dancrane
Well-known member
Thinking of spoiling myself at Christmas. I may be ashore just looking at boats next summer. Not sure yet if that'll be cheaper than having a boat of my own.
I've occasionally attempted to align not-very-powerful spotting scopes in front of my phone's camera lens. Limited in success because modern phones have multiple lenses, so as one zooms in, the lens changes and the scope is no longer aligned. It's also diabolically difficult to keep it still enough to get a good pic.
Nab Tower, from Whitecliff Bay approximately 5.5 nautical miles away. Could do better, I hope.
The obvious answer (I thought) was to buy a hopefully not-too-wallet-busting compact camera that could be securely attached to a decent basic scope...
...and that may yet be a good solution, although from what I've read, the sensitivity and capability of phone camera lenses is now stunning considering their size, in fact some comparisons suggest a dedicated camera doesn't give superior results.
Nevertheless, what I think I'd like, is to find a compact camera with a bright screen that isn't too tiny, and mate it fairly permanently to a good quality spotting scope with as much magnification as possible, and keep them in a padded hard case that I'd happily make myself. And I'd include space for a folding tripod, because I don't want any more terrible extended shaky videos of barely glimpsed boats two miles away. We usually spend time on the Isle of Wight and the views from the high downs are superb, but attempts to capture distant items of interest are usually discouraging.
I can't tell whether I will get better images from a lower-quality (cheaper) scope with a bigger objective lens, or by spending the same money on a smaller scope of better-quality reputation. Even the relatively affordable Celestron brand offers very differently priced models of the same size...so I'm a bit stumped.
I'm also wary of spending far more than is necessary to reach a good basic standard...I suspect diminishing returns apply in photographic kit. The prices rise very quickly from unsettlingly cheap to fearsomely expensive.
I can see it would be easy to spend £200 on a tripod alone, and that might be money very well spent. But ideally, I'd like to keep the total well under £1,000.
Any advice or recommendations? Is a conventional camera with a very big lens better than a spotting scope? Thanks for reading.
I've occasionally attempted to align not-very-powerful spotting scopes in front of my phone's camera lens. Limited in success because modern phones have multiple lenses, so as one zooms in, the lens changes and the scope is no longer aligned. It's also diabolically difficult to keep it still enough to get a good pic.
Nab Tower, from Whitecliff Bay approximately 5.5 nautical miles away. Could do better, I hope.
The obvious answer (I thought) was to buy a hopefully not-too-wallet-busting compact camera that could be securely attached to a decent basic scope...
...and that may yet be a good solution, although from what I've read, the sensitivity and capability of phone camera lenses is now stunning considering their size, in fact some comparisons suggest a dedicated camera doesn't give superior results.
Nevertheless, what I think I'd like, is to find a compact camera with a bright screen that isn't too tiny, and mate it fairly permanently to a good quality spotting scope with as much magnification as possible, and keep them in a padded hard case that I'd happily make myself. And I'd include space for a folding tripod, because I don't want any more terrible extended shaky videos of barely glimpsed boats two miles away. We usually spend time on the Isle of Wight and the views from the high downs are superb, but attempts to capture distant items of interest are usually discouraging.
I can't tell whether I will get better images from a lower-quality (cheaper) scope with a bigger objective lens, or by spending the same money on a smaller scope of better-quality reputation. Even the relatively affordable Celestron brand offers very differently priced models of the same size...so I'm a bit stumped.
I'm also wary of spending far more than is necessary to reach a good basic standard...I suspect diminishing returns apply in photographic kit. The prices rise very quickly from unsettlingly cheap to fearsomely expensive.
I can see it would be easy to spend £200 on a tripod alone, and that might be money very well spent. But ideally, I'd like to keep the total well under £1,000.
Any advice or recommendations? Is a conventional camera with a very big lens better than a spotting scope? Thanks for reading.
Last edited:
