39:03 +0800 Jay, I did some tests early on with the Olympus 25/2.8 P against the Panasonic kit zoom. There was little in it but the 25/2.8 doesn't AF internally so needs to be mounted separately. Quality-wise the 20/1.7 P seems a little better than the 25/2.8 P . None are as good as the Nikon 8400 and Olympus 7070wz lenses. The Nikon 20/2.8 D is still the best I've tested for digiscoping on the G1,although a little short. I'd love to have the Leica. Neil >Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned >previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro >4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around >25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically >not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would >be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now >the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. >I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences >with this lens. > >Jay Turberville >www.jayandwanda.com > > Subject: Re: Off Topic: New website From: Frank Barkhofen <pieczy AT googlemail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 20:43:01 +0100 On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:25 PM, xmartinezperona wrote: > > > Hi all, > I send this message to present my new website > http://www.xaviermartinez.com/ where you can find images of birds take > with both digiscoping and camera+lens techniques. > I hope you like it. > Hi Xavier, thanks for sharing, very nice shots! Regards Frank Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Steve Sosensky <steve AT optics4birding.com> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:37:35 -0800 Hi Mike, Here are a few photo basics that might help you understand. In all optics formulae, the focal length of the lens is represented by "f", always in lower case. The lens opening (aperture) is represented as a fraction of the focal length, and is written as "f/" some number. f/2 means that the aperture is the focal length divided by 2. For a 100mm f/2 lens, the maximum aperture has a diameter of 50m or a radius of 25mm. The main f/numbers (1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, and 32) differ by the square root of 2, so when you square them to get the area of the opening, each gives a difference in exposure of a factor of 2. The difference between each f/number is known as an f/stop. A longer focal length lens needs a larger opening to get to the same aperture. Think of an exposure as a cylinder with the circular base being the aperture and the length being the shutter speed. Since shutter speeds represent a length instead of an area, the difference between the main shutter speeds (1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8,...,1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, ... of a second) also give a difference of a factor of 2. Theoretically, any two exposures that result in the same volume of light in the cylinder will be equivalent. So if f/2 AT 1/500 sec gives a proper exposure, then so will f/2.8 AT 1/250, f/4 AT 1/125, etc. This is called the law of reciprocity. In actuality, there are circumstances where the law of reciprocity breaks down. This is called reciprocity failure, and it occurs when exposure times are very short or very long. You can use the law of reciprocity to creative effects. A smaller aperture increases depth of field. A slower shutter speed records moving subjects at a blur (try shooting a stream at 1/2 second). The same aperture always gives the same real depth of field, however increasing focal length changes perspective to "compress" the way we see this depth of field. If you took two lenses set to the same aperture and stopped them down using DoF Preview to see the way the image would be rendered when they are the same distance from the subject, and you put markers at the extremes of your field of focus, the markers would be in about the same place, but the longer focal length lens would make them look closer together. BTW, a faster lens does not necessarily mean a better quality glass. It only means a wider piece of glass, a bigger lens barrel, and usually more weight are required to get the larger aperture. Glass and coating quality may only be compared when comparing lenses of the same speed and focal length. This will usually be reflected in the price. So, all that a "faster" lens means is that it has a larger maximum aperture, so you can shoot at a faster shutter speed at maximum aperture. In the above example, if you had an f/1.4 lens and were shooting wide open, you would shoot at 1/1000 sec. At 10:14 AM 2/3/2010, Mike Grant wrote: >A question on exposure, and not really a true digiscoping question: > >I understand that in lens speak, "faster" means a lens with a bigger >aperture. For some reason, I also figured that a "faster" lens >would also be faster (as in faster shutter setting) for any given >aperture setting than a "slower" lens. For instance, I thought the >f/1.4 Leica when set to f/3.5 would give a faster shutter speed than >the kit f/3.5-5.6 zoom lens. But I tested all three lenses that I >have last night in the house with fixed lighting and a set ISO and >all three gave exactly the same shutter speed for the same aperture >setting. So I see that I missed that point at sometime. I guess I >figured faster lens - better glass - bigger opening - faster shutter >on the entire range. But that can't be or calculating the correct >exposure (aperture and shutter) would be very difficult if every >lens passed different amounts of light for the same aperture setting. > >So, given that "eureka" moment there, I now ponder the purpose of a >'faster' lens. Doesn't the depth of field decrease when you use >those faster aperture settings? Couldn't you refer to a 'faster' >lens as a narrow depth of field lens? Does every lens give the same >depth of field for the same aperture? > >The real question is, does anybody think the $900 Leica D Summilux >25mm/F1.4 will take pictures that are $500 better than the pictures >that I could get with the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7 Aspheric? Note >also that the Leica lens weighs 1.1 pounds versus the pancakes 3.5 ounces. > >It will probably be the weekend before I can really test the Leica >for digiscoping, but given the weight of it I probably won't use it for that. Good Viewing, Steve Sosensky Vice President www.Optics4Birding.com 19 Hammond Suite 506 N 33.65926 Irvine CA 92618 W 117.70305 877.OP4.BIRD (877.674.2473) Toll Free 818.522.5261 Cell 949.360.OPTX (949.360.6789) Local Subject: Re: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 19:27:11 +0000 (UTC) Lots of great info Jay.  Does anyone know if the Olympus 25mm f/2.8 pancake vignettes at all on the Kowa 20-60x zoom eyepiece? Thanks, Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "wturber" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2010 1:53:52 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1   Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: PhotoScoped Anhingas (Zeiss Digiscope Blog) From: Gina Cicotello <ginacico AT gmail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:55:19 -0500 Steve, Beautiful photo! I'd never seen that detail before, either. I was down for the Space Coast festival last week, and saw perhaps the same green-eyed Anhingas at Viera Wetlands. These shots were taken with a Pentax Optio W60 hand-held to a Vortex Skyline 80 ED scope, with slight touch-ups in Lightroom. http://pasadenagina.smugmug.com/Nature/Central-Florida-26-31-Jan-2010/11131515_tokoY#780036937_FUoQx Gina Cicotello Pasadena, MD On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Stephen Ingraham wrote: > > > at Viera Wetlands, Melbourne FL. I had not seen the green eyes of breeding > plumage before this. > > http://zeisssports.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/zeiss-digisocped-pic-21/ > > -- > Steve Ingraham > lightshedder: www.lightshedder.com > Point and Shoot Landscape: > Pic of the Day > Cloudy Days and Netbook Nights: > > > Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:53:52 -0000 Just to be clear, the near ideal 25mm f/4 lens I mentioned previously would only be near ideal if it were made for the micro 4/3s format or a similar format with a flange distance of around 25mm or so. 25mm f/4 lenses made for 35mm cameras will typically not be good because they'd be designed for wide angles use and would be retrofocus designs that would typically not be ideal. Right now the closest thing I've seen is the 25mm f/2.8 pancake from Olympus. I think I'll search the forum to catch up on any user experiences with this lens. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:35:45 -0000 Quite simply, faster means that the lens has a larger (smaller numerically) maximum aperture. That's it. What this means is that if you avail yourself of that faster aperture you can use a faster shutter speed given the same ISO. But f-numbers between lenses are equivalent. f/2 = f/2 and f/4 = f/4. This is true regardless of focal length or maximum aperture. Now the actual light that hits the sensor might vary a small bit between lenses, but this is typically unimportant for still photography - though motion picture cinematographers do care about this and their lenses sometimes emply T-numbers or T-stops. But for stills, that's just interesting trivia. There are some tendencies. Faster optics tend to be more expensive and higher quality. Of course, this is a tendency and not an absolute rule by any stretch of the imagination. Having a fast lens for digiscoping has little or no advantage. In fact, it probably more typically presents disadvantages in the form of additional cost and size. The perfect digiscoping lens for one of the micro fourthirds cameras would probably have an aperture around f/4 and have internal auto-focus.It might even have a 2x zoom ratio where the entrance pupil wouldn't move around much. The smaller f-number would make the lens more compact and allow the designers more room for the stuff that would provide internal AF. The smaller lens elements would also be less expenive to make. > The real question is, does anybody think the $900 Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4 will take pictures that are $500 better than the pictures that I could get with the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7 Aspheric?  Note also that the Leica lens weighs 1.1 pounds versus the pancakes 3.5 ounces. If it does, it has nothing directly to do with the fact that the Leica is an f/1.4 lens. It would be that the Leica was a better corrected lens - that might indirectly be side-effect of the faster aperture. Right now I'm a fan of my 40mm f/1.8 Hexanon (about $35 used). But I'd rather have a 25mm f/4 if there were such a thing made. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Mike Grant <mocurlew AT att.net> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:14:27 -0800 (PST) A question on exposure, and not really a true digiscoping question:   I understand that in lens speak, "faster" means a lens with a bigger aperture.  For some reason, I also figured that a "faster" lens would also be faster (as in faster shutter setting) for any given aperture setting than a "slower" lens.  For instance, I thought the f/1.4 Leica when set to f/3.5 would give a faster shutter speed than the kit f/3.5-5.6 zoom lens.  But I tested all three lenses that I have last night in the house with fixed lighting and a set ISO and all three gave exactly the same shutter speed for the same aperture setting.  So I see that I missed that point at sometime.  I guess I figured faster lens - better glass - bigger opening - faster shutter on the entire range.  But that can't be or calculating the correct exposure (aperture and shutter) would be very difficult if every lens passed different amounts of light for the same aperture setting.   So, given that "eureka" moment there, I now ponder the purpose of a 'faster' lens.  Doesn't the depth of field decrease when you use those faster aperture settings?  Couldn't you refer to a 'faster' lens as a narrow depth of field lens?  Does every lens give the same depth of field for the same aperture?   The real question is, does anybody think the $900 Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4 will take pictures that are $500 better than the pictures that I could get with the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7 Aspheric?  Note also that the Leica lens weighs 1.1 pounds versus the pancakes 3.5 ounces.    It will probably be the weekend before I can really test the Leica for digiscoping, but given the weight of it I probably won't use it for that.   Mike Grant Chesterfield, MO --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Mike Grant wrote: From: Mike Grant Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 5:54 PM   Roy,   I actually spent 5-6 hours with Clay.  I was on his Friday afternoon Digiscoping trek and spent an hour or so at the Swarovski booth checking out their Universal Camera Adapter on Saturday.   I did not say that the Summilux was 'too' fast, rather extremely fast.  I was amazed at the pictures that I could take inside my house after dark without a flash.   The Summilux does support AutoFocus Single (AFS) on the G1 with the Panasonic four thirds to micro four thirds adapter.  It does not support AutoFocus Continuous (AFC).   I can get vignette free images by using the Olympus 50mm four thirds lens that I have so the 'least expensive' thing for me to do is to return the 25mm, but I don't think that I will do that.  fEven if it doens't work well for digiscoping I will use the 25mm lens for other things as it is so much better than the kit lens.  I do intend to shoot some digiscoping test shots to compare usable width of picture and shutter speeds to what I get with the 50mm.  My guess is that I am going to be happier with the 20mm F/1.7 pancake because of its size, weight and compatibility for digiscoping.    And the 25mm really looks impressive on the G1 with the lens hood attached.  Somebody might mistake me for a real photographer. .. ;-)   Mike Grant --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Roy Halpin wrote: From: Roy Halpin Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 3:29 PM   Hi Mike I didn't see you at the Space Coast Festival.  Angie, Tara, Clay Taylor and Jeff were there, any of us could have help you one on one. I do not understand about your comment the Summilux being too fast.  Please explain. I never expected the Summilux lens to Auto Focus, may be there is firm ware that will make the correction, I don't know if it is available. As far as the vignetting is concerned there is a problem with wide angle lenses needing more eye relief than a standard lens. A 40mm lens like the Konica or Pentax should provide a vignette free image but no auto focusing.  I know that there is no problem with the Kowa 25X long eye relief eyepiece and a 25mm lens.  A bracket like the Kowa TSN-DA3 or TSN-DA3st gives more flexibility to adjust the distance between the lens and eyepiece. (this would be used instead of the DCA). The least expensive thing to do is to crop you photos.  One can crop 50% and still have 6MP to work with.  Ten years ago when I started my first camera was 2.1MP and I shot nice photos. Roy Halpin From: Mike Grant To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, February 1, 2010 10:36:36 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening.  I could not make the vignette go away.  Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won’t make the vignette go away.   It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have.  It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider.  However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens.  The extra length means that it doesn’t fit my custom camera adapter either.  That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway.   I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast.   I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend.  I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots.  While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped.  I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price.   Mike Grant Chesterfield, MO Subject: Off Topic: New website From: "xmartinezperona" <tcapella AT arrakis.es> Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:25:05 -0000 Hi all, I send this message to present my new website http://www.xaviermartinez.com/ where you can find images of birds take with both digiscoping and camera+lens techniques. I hope you like it. Thanks Xavier Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Mike Grant <mocurlew AT att.net> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 09:54:41 -0800 (PST) Roy,   I actually spent 5-6 hours with Clay.  I was on his Friday afternoon Digiscoping trek and spent an hour or so at the Swarovski booth checking out their Universal Camera Adapter on Saturday.   I did not say that the Summilux was 'too' fast, rather extremely fast.  I was amazed at the pictures that I could take inside my house after dark without a flash.   The Summilux does support AutoFocus Single (AFS) on the G1 with the Panasonic four thirds to micro four thirds adapter.  It does not support AutoFocus Continuous (AFC).   I can get vignette free images by using the Olympus 50mm four thirds lens that I have so the 'least expensive' thing for me to do is to return the 25mm, but I don't think that I will do that.  fEven if it doens't work well for digiscoping I will use the 25mm lens for other things as it is so much better than the kit lens.  I do intend to shoot some digiscoping test shots to compare usable width of picture and shutter speeds to what I get with the 50mm.  My guess is that I am going to be happier with the 20mm F/1.7 pancake because of its size, weight and compatibility for digiscoping.    And the 25mm really looks impressive on the G1 with the lens hood attached.  Somebody might mistake me for a real photographer... ;-)   Mike Grant --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Roy Halpin wrote: From: Roy Halpin Subject: Re: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 3:29 PM   Hi Mike I didn't see you at the Space Coast Festival.  Angie, Tara, Clay Taylor and Jeff were there, any of us could have help you one on one. I do not understand about your comment the Summilux being too fast.  Please explain. I never expected the Summilux lens to Auto Focus, may be there is firm ware that will make the correction, I don't know if it is available. As far as the vignetting is concerned there is a problem with wide angle lenses needing more eye relief than a standard lens. A 40mm lens like the Konica or Pentax should provide a vignette free image but no auto focusing.  I know that there is no problem with the Kowa 25X long eye relief eyepiece and a 25mm lens.  A bracket like the Kowa TSN-DA3 or TSN-DA3st gives more flexibility to adjust the distance between the lens and eyepiece. (this would be used instead of the DCA). The least expensive thing to do is to crop you photos.  One can crop 50% and still have 6MP to work with.  Ten years ago when I started my first camera was 2.1MP and I shot nice photos. Roy Halpin From: Mike Grant To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, February 1, 2010 10:36:36 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening.  I could not make the vignette go away.  Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won’t make the vignette go away.   It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have.  It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider.  However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens.  The extra length means that it doesn’t fit my custom camera adapter either.  That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway.   I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast.   I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend.  I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots.  While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped.  I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price.   Mike Grant Chesterfield, MO Subject: thirty power digital cameras From: SiriusGuy AT aol.com Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 10:45:06 EST Not surprisingly, the alternative to digiscoping for some, the "superzoom" compact camera, continues to evolve, with now two THIRTY power zoom models. However of the two just announced, only the Fuji version seems to have an electronic viewfinder that one can use like an SLR or DSLR. up against one's eye; the Olympus counterpart would require one to hold the camera at arm's length, NOT my idea of what would ever work for handheld use. The Fuji yields a range of 24-720 35 mm equivalent, optically and electronically stabilized, the Olympus 28 to 840, either one at f2.8 to f5.6 at the long end. The Fuji has the discretion to limit itself to a 10 megapixel sensory, while the Olympus uses a 14 megapixel version. These are of course NOT pocket cameras. The Fuji is about the size of the smallest APS-C sensor DSLR. As to what these will cost, my guess would be around $500. _http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10020206fujifinepixhs10series.asp_ (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10020206fujifinepixhs10series.asp) Alan Birnbaum Fresno CA Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: Roy Halpin <royhalpin AT yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 07:29:21 -0800 (PST) Hi Mike I didn't see you at the Space Coast Festival. Angie, Tara, Clay Taylor and Jeff were there, any of us could have help you one on one. I do not understand about your comment the Summilux being too fast. Please explain. I never expected the Summilux lens to Auto Focus, may be there is firm ware that will make the correction, I don't know if it is available. As far as the vignetting is concerned there is a problem with wide angle lenses needing more eye relief than a standard lens. * A 40mm lens like the Konica or Pentax should provide a vignette free image but no auto focusing. * I know that there is no problem with the Kowa 25X long eye relief eyepiece and a 25mm lens. * A bracket like the Kowa TSN-DA3 or TSN-DA3st gives more flexibility to adjust the distance between the lens and eyepiece. (this would be used instead of the DCA). The least expensive thing to do is to crop you photos. One can crop 50% and still have 6MP to work with. Ten years ago when I started my first camera was 2.1MP and I shot nice photos. Roy Halpin ________________________________ From: Mike Grant To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, February 1, 2010 10:36:36 PM Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening. I could not make the vignette go away. Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won’t make the vignette go away. It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have. It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider. However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens. The extra length means that it doesn’t fit my custom camera adapter either. That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway. I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast. I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend. I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots. While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped. I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price. Mike Grant Chesterfield, MO Subject: Re: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: h2otara AT comcast.net Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 13:21:16 +0000 (UTC) Mike, Thanks for updating us on this lens.  I'd be interested to know if it vignettes with a lower power fixed eyepiece.  Do you have any of your shots from the festival posted?  I'd love to see them.  Sorry our paths didn't cross last week.  Tara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Grant" To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 1, 2010 10:36:36 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1   I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening.  I could not make the vignette go away.  Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won’t make the vignette go away. It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have.  It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider.  However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens.  The extra length means that it doesn’t fit my custom camera adapter either.  That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway. I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast. I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend.  I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots.  While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped.  I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price. Mike Grant Chesterfield , MO Subject: Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm/F1.4/ASPH and the G1 From: "Mike Grant" <mocurlew AT att.net> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 21:36:36 -0600 I got this lens and hand held it to my Swaro AT 80 HD with the 20x60 eyepiece this evening. I could not make the vignette go away. Hopefully I can try it outside tomorrow to see what kind of pictures it takes, but that won't make the vignette go away. It is larger and heavier than the Olympus 50mm f/2.0 lens that I have. It is just over a half an inch longer and about 3/8s wider. However autofocus (AFS) does work with it, unlike the Olympus lens. The extra length means that it doesn't fit my custom camera adapter either. That may be somewhat irrelevant though, as it is so heavy (the lens itself and the fact that being longer it moves the camera even farther out) that it flexes the mount anyway. I do think that it is a lens that a G1 owner wants, as it is extremely fast. I attended the Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival this previous weekend. I took a lot of pictures with the Olympus 50mm and am pleased with it except for one item: it is so powerful and many of the birds so close that I could only get head and neck shots. While that is normally not the case, a less powerful lens would have helped. I will try the 20mm F/1.7 when I can get it at a good price. Mike Grant Chesterfield, MO Subject: PhotoScoped Anhingas (Zeiss Digiscope Blog) From: Stephen Ingraham <lightshedder AT gmail.com> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 11:11:03 -0500 at Viera Wetlands, Melbourne FL. I had not seen the green eyes of breeding plumage before this. http://zeisssports.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/zeiss-digisocped-pic-21/ -- Steve Ingraham lightshedder: www.lightshedder.com Point and Shoot Landscape: Pic of the Day Cloudy Days and Netbook Nights: Subject: Some Digiscoped video using the GH1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 01:10:23 -0000 OK - I uploaded some of the clips I shot this morning using the GH1 The rig consisted of: GH1 4/3s to m4/3s adapter (the Panasonic one) 40mm f/1.8 Hexanon lens - crude home-brew adaptation Swarovski ATS 80 HD with 20-60x eyepiece. Swarovski DCA adapter with homebrew step up ring from 52mm to 55mm. None of the clips were post processed. I shot at either 20x (1600mm equivalent)or 30x (2400mm equivalent). It is super important to have clear air. Turbulence shows up quickly. 30x over distance tends to be soft due to turbulence. It isn't too bad at closer distances. 20x is pretty good and actually quite nice at close distances. I expected better performance than I got. Right now I think the difference between expectations and reality come down to air quality issues. Today's results were much better than last Sunday's. You can find the five clips at: http://www.youtube.com/wturber Subject: Re: Lumix GH1 vs. G1 From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:31:50 -0000 The GH1 is the camera I've been waiting for for some time. It is exactly the kind of modern camera I've been thinking about for the last eight years. It is priced a bit steeply, but I'm quite happy. I've only been out digiscoping with it twice now, but I'm very happy so far. I'll upload some better video this afternoon and post a link. See the link to a still of a black throated sparrow in the thread on apertures. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com > Been following this email forum for quite some time, and have learned quite > a lot. Thanks to all for the excellent information. > > I've been tossing around ideas for upgrading my digiscoping setup for quite > some time (Swarovski 80mm, 20-60x) from point-and-shoot camera to a DSLR or > Lumix (DCA adaptor). I've chatted with many of you off-forum and am leaning > toward the Lumix solution. > > The G1 has gotten a lot of coverage over the last year, and GF1 is starting > to get some attention. I really want to use this as a second camera for > non-digiscoping shooting so a viewfinder is important to me (somewhat rules > out GF1). With that said, however, the ability to shoot video clips could > be an exciting new opportunity the GF1 would provide. > > So, what about the G1's bigger brother, the GH1? Has anyone tried one of > these, or are there any reasons to believe it wouldn't perform the same as > the G1? I realize the GH1 kit lens wouldn't work, but are there any other > known downsides to the GH1 other than the price? > > Thanks, > Mike > Subject: Re: Camera aperture question From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:22:17 -0000 I have a GH1. I'm not sure if it works the same as the G1, but when in manual focus mode, I can go closer in by turning the front "finger wheel." Of course, the camera has to be put into magnified focus mode manually with a legacy manual lens since the camera doesn't know when you are focusing. It's a two step process where you hit one of the four "arrow" buttons and then press the center select button. FWIW, I've found I can focus darned nearly as well without the manual aid by rocking the focus back and forth and looking for the sharpest contrast point. Right now I'm doing that first to make sure I get a picture, then I'll verify focus with the magnified focus and continue shooting from there. Here's a link to a pic take of a Black Throated Sparrow this morning. The only mods are that it was sharpened and resized from 12Mp (4000 x 3000) to 6.75Mp (3000 x 2250) The file is large. The second link is to the same imaged sized down by half. http://www.jayandwanda.com/birds/sparrows/P1010011_mod.jpg http://www.jayandwanda.com/birds/sparrows/P1010011_mod2.jpg Swarovski ATS80HD 20x(20-60x)40mm f/1.8 Hexanon and GH1. I very much like the idea of using a manual focus lens with the GH1 and presumabely the G1. They are robustly built. A modern internal focus lens would probably be better if anybody was to make one. Either that, or use a modern lens without a tube mount. But I like the tube-type mounts. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com > When I got my Olympus 50/2.0, I started using it around F6 as dpreview said > it was sharpest there. I was finding that I had to really lower the EV comp > (usually -1.3 to -2 stops) in order to get the histogram correct when I > stopped down the aperture. I think I was getting essentially the same > shutter speed as if I'd set it on F2 and no EV comp, however I couldn't see > well in the Liveview to focus. A post to this group for help resulted in > recommendations from two of our masters that I should just shoot with it > wide open, so that's what I've been doing. > > > > ONE more question, please. Do you know if the 5x and 10x magnification > function will work with a manual stop down lens on the G1? > > > > Thanks again, > > > > Tara > > > > _____ > > From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com > [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wturber > Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:16 PM > To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com > Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Camera aperture question > > > > > > > > And a final question for Jay: You said "The other solution that works > great on a micro four-thirds camera is to use an older manual stop down > lens. That way you meter and shoot at the same exact aperture nothing > changes when you trip the shutter and the camera measures the same image > that it will be recording, so your exposures should be excellent. So if I > understand, with a manual stop down lens the behavior would be as I had > originally expected, or do you shoot in something other than aperture > priority with this type of lens? Do you set the aperture wide open > manually and leave it there? > > Yep. When you turn the aperture ring the lens actually stops down. So if > stopping the lens down affects the exposure, you can see that immediately. > If it doesn't, then nothing is affected. The only way the camera "knows" > that something is changed is by a change in light on the sensor. There is no > other mechanical or electrical communication happening between the lens and > camera. Modern DSLRs make calculations to compensate for the largest > aperture of the lens and how it interacts with the focus screen. And this > aperture changes as you zoom these lenses and the modern lens tells the > camera what its sending. But the simple act of metering directly off of the > digital sensor at the actual taking aperture makes all that unnecessary. It > also solves the problem of focus shift that occurs when lenses are stopped > down - but that's another issue. > > With my GH1 that I've just begun to work with, I set the aperture to f/5.6. > With my current combo, that it effectively wide open. I could probably leave > the lens at f/1.8 and it would work the same. I only stop it down on the off > chance that doing so might reduce flare a bit. It probably doesn't, but > there's no harm at shooting at f/5.6 so why not? > > I shoot at aperture preferred so that the camera will set the shutter speed > for me. I keep a live histogram showing to help me judge the exposure and > use the +/- wheel to tweak exposures. > > BTW, I'm not certain, but I thought my C7070 would stop its aperture down > when I half-pressed the shutter button and would meter that way. Maybe I'll > double check later. > > Jay Turberville > www.jayandwanda.com > Subject: Lumix GH1 vs. G1 From: Mike Blatchley <mabxmab AT gmail.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:01:48 -0700 Been following this email forum for quite some time, and have learned quite a lot. Thanks to all for the excellent information. I've been tossing around ideas for upgrading my digiscoping setup for quite some time (Swarovski 80mm, 20-60x) from point-and-shoot camera to a DSLR or Lumix (DCA adaptor). I've chatted with many of you off-forum and am leaning toward the Lumix solution. The G1 has gotten a lot of coverage over the last year, and GF1 is starting to get some attention. I really want to use this as a second camera for non-digiscoping shooting so a viewfinder is important to me (somewhat rules out GF1). With that said, however, the ability to shoot video clips could be an exciting new opportunity the GF1 would provide. So, what about the G1's bigger brother, the GH1? Has anyone tried one of these, or are there any reasons to believe it wouldn't perform the same as the G1? I realize the GH1 kit lens wouldn't work, but are there any other known downsides to the GH1 other than the price? Thanks, Mike Subject: RE: Re: Camera aperture question From: "Tara T" <h2otara AT comcast.net> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:40:09 -0500 Thanks Jay. When I got my Olympus 50/2.0, I started using it around F6 as dpreview said it was sharpest there. I was finding that I had to really lower the EV comp (usually -1.3 to -2 stops) in order to get the histogram correct when I stopped down the aperture. I think I was getting essentially the same shutter speed as if I’d set it on F2 and no EV comp, however I couldn’t see well in the Liveview to focus. A post to this group for help resulted in recommendations from two of our masters that I should just shoot with it wide open, so that’s what I’ve been doing. ONE more question, please. Do you know if the 5x and 10x magnification function will work with a manual stop down lens on the G1? Thanks again, Tara _____ From: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com [mailto:digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wturber Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:16 PM To: digiscopingbirds AT yahoogroups.com Subject: [digiscopingbirds] Re: Camera aperture question > And a final question for Jay: You said "The other solution that works great on a micro four-thirds camera is to use an older manual stop down lens. That way you meter and shoot at the same exact aperture nothing changes when you trip the shutter and the camera measures the same image that it will be recording, so your exposures should be excellent. So if I understand, with a manual stop down lens the behavior would be as I had originally expected, or do you shoot in something other than aperture priority with this type of lens? Do you set the aperture wide open manually and leave it there? Yep. When you turn the aperture ring the lens actually stops down. So if stopping the lens down affects the exposure, you can see that immediately. If it doesn't, then nothing is affected. The only way the camera "knows" that something is changed is by a change in light on the sensor. There is no other mechanical or electrical communication happening between the lens and camera. Modern DSLRs make calculations to compensate for the largest aperture of the lens and how it interacts with the focus screen. And this aperture changes as you zoom these lenses and the modern lens tells the camera what its sending. But the simple act of metering directly off of the digital sensor at the actual taking aperture makes all that unnecessary. It also solves the problem of focus shift that occurs when lenses are stopped down - but that's another issue. With my GH1 that I've just begun to work with, I set the aperture to f/5.6. With my current combo, that it effectively wide open. I could probably leave the lens at f/1.8 and it would work the same. I only stop it down on the off chance that doing so might reduce flare a bit. It probably doesn't, but there's no harm at shooting at f/5.6 so why not? I shoot at aperture preferred so that the camera will set the shutter speed for me. I keep a live histogram showing to help me judge the exposure and use the +/- wheel to tweak exposures. BTW, I'm not certain, but I thought my C7070 would stop its aperture down when I half-pressed the shutter button and would meter that way. Maybe I'll double check later. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com Subject: Re: Camera aperture question From: "wturber" <jay AT studio522.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:15:49 -0000 > And a final question for Jay:  You said "The other solution that works great on a micro four-thirds camera is to use an older manual stop down lens. That way you meter and shoot at the same exact aperture nothing changes when you trip the shutter and the camera measures the same image that it will be recording, so your exposures should be excellent. So if I understand, with a manual stop down lens the behavior would be as I had originally expected, or do you shoot in something other than aperture priority with this type of lens?  Do you set the aperture wide open manually and leave it there? Yep. When you turn the aperture ring the lens actually stops down. So if stopping the lens down affects the exposure, you can see that immediately. If it doesn't, then nothing is affected. The only way the camera "knows" that something is changed is by a change in light on the sensor. There is no other mechanical or electrical communication happening between the lens and camera. Modern DSLRs make calculations to compensate for the largest aperture of the lens and how it interacts with the focus screen. And this aperture changes as you zoom these lenses and the modern lens tells the camera what its sending. But the simple act of metering directly off of the digital sensor at the actual taking aperture makes all that unnecessary. It also solves the problem of focus shift that occurs when lenses are stopped down - but that's another issue. With my GH1 that I've just begun to work with, I set the aperture to f/5.6. With my current combo, that it effectively wide open. I could probably leave the lens at f/1.8 and it would work the same. I only stop it down on the off chance that doing so might reduce flare a bit. It probably doesn't, but there's no harm at shooting at f/5.6 so why not? I shoot at aperture preferred so that the camera will set the shutter speed for me. I keep a live histogram showing to help me judge the exposure and use the +/- wheel to tweak exposures. BTW, I'm not certain, but I thought my C7070 would stop its aperture down when I half-pressed the shutter button and would meter that way. Maybe I'll double check later. Jay Turberville www.jayandwanda.com