Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Last year (Oct) I took a drive through Lamar valley and found some wolves to take pictures - at a long distance. With my R5, 600f4v2 and 1.4x v3. Picture repeated below.

Everyone else on the road was using spotting scopes and cell phones. It made me curious whether I needed to get a spotting scope and attachment for my camera to get better long long images.

I did a whole lot of reading and learned:
Kowa 88 is likely the best or equal to the best- 25-60 mag (1,000mm to 3,000mm equiv)
Spotting scopes don't have image stabilisation
You don't get to change the aperture to seek more iq
You can buy a 22mm wide or a 20-60 eye piece (and many more).
If you don't get wide angle you will end up cropping to 4x3
There are zoom eye pieces with wide angle
Kowa 88 is $2800 and the 25-60 eyepiece is $1000 cdn.
Add another $1000 for the adapters to put the r5 on it and other stuff.
So $4800 can [or $3600 USD]

I was close to pulling the trigger and then looked for images on YouTube to compare 600f4 vs Kowa 88. What I concluded was:
Often beyond 1,000mm the atmospherics mean that even a good lens looks bad
Spotting scopes don't have image stabilisation which matters a lot in video
My 600f4v2 plus r7 (I would buy) plus 1.4x cropped (1344mm equiv - or 27x) to the equivalent of 60x is a bit better on contrast, close on iq - maybe slightly better, and way better for video because of image stabilisation
Buying a r7 to complement my 600/1.4x is way cheaper than a spotting scope

These two videos were most helpful.
see

and note apsc Sony 6100 and 1.4x - should be close
see also https://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=37290&Title=Lets-Talk-About-Reach-Does-an-APS-C-Format-Imaging-Sensor-Increase-Reach shows R7 is superior to 1.4x thus R7 plus 1.4x better than R5 in 1.6xmode

The purpose of my post is to test my conclusions. I am interested in peoples thoughts on this question.

You agree with the conclusion?
Is 600f4 1.4x r7 cropped better than a really good spotting scope?
Is there a better brand that can do better than Kowa?

These pictures are cropped from 600f4/r5/1.4 at more than a mile.

Canon EOS R5 EF600mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III lens 840mm f/8.0 1/1000s 2000 ISO -0.3 EV

Feb 17, 2024 at 04:54 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

I've done a little digiscoping (telescope + phone) using a smaller telescope + solar filter on a solar eclipse. In that case you can get relatively inexpensive scopes vs camera lenses, since you don't need a 6" telescope even, for solar, it's been awhile since i read about it but I believe 4-5"/100-125mm is enough , more gets covered partially and that's what I use

your 600/4 is a telescope, and a telescope is basically a spotting scope and vice versa all the same thing. Spotting scopes more optimized from daylight use, lenses optimized for photography, but basically the same thing, optically. Your 600/4 is 6 inch/ 150mm (front aperture ) f/4 refractor, in telescope terms, vs 88mm aperture on the Kowa (haven't been able to find FL or f number on kowa) a bit harder to affix an eyepiece since attachments to 600mm aren't generally readily available, but doable

I've made apertures with thick paper put in front of the lens, nobody does it and astronomers apparently have some funny ideas, but yes you can stop down a telescope

Feb 18, 2024 at 01:10 AM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

I would agree with your conclusion. The way to go is to use as high pixel density as possible (R7) on the 600 f/4 II, and then add teleconvertes as long as the cropped results improve.

Feb 18, 2024 at 03:54 AM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Scott Stoness wrote:
Last year (Oct) I took a drive through Lamar valley and found some wolves to take pictures - at a long distance. With my R5, 600f4v2 and 1.4x v3. Picture repeated below.

Everyone else on the road was using spotting scopes and cell phones. It made me curious whether I needed to get a spotting scope and attachment for my camera to get better long long images.

I did a whole lot of reading and learned:
Kowa 88 is likely the best or equal to the best- 25-60 mag (1,000mm to 3,000mm equiv)
Spotting scopes don't have image stabilisation
You don't get to change...Show more →

Great post, I though about this very scenario. thanks for posting !! .

Scott one other part of the final equation to consider would be to utilize Topaz Giga Pixel, (for enlargement) if you have that app, try running the image you have posted above, and see if it meets your expectation.

If you dont have the app, I would be happy to do it for you, just let me know....

Feb 18, 2024 at 11:14 AM

juststeve
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

The watchers in Yellowstone are most often using Swarovski spotting scopes. Seems like it is almost a must have if you are to be accepted.

As a photographer I was not going to be accepted by the watchers so I bought a Pentax scope for about a third as much. Probably most of the Swarovskis are slightly better, but some are not. I was and am happy with the decision. With the Kowa using fluorite vs. the Pentax using ED glass, I suspect it the Iowa would perform more consistently with the Swarovskis.

That said, I have had no interest in trying to adapt a spotting scope to photograph wildlife. My thinking is a scope is designed to lay an image down on a retina, a quite small device. Photo lenses are designed for film or digital sensors, quite large devices. To get the scope to handle the larger size imager is going to take some optical trickery or using a cell phone or similar small censored device to get an image. Likely a compromise.

Your photo of the big dogs and the elk is about optimum for long distance photography in Yellowstone. Reasonably cold, snow covered with no or not much bare ground, no falling snow or airborne ice crystals, no fog, and probably not much wind are optimum conditions. Count your blessings and maybe your money as an R7 can function as a free 1.6 teleconverter. But having a proper lens on a proper imaging device improves your odds vs. faking it.

As far as I know, I was the first competent still photographer to go digital for Yellowstone wolves. I picked up one of the first D60's, looking at it as a free 1.6 teleconverter. I know that will stir up some of the know-it-alls but it worked out well in practice as I gave away most of my film bricks and kept only one EOS 3 and one brick of film for high action times within the year. Later added a 1Ds for the greater number of pixels and full frame advantages. And kept doing so with a full framer and a cropper until going mirrorless. I think about doing the same again, but the current R7 does not seem to fit either my hands or my needs, so I'll wait. Maybe a Fuji with an adapter.

Feb 18, 2024 at 12:15 PM

Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

I have a Swarovski spotting scope and a 600mm III. While the scope is top notch I haven't used it the last year. Looking through my full frame viewfinder is much better.

Feb 18, 2024 at 01:25 PM

bman212121
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Photography is the capture of light. Look at the 88mm front optic on that scope, and then look at the front of the 600mm F4. I can't find a measurement but I assume it's about 4x the size. It goes without saying which one is bringing in more light.

That said you want 'captured light per image area'. In that case you're using a 1.4x teleconverter, which is throwing away a bunch of the captured light, about 1 stop. But you would need to use a 2x TC in my uneducated guess to put the light per area to be roughly the same as the Kowa 88, since you magnified the image to twice the resolution. (To make the image of the 600mm 4x larger, matching the light per area of the kowa) So the maximum amount of light the scope is able to capture is likely quite similar to a 600 f4 with a 2x TC on it. But in your case that light is going right onto the R5 image sensor, spread across large pixels with a guess of 1 stop advantage. With a smartphone attached to the scope the light is going through another set of lenses and a fixed aperture which might not be capturing all available light. Nor do you know that the entire sensor is being covered, or if it's optically aligned. (It's not)

I'm sure that the scope + smartphone does actually work fairly well, because the size of the image that exits has been narrowed a lot to be sized for an eye. Because of this that usually means that the light per square area goes up significantly which really helps increase the light that reaches a small smartphone sensor. But total captured light is always more with a bigger optic, and because you're only using a 1.4x TC you will have captured a full stop more light across the frame. More light = better image assuming the sensors are of similar quality.

Also, using magnifiers would be detrimental to IQ. They are simply a cheaper form of a teleconverter which enlarges part of the image (Thus throwing away light from the part that isn't enlarged). TCs are a much more sophisticated version which cuts down on aberrations caused by enlarging the image.

Feb 19, 2024 at 05:19 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

AmbientMike: Thanks for the thoughts on digiscoping. That's what I was thinking - it's about the glass and a $12,000 lens optimised to photography is likely to be better than a $4000 lens which is meant for figuring out how many legs and how big the curl.

alundeb: r7

IndyFab: I have tried Topaz Giga Pixel and thought it did a good job. But I was looking to improve the original source for the next time I visit.

juststeve: Swaroski might be better - I will look but most reviews said they were similar to Kowa. And after looking at some YouTube videos I thought I would not be happy after $5000 so not. I think the r7 is the next thing to try.

Uarctos: If you have some posts of 600viii vs Swarovski I would appreciate the view.

So far, no one has indicated spotting stop with a r5 adapter, is equal or better? So I guess I should buy the r7.

Feb 19, 2024 at 05:32 PM

bman212121
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Unless the spotting scope is made out of fairy dust, it won't compete with a larger aperture lens made of a similar build quality.

As for R5 vs R7, you have to think about what you're trading there. You are trading light per pixel to increase resolution. If you're cropping the R5 heavily already, then the full vs APS-C is a bit of a moot point. You can crop a full to do the exact same thing an APS-C camera does, if the pixels are the same size. But in this case the R7 has smaller pixels, so it increases resolution, at the expense of what smaller pixels do. IE capture less light.

The question is, are you already light limited? Are you atmospheric limited? Are you stabilization limited? Those are all the questions you'd need to answer before knowing if there is still room for improvement on the table. If you are struggling with light, atmospheric conditions, or can't keep the image stable then you might not be able to see a resolution increase, while hurting the contrast with reduced light.

Feb 19, 2024 at 05:58 PM

mogul
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Just an aside, I have a Pentax scope and binocs. With a 20mm eye piece, my scope is preferred in a large crowd to the also available Swarovski. One thing about optics is that most retailers will bargain down significantly (I am talking 50% off msrp) compared to camera equipment fixed prices.

Feb 19, 2024 at 06:25 PM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Assuming you will be using your prime 600, once you acquire an R7 with the 1.4 compare it to R5 + 1.4 + crop mode. I understand the R5 will be with less Mpix in that configuration, but see what file holds up best. Doesn't hurt to compare..

I happened to experience digiscoping (telescope + phone) and I was really impressed, but the target was not a mile out.

The ultimate setup will cost you, depends what you are going to do with the files, if its worth the investment.

There is a rental outfit in West Yellowstone that rents scopes

Feb 19, 2024 at 06:29 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

bman212121 wrote:
Unless the spotting scope is made out of fairy dust, it won't compete with a larger aperture lens made of a similar build quality.

As for R5 vs R7, you have to think about what you're trading there. You are trading light per pixel to increase resolution. If you're cropping the R5 heavily already, then the full vs APS-C is a bit of a moot point. You can crop a full to do the exact same thing an APS-C camera does, if the pixels are the same size. But in this case the R7 has smaller pixels, so it increases resolution,...Show more →

I agree with the above. My question is best in class spotting scope or best in class r7/1.4x/600f4 camera/body. I appreciate that in low light the r5 would be better but it would offer less magnification.

The reason I am asking the question is to take pictures and video of wolves from a long distance, in high quality. Sometimes the light will be good and sometimes it won't. It depends on when I find them and the distance. Based on my pixel peeping of YouTube, it looks like my canon 600f4v2 with 1.4x cropped is better with the r7 for really long and with the r5 for less really long. Largely because of the image stabilisation, ability to control aperture and field of view.

Thank you. Scott

Edited on Feb 19, 2024 at 07:43 PM · View previous versions

Feb 19, 2024 at 07:40 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

mogul wrote:
Just an aside, I have a Pentax scope and binocs. With a 20mm eye piece, my scope is preferred in a large crowd to the also available Swarovski. One thing about optics is that most retailers will bargain down significantly (I am talking 50% off msrp) compared to camera equipment fixed prices.

This is the interesting thing about spotting scopes. It seems that they perform better at less magnification, like most less expensive canon zoom lens. Thus at the short end, the Pentax is likely just as good as the Swarovski but both lessor to my 600f4. My neighbour sells Swarovski and I could ask him but I wanted an objective comparison before spending thousands$

Thank you. Scott

Feb 19, 2024 at 07:43 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

IndyFab wrote:
Assuming you will be using your prime 600, once you acquire an R7 with the 1.4 compare it to R5 + 1.4 + crop mode. I understand the R5 will be with less Mpix in that configuration, but see what file holds up best. Doesn't hurt to compare..

I happened to experience digiscoping (telescope + phone) and I was really impressed, but the target was not a mile out.

The ultimate setup will cost you, depends what you are going to do with the files, if its worth the investment.

There is a rental outfit in West Yellowstone that rents scopes...Show more →

I see that I can rent an r7 for $150/week in Bozeman and a leica 88 spotting scope there too with iPhone connection - so maybe I will just have to take a trip and try it. I expect 33mpx (r7) to perform better than 19 max (r5 in apsc mode) but the proof is in the pudding.

Thanks Scott

Edited on Feb 19, 2024 at 10:59 PM · View previous versions

Feb 19, 2024 at 07:46 PM

bman212121
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

I'm guessing relatively few people have tried what you're asking, so you're definitely pushing the limits of what's possible on a camera system.

My other suggestion is throw a 2x TC into the mix. If you have one already it's a free test. The R5 + 2x TC would offer a bit more pixel density than an R7, and should be relatively close to the R7 combination for resolution. If I did my math right it makes the R5 around 34MP for the same frame on APS-C. I'd imagine people have done tests of R7 + 600/4 + 1.4 vs R5 600/4 + 2x. The main downside I can see with adding in that optic is it usually hurts CA a bit.

Feb 19, 2024 at 08:51 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

bman212121 wrote:
I'm guessing relatively few people have tried what you're asking, so you're definitely pushing the limits of what's possible on a camera system.

My other suggestion is throw a 2x TC into the mix. If you have one already it's a free test. The R5 + 2x TC would offer a bit more pixel density than an R7, and should be relatively close to the R7 combination for resolution. If I did my math right it makes the R5 around 34MP for the same frame on APS-C. I'd imagine people have done tests of R7 + 600/4 + 1.4 vs R5...Show more →

I have never been happy when I use my 2x. There is noticeable iq degradation. I think it's okay when you fill the frame but not so much when you don't. I don't know if it's just my 2x or all 2x's. But when I look at the digital picture I do see significant degradation from 1.4x to 2x.

So I don't think r5/2x/1.6apsc mode would not be satisfactory even stopped down.

I think that 1.6 apsc to 33mpx would be significantly better.

And my suspicion is that cropping r7 33mpx to 8mpx (~50x) would outdo my 2x with 1/3 crop.

But since I have it, I guess I could try.

Feb 19, 2024 at 10:56 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

Scott Stoness wrote:
AmbientMike: Thanks for the thoughts on digiscoping. That's what I was thinking - it's about the glass and a $12,000 lens optimised to photography is likely to be better than a $4000 lens which is meant for figuring out how many legs and how big the curl.

Nikon used to make an attachment to attach an eyepiece to their super teles which made them a spotting scope. 500/4 P or something might be less expensive than the scopes, and you'd think it'd be high quality.

Canon you'd need to be able to focus if not connected to the camera, more DIY, but you should be able to get an eyepiece barrel attached to the lens. 600/4 very high quality scope if you cam focus it. Might be a lot less expensive than the scope possibly better quality and you could try it and decide

Feb 20, 2024 at 01:22 AM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Long Long Shots - 600f4/r7/1.4 cropped vs Kowa 88 Spotting Scope

AmbientMike wrote:
Nikon used to make an attachment to attach an eyepiece to their super teles which made them a spotting scope. 500/4 P or something might be less expensive than the scopes, and you'd think it'd be high quality.

Canon you'd need to be able to focus if not connected to the camera, more DIY, but you should be able to get an eyepiece barrel attached to the lens. 600/4 very high quality scope if you cam focus it. Might be a lot less expensive than the scope possibly better quality and you could try it and decide

Thanks AmbientMike.

I don't want a spotting scope for spotting. I was considering a spotting scope for taking pictures and video at > 1km. The screen on the back of my r5 with lighting turned up- or the eye view is better than a spotting scope.

My reading and assessment of spotting scopes is that they do what they are intended for - finding animals and determining whether they are worth hunting (permit and glory and food). Thus they save hunters walking 2-3km to find that the prospects that are not whorthwhile. So they must be able to identify sex (antlers or not), size (vs females and others) , and condition (movements) - but not cause a great picture. Hunters care less about coma, astigmatism, and contrast - they mostly care about assessing the prospect.

Some people are using them for what they were not intended for - taking pictures usually with iPhone attachment and sometimes with camera adapters - but from my perusing of YouTube - generally what I see is they do not perform as well as the 600f4 (25x achievable with IS ) at 25x; or 50x - 600/f4/r7/1.4x cropped to 8mpx (no IS and poor contrast). They are okay at x25, which I can mostly achieve with my 600f4, but less than ok at 50x.

My goal is long pictures/video with pretty good quality in Yellowstone type area (big wide open long views with lots of wolves, grizzlies). I have long ago moved from hunting to photography and consider photography tougher (more fun) than hunting because you need iq and no obstruction and a good composition (eyes and behaviour). I can use my canon x10 IS binoculars to find the photography prospects and generally just drive to where the binocular people are parked to find the prospects.

I am looking for confirmation that I can't do better than 600/f4/r7/1.4cropped, and/or that r5 in apsc mode is not as good as r7 for this purpose; and/or its better to skip the 2x vs the 1.4x because its better to crop the 1.4x than accept the image degradation of the 2x.

Feb 20, 2024 at 09:54 AM


FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.