Digital Camera suggestions

[paulstenlund]

Its time to take some photos of pens, stoppers, bandsaw boxes, etc.
My old Minolta Dimage just doesn't provide the resolution that is needed. Can you guys suggest a under $200 (or less) camera that will give a hi-res image of something the size of a pen/stopper?

Thanks
Paul

[Tom Slick]

all you need is a macro setting and more then 3 mp.

[paulstenlund]

It has macro, but it is busness card sized window. I guess you mean 3 mega pixels??

Thanks
Paul

[Tom Slick]

you mean the viewing screen is business card sized?

[mikel]

Canon's are nice and the new nikons. look st steve's digicams .com they review em all..


...m

[paulstenlund]

No, the field of view in macro setting is about is about 2"X 3", to small for a pen.

Paul

[poolhound]

Paul,

Are you looking new or used? something worthwhile for less than $200 new may be tough but you could find some used bargins on CL.

Tom is right that anything above 3MP should be good for you. He is also right about having a macro setting. However many cameras have just that "a setting" it doesnt really mean they have a useful macro mode. When you find something that looks promising then checkout the macro distance as some still can not focus as close as you want and if you use the zoom the focus distance gets even longer.

Most cameras will have a macro spec that tells you what the minimum focus distance is but this is usually at its widest zoom setting. This undoubtedly wont get you the field of view you would like. When you zoom in to get a better FoV then the min focus distance gets further away.

Do a google for "best compact camera macro" and see what you find. Some out there can focus as close as 1cm

[Tom Slick]

No, the field of view in macro setting is about is about 2"X 3", to small for a pen.

Paul

strange, I've never seen a camera that limits the macro size. Just about any camera will take care of your needs. I prefer canon or nikon, but sony, kodak, fujifilm, panasonic, all make nice units for under $200. the canon A590 IS can be picked up fairly "cheap".

[poolhound]

strange, I've never seen a camera that limits the macro size. Just about any camera will take care of your needs. I prefer canon or nikon, but sony, kodak, fujifilm, panasonic, all make nice units for under $200. the canon A590 IS can be picked up fairly "cheap".

Usually it is the other way around i.e. you cant get close enough and still obtain good focus.

Paul - we may be misunderstanding you but if you say 2x3 is too small cant you just pull back until you have the field of view you require?

[poolhound]

Paul,

Another couple of questions.

which model dimage do you have?

How big a picture do you wish to make from your images and is it for online posting or print?

[Russianwolf]

All the pics you've seen from me this year were taken on a Fujifilm S700 on Auto using the Macro feature. Get your lighting right and it turns out some nice shots. I think I paid in the $180 range.

[billfrommich]

Don't be seduced by high pixel count (8+ Megapixels). At $200 you're probably talking about a "snapshot" camera and not an SLR. Snapshot cameras have much smaller image sensing chips, which can result in poor quality photos if taken in low light situations. Although that shouldn't be an issue where you can control the light level and/or use flash, you might be dissapointed when using the camera in other situations. I have a Fujifilm FinePix F31fd (6 Megapixels) which is noted for its low light performance but frankly I don't think it is as good (in low light) as some 3 Megapixel cameras I've used before. A camera with a moderate to wide range optical (not digital) zoom, and a moderate pixel count is probably your best bet. Of course, macro capability is a must for closeups.

[LCHIEN]

my 2 cents is that when you use macro on many cameras, the lens is so close to the subject its hard to light properly. By that I mean the flash will be relatively far off axis so that the light may come more from the side than head on and the field of flash coverage may only illuminate the upper corner of the frame. Getting exterior lighting on the subject may be difficult as the camera shadows the subject. You need good low light capability and ability to use a tripod and perhaps, macro capability at tele, not Wide angle settings thus avoiding very tight camera to subject distances.

A reasonable approach with so many 8 MP cameras now under $200 is to take as close a picture as you can with all 8 MP, not filling the frame but in focus. Then edit by cropping the picture taking the central portion - this will still be 2 MP if you use the middle 1/4 of the frame (1/2 in both the Horz and Vert directions) and be more resolution than you need or want in a on-line post here at BT3, if that is your main objective.

[garymuto]

I recieved a Canon A570? as a gift last year and have been really pleased. I was looking at the thinner cameras (SD1000?), but my brother advised my parents that the slightly larger camera had a better lense. I came from an 8 yr old 2.3 M pix Kodak so maybe I was easily impressed, but the canon is a great camera and that model series are usually on sale for less than $200.

[jziegler]

The Canon A5xx series would be a pretty good bet. I have the older 6mp A540 and it performs well in good light. The Fuji F31 mentioned before is also pretty good (I have a related superzoom, the S6000fd), although discontinued. The F41fd and F50fd are more current, similar cameras with (unfortunately) higher resolution. In general, I think that Canon, Fuji, Sony, and Panasonic make the best P&S digitals. Olympus, Pentax and Nikon make good DSLRs, but relatively underwhelming P&S. Still good quality, but nothing that stands out as exceptional in any way.

Jim