Carl Zeiss combines spotting scope, digital camera with the PhotoScope 85 T* FL

Esteemed lens manufacturer Carl Zeiss is breaking new ground by releasing the PhotoScope 85 T* FL, a spotting scope that also serves as a seven megapixel digital camera -- just in case "super-zoom" wasn't enough for you. With 15 - 45x magnification, a focal length of 600 - 1800 mm, a flip-out OLED display, and an IR remote for vibration-free release, it's great for birdwatchers but perhaps even better for the paparazzi. Look for it in Spring or Summer 2009 if you're planning to profit off the next Amy Winehouse meltdown.

[Via PhotographyBLOG]

[Alexandre Emond @ Oct 20th 2008 12:49PM]

Cool but not ($$$) for the average Joe like me.

[rento @ Oct 21st 2008 4:24AM]

What? You make 250k per year and cannot afford this?

/s

[Alexandre Emond @ Oct 21st 2008 11:59AM]

Hmmm, you may be referring to the famous Joe the plumber. Sorry, I'm not from the States so my average Joe is not this stupid one, just a normal guy.
On the other other way, I now recognize that bird lovers and hunters may be interested in that device.

[Flashpoint @ Oct 20th 2008 12:53PM]

I think anyone here who hunts Deer or Moose would love to have a spotting scope for their spotter t take pictures of their game getting its head blown off.

[kjb434 @ Oct 20th 2008 1:17PM]

I think a lot of hunters would like this and not for the reason you state. Having the snapshot is good to keep a record of the accuracy of the shots.

In killing moose and deer, a good shot is placed in the neck because it insures and instant kill. It also protects the meat and valuable parts of the hide. The worst thing you want is hunters out there shooting game in bad spots. The game would get away but eventually die from bleeding. And instant kill in a bad spot would also be bad because it would render parts of the meat unusable.

Responsible hunting isn't about slaughtering animals for the hell of it. One moose or two or three deer can provide plenty of food for a family throughout the year. And if you think about, the food is of higher quality and falls into the category of organic and natural.

[Sarig @ Oct 20th 2008 1:34PM]

In my part of the world, we're taught to aim for the vital organs, that is, hearts and lungs. The neck may be a more efficient place to shoot, but also far smaller, thus you're more likely to miss entirely, or just wound the animal.

[barry99705 @ Oct 20th 2008 1:52PM]

@kjb434

What the hell are you talking about? You don't shoot anything in the freaking neck! You blow it's freaking lungs and heart out. A neck shot isn't an instant kill unless you blow out the spine, that's a pretty damn small target. One moose will not feed an entire family for a year. Maybe a couple months.

[bolezhinkov @ Oct 20th 2008 1:54PM]

in my part of the world we dont kill helpless animals for sport or nutrition. and neither should you. start an organic farm if youre going to go on about natural and organic.

in related news - buying this camera gives about 10 000 bonus points on the stalker index for you.

[barry99705 @ Oct 20th 2008 2:00PM]

@bolezhinkov

If you think a moose is helpless, I've got video of one practically killing a guy. I don't care what it is. If it weighs almost 2000 pounds, it isn't helpless. Though you sound like one of the "legalize pot" hippies at the fair, so what ever anybody tells you is falling on deaf ears anyway.

[Tom @ Oct 20th 2008 2:01PM]

Just wondering, what's the difference between hunting for a "helpless" animal you end up eating and growing one on a farm that you end up killing and eating.

[bolezhinkov @ Oct 20th 2008 2:13PM]

@Tom

sorry . . . I didnt think anyone would assume I meant to make a farm with animals to kill on it. I meant a produce farm. there is no need to have animals killed for us to eat.

@barry99705
no shit, CSI . . . a moose can kill a guy. that has nothing to do with dudes going out in to the woods with high powered weapons to "blow it's freaking lungs and heart out" as you so eloquently put it. you're sick and fucked up, feller.

[Sarig @ Oct 20th 2008 2:20PM]

Here we hunt to keep the population down. Since harmless animals like moose and deer are one of the top causes for traffic accidents if left unchecked. While the alternate solution would be to reintroduce apex predators like wolves, here's the kicker: Deer would still die!

[bolezhinkov @ Oct 20th 2008 2:28PM]

@sarig

if left unchecked? we have never left them unchecked since white people got to north america. I lived on the east coast of canada and know all about moose and deer accidents. there is absolutely no way you can say we have to keep their populations down.sicksicksick.

reintoducing wolves that kill deer is AOK by me. as humans we live and think of a very different level than the animals. a kid shits his pants and the adults say its ok, he doesnt know any better. when you shit your pants, people wonder whats wrong with you. when someone kills a deer or a moose under whatever pretense, people wonder what is wrong with them and why they don't know any better yet.

[extinctdoughnut @ Oct 20th 2008 4:26PM]

If God didn't want us eating animals he wouldn't have made them out of meat.

[dajimmers @ Oct 20th 2008 4:31PM]

@bolezhinkov

So if you find hunting an animal with the intent to control its population, provide food, encourage exercise, interaction with nature, and family values, and trying as best as possible to kill it quickly and humanely wrong, I suppose you also don't support or utilize any of the advances in medicine, science, technology, fabrics, or chemicals that have come from animal research. If you want to talk the talk...

And you can disagree with the "brutality" of hunting, but many of these hunters have a stronger connection with nature and intent to preserve it than your average vegan growing tomatoes in the back yard.

Any way, to pretend to stay on topic, what's this thing's low-light capabilities. Zoomed in shots in the woods tend to have little available light left...

[bolezhinkov @ Oct 20th 2008 5:01PM]

@doughnut

There is no god.

@dajimmers

I walk the walk. I do not support animal testing or use of animal products in any way. There are better ways to excercise and interact with nature than killing animals in the woods. Try planting a garden or looking at the animals without shooting them. I have to question what other values your family has if killing is one of them.

I never said hunting was brutal . . . who are you quoting, sir? So how do you loop your connection to nature around killing it? You aren't preserving when you are killing. Most hunters appreciate how they use the natural world, not the world itself. Get it right.

[Zelatio @ Oct 20th 2008 6:08PM]

bolezhinkov:

So we shouldn't kill animals...so you are a vegetarian...and you say you don't have anything against killing animals, yet you say that we shouldn't and question a families values based on that? You are one f***** up motherf*****. Would you harass Native Americans for killing a bison, back before the white man entered? Would you argue with a caveman hunting for food? You and your kind of people, not us, are the people that make this earth a shitty place to live.

[bolezhinkov @ Oct 20th 2008 8:21PM]

@felatio

read the all the comments and maybe I will read your name.

[GoVegan @ Oct 21st 2008 9:48AM]

Oh no... don't get me started. Hunters make me want to vomit, they are really sick individuals who have no sense of moral right and wrong.
Hunters are the scum of the earth and are just as sick as child molestering paedophiles.

[Ayman @ Oct 20th 2008 1:48PM]

How do you start a conversation on showing pictures of animals you killed while taking pictures?

"as you can see the brain is splattering while the bullet exists the head,.... look at the funny face the deer is making ...
and this is the guy who sold me the crappy car, ... look at his face............ "

[barry99705 @ Oct 20th 2008 1:54PM]

The scope is more aimed (heh) at target shooters. There's actually a rigle scope that takes a picture when the trigger is pulled, now that will take some interesting pictures.

[barry99705 @ Oct 20th 2008 1:56PM]

Damn it!! That was supposed to be rifle scope.....

[rcappo @ Oct 20th 2008 1:56PM]

They're close to getting it right. There are many times I would love to have a super zoom on my digital camera (sporting events mainly, but nature/wildlife, and some tourist pics as well). The only suggestion I would make is to add another one without the camera next to it and turn them into binoculars. Maybe come out with a higher zoom model as well. 30x-90x, 45x-90x, or 60x-120x or something like that.

[ssrat_ @ Oct 20th 2008 4:17PM]

AND highly stable of course.

Actually my dream would be this in probably binocular form, with some way to add your own camera (regular digital) and of course throw in night vision and thermal just for the hell of it

[william @ Oct 20th 2008 6:35PM]

I couldnt agree with Ellie more. Please tell us what part of the world you are from bolezhinkov and I will give you numerous examples of your unfortunate lack of knowledge as to the hunting there. I have hunted with locals around the world and there is a vast amount of published literature on the type and nature of hunting around the planet. Could it be bolesy baby that you have a personal agenda here? Otherwise your lack of knowledge is really scary and must be reflected in other of your opinions.

[Monty Alexander @ Oct 21st 2008 9:30AM]

There are many times I would love to have a super zoom on my digital camera. Use canon digital camera for best images