Getting a focal length of between 500 and 2000 mm for a digital camera?

Hello!

I wonder if somebody knows anything about this: what is the cheapest
way (but maintaining high quality!) of getting the equivalence of a
focal length of between 500 and 2000 mm for a digital camera? I now
have a Nikon Coolpix 4500 and a TC-E3ED lens that gives the
equivalence of a focal length of 500 mm, but I need more for bird
photography. Does other camera manufacturers offer lenses similar to
TC-E3ED but with greater focal length? I have tried to connect my
camera to my KOWA scope but the quality was not good enough I think.

I'm looking for accessories that are affordable like the TC-E3ED. For
cameras like Nikon D2Xs or Canon EOS 1D Mark III, there are no doubt
telephoto lenses that will do the job but the cost would be absurd.

Thanks in advance for any polite meaningful response!

In article om,
says...
Hello!

I wonder if somebody knows anything about this: what is the cheapest
way (but maintaining high quality!) of getting the equivalence of a
focal length of between 500 and 2000 mm for a digital camera? I now
have a Nikon Coolpix 4500 and a TC-E3ED lens that gives the
equivalence of a focal length of 500 mm, but I need more for bird
photography. Does other camera manufacturers offer lenses similar to
TC-E3ED but with greater focal length? I have tried to connect my
camera to my KOWA scope but the quality was not good enough I think.

I'm looking for accessories that are affordable like the TC-E3ED. For
cameras like Nikon D2Xs or Canon EOS 1D Mark III, there are no doubt
telephoto lenses that will do the job but the cost would be absurd.

Thanks in advance for any polite meaningful response!


Google for digiscoping.... Lots of advice and equipment suppliers out
there...

Good look with your photography..

T.

Dean Keaton wrote:
I wonder if somebody knows anything about this: what is the cheapest
way

Get a cheap 50mm lens and add several cheap 2x teleconverters

(but maintaining high quality!)

Oh, then get a cheap third-party 500mm lens or if you are looking for higher
quality then a high-quality lens.
Or a mirror lens. They are dirt cheap and for some applications (although
not many) they do work very well.

of getting the equivalence of a
focal length of between 500 and 2000 mm for a digital camera?


I now
have a Nikon Coolpix 4500 and a TC-E3ED lens that gives the
equivalence of a focal length of 500 mm, but I need more for bird
photography. Does other camera manufacturers offer lenses similar to
TC-E3ED but with greater focal length? I have tried to connect my
camera to my KOWA scope but the quality was not good enough I think.

Sorry, with that equipment you are simply hitting the limits.

I'm looking for accessories that are affordable like the TC-E3ED. For
cameras like Nikon D2Xs or Canon EOS 1D Mark III, there are no doubt
telephoto lenses that will do the job but the cost would be absurd.

You don't need a D2 or 1D to leverage changable lenses. A low-end dSLR like
e.g. the Nikon D40 will do just fine.

jue

Easy. Get closer to the birds.

I'm being serious BTW.


"Dean Keaton" wrote in message
ps.com...
Hello!

I wonder if somebody knows anything about this: what is the cheapest
way (but maintaining high quality!) of getting the equivalence of a
focal length of between 500 and 2000 mm for a digital camera? I now
have a Nikon Coolpix 4500 and a TC-E3ED lens that gives the
equivalence of a focal length of 500 mm, but I need more for bird
photography.

In article ,
"Gino" wrote:

Easy. Get closer to the birds.

I'm being serious BTW.

I'm not. Did you know you can catch a bird if you put salt on its tail?

My problem with shooting "birds" has been with Space Shuttle launches.
I have a Celestron C90 mirror telescope using a T-mount camera adapter.
It is 1000 mm f/11 on a 35 mm film camera. At one time I used a 2X
adapter for 2000 mm f/22 for some of the early launches.

This approach might be equivalent to a 3000 mm lens on the 1.5 factor
DSLR. However it makes a lousy photograph. I think its shortcomings
would apply equally to regular birds. With a mirror lens, there is
usually a considerable reduction in contrast. A long focal length lens
is usually accompanied by a small f/stop which limits shutter speed. So
you would need a heavy tripod and only shoot birds sitting still!

My favorite lens for photographing things like birds, is the Minolta 500
mm f/8 AF mirror lens. This particular lens has much better contrast
than the Celestron. A conventional refractive lens might be better but
would be larger and weigh more.

I originally used the lens with a Minolta 8000i film body, but it works
perfectly with the Sony Alpha 100 with its image stabilization. For a
Shuttle launch last June, the sky was unusually clear. I live about 15
miles from the launch pad, and was able to get some decent shots after
it had cleared the trees. I managed to catch the solid rockets as they
flew away from the Shuttle, 80 miles away. The image is quite small but
recognizable.

Yes, you need to get closer to the birds, but you can also use your 500
mm lens and enlarge the images in the computer.

Fred

'You can catch a bird if you put salt on its tail'. Not heard that
expression in a while, however for me it used to be 'You can catch a fox if
you put salt on its tail'. ;-)

One problem with using something like a 2000mm lens, except the cost, etc.
is that you are more susceptible to atmospheric conditions such as haze,
etc. The trick is to work out how to get closer to the subject. Of course,
with a shuttle, this isn't an easy task.

BTW, I would love to be in a situation to live that close to a shuttle
launch. If the schedule is cancelled, which is not uncommon, you haven't
travelled that far to be disappointed.

Speaking of launches (slow, I know) ...:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=4kegh1y





"Fred McKenzie" wrote in message
...

Easy. Get closer to the birds.

I'm being serious BTW.


I'm not. Did you know you can catch a bird if you put salt on its tail?

My problem with shooting "birds" has been with Space Shuttle launches.
I have a Celestron C90 mirror telescope using a T-mount camera adapter.
It is 1000 mm f/11 on a 35 mm film camera. At one time I used a 2X
adapter for 2000 mm f/22 for some of the early launches.

This approach might be equivalent to a 3000 mm lens on the 1.5 factor
DSLR. However it makes a lousy photograph. I think its shortcomings
would apply equally to regular birds. With a mirror lens, there is
usually a considerable reduction in contrast. A long focal length lens
is usually accompanied by a small f/stop which limits shutter speed. So
you would need a heavy tripod and only shoot birds sitting still!

My favorite lens for photographing things like birds, is the Minolta 500
mm f/8 AF mirror lens. This particular lens has much better contrast
than the Celestron. A conventional refractive lens might be better but
would be larger and weigh more.

I originally used the lens with a Minolta 8000i film body, but it works
perfectly with the Sony Alpha 100 with its image stabilization. For a
Shuttle launch last June, the sky was unusually clear. I live about 15
miles from the launch pad, and was able to get some decent shots after
it had cleared the trees. I managed to catch the solid rockets as they
flew away from the Shuttle, 80 miles away. The image is quite small but
recognizable.

Yes, you need to get closer to the birds, but you can also use your 500
mm lens and enlarge the images in the computer.

Fred