# Scouting Cameras



## ThumbBum (Oct 13, 2003)

I realize that this isnt the correct forum to post this question
But there are a lot of people here with a lot of experience that I would like to tap into, so here goes. 

I want to start using scouting cameras to monitor deer activity on my property. I dont want to buy junk, but I dont want to spend $500/camera either. It boils down to 2 questions

*Film or Digital*
Seems digital would hold more pictures and they would be easer to store in the long term, though downloading them in the filed would be a minor hassle. I have heard that the digitas have a split second longer delay then film when it comes to actually taking the picture though.

*Does a flash spook deer*
In a lot of scouting cam pic I have seen the deer is looking right at the camera as the flash goes off. Are deer and/or turkeys spooked by the flash? Infra Red cameras are really slick, but most only take black and white photos and the ones that can take color photos during the day are around $700.00. Friends of mine that use flash cameras point to the fact that they have pictures of the same deer taken by the same camera seveal days running, but Im still not sure.
(Anybody seen Jeff Foxworthy's Incomplete Deerhunter?)

Any experince anyone can offer would be appreciated.


----------



## mike hartges (Jun 9, 2003)

A few years ago, I put a camera in my clover field behind the house to see if the deer would spook from the flash. They did. They ran off about 20 yards then slowly made their way back near the camera. When it flashed again, the deer ran off. I think some deer might not be bothered as much as others and they might get used to the flash over time, but I have seen their reaction and they were spooked for a few minutes.


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

TB,

I own a Deer-Cam 35mm and the problem that I have with it is that I have to wait for the roll to be used up or waste the balance of the roll. The other problem that I have is that I can't wait for conventional film processing times and I always pay a premium for 1 hour developing. BTW, my problems are self imposed. :evil:

From everything I've experienced, observed, and read the Cudde Back digital is a great product.

Good Luck,

Big T


----------



## mich buckmaster (Nov 20, 2001)

In my honest opinion, I would buy three of the $99 moultrie digitals for the price of one cuddeback. They will do what you need and want and you will save on processing costs. Believe my after running 9 35mm cameras that gets to be a healthy fee.


----------



## Live2Hunt (Nov 23, 2004)

Another vote for the Moultrie Digital. I have two and have been very pleased for the money. The quality of the picture is good enough to satisfy my observation needs. There are times when I would like to get better clarity that is not possible with the Moultrie 1.3Mp. When you zoom on a picture you gain a lot of grain and lose detail. The Leaf River or Cuddeback offer a higher resolution, therefore a better quality picture.

But again, for my purposes, the Moultry works great. I have two cameras and four SD cards. The camera takes a 6Volt battery. the battery will last two to three weeks and the camera will record over 2,000 pictures on one 64MB SD card. So..... go to the field every three weeks, replace teh battery, exchange the SD card, then go home and view your pictures on your computor. Print or email the ones you want. Store them for future reference.


----------



## steveboss (Sep 4, 2002)

I have three cameras 2 35mm and 1 digital. The digital is the way to go. I have a Leaf River 2.1 megapixel camera I got it for $269 at Cabelas. This is by far my favorite. I own the cheapest which is the $69 Stealth(JUNK) and a medium priced $179 one, but believe me you WILL SAVE $$$$$ with the digital in the long run with processing. As far as the deer being spooked I have taken over a thousand pics with all these cameras and it doesn't really bother them too much. I have pics in my gallery if you would like to see them. If you have any questions pm me and I will help if I can. Hope that helps.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

No question, digital is the way to go. Just buy an extra storage card and then you don't have to download pics in the field, just switch cards.

I have a cuddeback and I'm very happy with it. They are a little more expensive but worth it IMO for the quality of the pics and the battery life. I'm getting around 3 months per set of batteries, ( 4 D cells).

As far as the flash bothering deer, I don't think it bothers them much. I get pictures of the same deer over a period of months so it must not be scaring them away.

Here is one I've gotten a bunch of pics of this year. Hope he is still around by rifle season.  









_____________________________
Munsterlndr
Curmudgeon in Training


----------



## GVSUKUSH (Mar 9, 2004)

A question for you game cam guys, ever catch a trespasser on them?


----------



## ThumbBum (Oct 13, 2003)

Thanks for all the input people, you gotta love this board

As far as using scouting cameras to deter tresspassers, I have considered it. But I would definitely use one of the less then $100 models. Seems to me anybody who has the stones to tresspass wont think twice about picking up a rock or letting a few rounds fly to destroy the evidence if they spot it.


----------



## Hunter333 (Jan 19, 2000)

I opened this thread, based on the title, because I was curious why anyone would want to SCOUT cameras? They dont seem that hard to find!!:lol: Sorry, couldnt resist:lol:


----------



## Kevin D (Apr 30, 2004)

I agree that digital is the way to go. I bought the cheapest one around, a 1.3 Stealth Cam I got on sale for $149. I like digital, but I would buy another brand if I had it to do over again. The battery life (6 AAs) is extremely short and the trigger is very slow, resulting in a lot of missed pics. I saw a cudde back advertisement in a magazine that said cudde back triggered in .3 secs and the Stealth in eight seconds. I don't doubt it. I guess that's what you get for spending an extra $200.


----------



## Backwoods-Savage (Aug 28, 2005)

I recently purchased a digital camera and after looking and questioning for over year decided on the cuddeback. They advertise that 4 d-cell batteries should take about 1500 pictures. They take a compact flash card and you can change them in the field. So far, I get about 12-20 pictures a day and have seen no evidence of a flash bothering the deer. No doubt it might scare some, especially if they happen to be looking in that direction at the time, but I doubt it. I think it is more like lightning to them or even reflection from a car light, etc. If you would like some pictures that I've taken in the past week and other information, feel free to PM me and I'll reply and send you pics too. 
Keep smiling!
Dennis


----------



## wild bill (Apr 20, 2001)

well i have been using the 35mm cameras for about 10 years now. started out with an original camtrakker and now have the cheap moultrie 35's. i have tried 2 of the new moultrie digitals and both of them have gone back to the store. picture quality was good for the money but trigger speed was way to slow for me. on a side by side comparison with my moultrie 35mm i went through 3 rolls of 24exp film and only got 6 pictures on the digital. the cuddeback has a faster trigger time and the new leaf river cams are supposed to be right there with the cuddeback. from people i have talked to and reports i have read i have decided on getting one of the new leaf river digitals in the spring.


----------



## sagittarius (Jun 2, 2004)

From reading about game cameras on multiple forums, the concensous seems to be that it is not the "flash" that bothers deer, but that the mechanical noises of the camera, shutter, ect. that do.


----------



## farm hunter (Sep 6, 2004)

cuddeback - I hear you can get the 1.3 megapixel for less than $300 now that the new one has come out. (Leaf river might beas good).


The 1.3 mp has enough resolution for me - it does really great on slow moving deer - and captures faster moving deer well enough to tell what you need. Examples below:










and










Every now and then I get a blurry picture -

Also - I can turn off the flash function - if I'm worried about spooking the deer - or if its on a trail where people might drive pass through after dark. It 100% silent taking pictures - so it never spooks a deer taking the picture without a flash.

I think the flash does spook some deer:










FH


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

FH -
Cool pics! As far as the flash, I'm more worried that someone might see the flash at night from a road and steal the camara. There are some food plots on my property that I'd like to get some pics of to see what deer are using them but they are too exposed and can be seen from the road and I don't want to risk getting my camara stolen. I mount my camaras up a little higher and then put a little wedge behind the top so they are angled slightly downward. This prevents a deer from walking directly in front of the camara and causing a pic like your last one. Once again, nice pics.
_________________________________
Munsterlndr
Curmudgeon in Training


----------



## DryFly (Jun 4, 2001)

Long battery life 3 mos on 4 D cell.

Fastest trigger speed. 

Totally programable, adjustable time delay between pictures, flash on or off, program to take pictures day, night or both and much more. 

I love it. Buy an extra card and change them in the field, go home and view on the computer. 

For you guys who have posted pictures with the Cuddie Back, did you know you can program them so your name appears on the picture along with date and time? It is programmed with a password. Your name will always be on each picture and can only be changed by knowing the password. In case it gets stolen, you will be able to identify it if you find the low life who took it. 

Here is one of my pictures with my name.


----------



## bjmad (Oct 11, 2004)

I just purchased a brand new cuddeback 3.0 megapixel for $290.00. I get the flash cards from work for free once in awhile, up to 256 meg cards. I just switch them out. So far, the camera has worked flawlessly. Once I get some decent pics I'll post them. I found a deal on the camera on Ebay from an authorized dealer. I can't find anymore yet.


----------



## Backwoods-Savage (Aug 28, 2005)

I also switch cards in the field. Had the camera now for a couple of weeks and have gotten a couple hundred pictures. Even tried some video but went back to still shots. So far I have seen nothing in the pictures to give me the impression that the flash bothers them at all. I have had a couple deer smelling of the camera but I had not sprayed with any Scent Shield either nor had I worn rubber gloves then. 

As far as the flash spooking them, the camera is set to take pictures one minute apart. I have a series of three of a buck: 1. coming in; 2. scraping; 3. going up to the branch. Shows no sign of spooking. 

I agree that most of the spooking that people have noticed has been from 35mm cameras that make a noise when forwarding the film.


----------



## ThumbBum (Oct 13, 2003)

Thanks for all the input everyone

Its neck and neck betwenn the Cuddeback and the Bushnell Pro with nightvision. Im leaning toward the Bushnell, it has less resolution then the Cuddeback (2.1 vs 3.0) but I like the nighvision feature. Cabellas lists the Bushnell for $350 but I have found it online for $273.


----------

