# A decent, yet not too $$, camera that does Macro?



## BigguyZ

My camera just can't focus up close.  So, does anyone have any reccomendations for a decent, low-cost option?  I've heard good things about Cannons in general, and with Macro photos as well.  Thoughts?

Thanks!


----------



## MesquiteMan

What do you consider low cost?  I really like my Sony cameras.  I shoot all of my pics with a Sony DSC H5 that I bought a few years ago.  I paid nearly $500 for it at the time.  Right before we went to Alaska for vacation this year, I decided to look for a smaller camera.  I ended up buying a Sony DSC H20 for $279 at Best Buy.  It is basically the same camera as my H5 but in a much smaller package.  I LOVE this camera!  It takes WONDERFUL HD video too, better than my 3 year old digital video camera.  Not sure if $279 is considerd low cost to you, though.


----------



## MesquiteMan

Oh, btw, it will focus as close as .07" (2 cm).


----------



## Rifleman1776

I can verify that the Sony DSC H-whatever models are fine cameras. Mine is an older DSC H-2 and I love it. Very versatile and has taken many breathtaking photos.
I am saving pennies, though, to buy an Olympus SP-590 UZ at about $400.00.
If you want a tiny point and shoot, the Nikon Coolpix series are really fine and dependable. My wife loves hers. This is after disappointments with several other brands. (Kodak, Pentax, etc.)


----------



## Seer

I use a Canon A590 Powershot that I like I am still learning more about it as my pictures get better.


----------



## stolicky

Most point-and-shoot cameras actually take decent macro pics.  I have now ventured into the world of dSLRs, and it is actually much more difficult.

Anyway, I have been a canon fan for years.  Sony and Nikon do make good camera.  The two key reasons I tend to shy away from sonys are: 1) they tend to be overpriced for the product you actually get, and 2) their propitiatory memory stick (again, more $$).  They are good cameras, but do tend to cost you more.


----------



## alphageek

As others have asked.... What do you consider $$ you want to spend?

Also what are you looking for other than that?  Pocket size, or something a little bigger but better for pictures.    I can recommend a Canon if you list budget.   I'm a big canon fan and can tell you they are very good, but you have to know what you want to spend first.


----------



## BigguyZ

Well, I'm not looking to buy tomorrow- but within the next 2-3 months.  My budget will be $2-300 or so.  I wouldn't mind keeping it closer to $200 though, as I want to get a website started....  

I like Sony'd stuff, but I hate hate HATE their memory sticks.  I guess if it came down to Sony having the hands-down best product for the money, but somehow I doubt Sony will break any value records.

Right now, I have a P&S (not POS, though it's that too), Fuji, and I was never happy with it.  Terrible to take a picture without the flash- always blurry without that.


----------



## stolicky

BigguyZ said:


> Right now, I have a P&S (not POS, though it's that too), Fuji, and I was never happy with it.  Terrible to take a picture without the flash- always blurry without that.



I strongly recommend a tripod when taking pics for a web site; especially when in macro mode.  That should help with the blur.

Some cameras also allow for a wired or wireless shutter release that will limit camera movement.  You can find some cheap generic one's on the bay for very little $$.

Oh, a camera with white balance controls is also particularly useful.


----------



## jleiwig

I've gone through Three Nikon cool pix and have never liked the colder image tone they provide.  I have an older Cannon G2 that I cannot kill, although recently my wife stepped on the LCD screen cracking it.  It still takes amazing pictures at 2 mp, and I plan on getting I believe it is the powershot A1180S or something like that.  Walmart has it for around $200 or $225.


----------



## alphageek

BigguyZ said:


> Well, I'm not looking to buy tomorrow- but within the next 2-3 months.  My budget will be $2-300 or so.  I wouldn't mind keeping it closer to $200 though, as I want to get a website started....
> 
> I like Sony'd stuff, but I hate hate HATE their memory sticks.  I guess if it came down to Sony having the hands-down best product for the money, but somehow I doubt Sony will break any value records.
> 
> Right now, I have a P&S (not POS, though it's that too), Fuji, and I was never happy with it.  Terrible to take a picture without the flash- always blurry without that.



Within that range, the best camera that I would suggest is the Canon SX120.  I have the SX110 and that one works great (It works much better with lithium batteries than recharables, but thats no big deal)   Great for pen shots, small but with a really decent zoom.


----------



## BigguyZ

alphageek said:


> Within that range, the best camera that I would suggest is the Canon SX120.  I have the SX110 and that one works great (It works much better with lithium batteries than recharables, but thats no big deal)   Great for pen shots, small but with a really decent zoom.



I definitely plan on using a tripod for taking marco pics.  The blurry image issue is something I've dealt with on my Fuji for ALL pictures.  It's darn near impossible to get a clear picture without the flash...  Even for a picture of a room or person.

I like the idea of the remote shutter, I may look into that.

The Cannon's sound like a good way to go.  I'll take a good look at the SX120 and the A1180S.  

Thanks!


----------



## alphageek

BigguyZ said:


> I definitely plan on using a tripod for taking marco pics.  The blurry image issue is something I've dealt with on my Fuji for ALL pictures.  It's darn near impossible to get a clear picture without the flash...  Even for a picture of a room or person.
> 
> I like the idea of the remote shutter, I may look into that.
> 
> The Cannon's sound like a good way to go.  I'll take a good look at the SX120 and the A1180S.
> 
> Thanks!



If the camera doesn't have a remote shutter, the other option is the canons have a "2 second delay" which means you press the button, then it takes the pic after 2 seconds.   Eliminated the movement from you pressing the button without having to buy a remote.


----------



## Lenny

You've received a lot of good advice above, I would just add that I have found switching to spot metering mode sometimes helps for me (Canon Powershot SD850IS Digital Elph on a tripod, macro, 2 sec timer,cheap light tent).
Whenever I am considering a new camera I always look here first for reviews ...
http://www.steves-digicams.com/


----------



## BigguyZ

Cool- Thanks everyone!  I think I have what I need to begin my search.  Like I said, I'm looking for something to pick up in a month or two, but I'd like to be ready when I'm able to pull the trigger.

Thanks again!


----------



## TellicoTurning

MesquiteMan said:


> What do you consider low cost?  I really like my Sony cameras.  I shoot all of my pics with a Sony DSC H5 that I bought a few years ago.  I paid nearly $500 for it at the time.  Right before we went to Alaska for vacation this year, I decided to look for a smaller camera.  I ended up buying a Sony DSC H20 for $279 at Best Buy.  It is basically the same camera as my H5 but in a much smaller package.  I LOVE this camera!  It takes WONDERFUL HD video too, better than my 3 year old digital video camera.  Not sure if $279 is considerd low cost to you, though.



Curtis,
I have an old Sony Mavica with a 3.5" floppy that I really like... problem is, the battery has given up the ghost (and my computer no longer has a 3.5 floppy slot).. but I got great photos from that old camera.

Now I use a Fuji Finepix S5200 that does a good job.... I can't speak to the cost of either camera... both were gifts from my sons... the Sony from my son when he upgraded and the Fuji from my step-son when he upgraded.  My step-son is an amateur photographer that could well be in class with most professionals and uses a couple of Nikons.. D50 & D80.  I think the Fuji he gave me - for what I do with a camera - does as good a job as his Nikons.  

For shooting my turnings, I always use a tripod.. and usually the timer so my hands are away from the camera when it shoots.


----------



## Texatdurango

I just tried to get some really close up shots to show some clip detail on a pen and my camera just doesn't cut it.

Do any of the cameras mentioned above give the oppurnutity to take detail shots from a few inches away AND stay in focus?


----------



## MesquiteMan

George, my camera will take pics super close and stay in focus.  The manual says .07" (2 cm).  Never actually measure it but I have done real close pics and were happy with the results.


----------



## Al_T

For what you are looking to spend I would look at some of the Lumix cameras, I have lumix ZS1 which is a compact super zoom which has some of the best macro of any compact camera that I have come across. Also the glass in the camera is Leica which is very nice. The ZS1 can be had for about $240 at Costco and $258 at Sam's. This camera always rates highest in its class for compact super zooms. The camera also has image stabilization. 

Here is are a couple of pics one of a coral vine flower about 1/4" across with a very small ant in the center and the camera held free hand. And another flower that I am not sure what it is but also held free hand. Some deterioration from downsizing the photos but overall pretty good macro. They look very good full screen. 

Alan


----------



## Texatdurango

MesquiteMan said:


> George, my camera will take pics super close and stay in focus. The manual says .07" (2 cm). Never actually measure it but I have done real close pics and were happy with the results.


 
How is it in the dark?  A few weeks ago we visited Carlsbad Caverns and noticed everyone else snapping photos and viewing what appeared to be decent shots in the dark cavern with only dim light showcaing structures.

When I tried with my little ole 7 year old Kodak I got zilch or very poor shots!

So, am I asking too much... close up macro AND low light capability?

I'm about ready to run down to Best Buy but don't trust what any of the worms there have to say.


----------



## wicook

I just bought a Canon Powershot SX10is that adapts well to low light AND does super-macro shots at 0" from the front of the lens out to about 3" or 4"...it cost $400CDN. It also has a macro setting that works very well.


----------



## Texatdurango

I spent an hour at the local Best Buy looking at several cameras, and was amazed at how far they have come since my little Kodak 4mp camera, 5+ years ago!

Of all the cameras I looked at the Sony Cyber Shot 12 mp # DSC-W230, on sale for $195, impressed me the most with macro shots and existing low light shots.  The Canon SX120 was also very impressive with the added bonus of long range zoom shots.  THey did not have the Sony DSC-H20 so couldn't really see what I went in for.

I can see some decent shots forthcoming with my little light tent!  IF I can just make up my mind!

*Question:*  None of the cameras I looked appeared to have "remote shutter" capabilities, something I would like to have.  I'm assuming this a feature normally found with the more expensive cameras but noticed the Sony has a delay timer feature.  I wonder if one could press the button then a few seconds later the photo snaps when my hands are away from the camera?


----------



## MesquiteMan

Texatdurango said:


> *Question:* None of the cameras I looked appeared to have "remote shutter" capabilities, something I would like to have. I'm assuming this a feature normally found with the more expensive cameras but noticed the Sony has a delay timer feature. I wonder if one could press the button then a few seconds later the photo snaps when my hands are away from the camera?


 
George, that is how I take ALL of my photos.  Camera on tripod, pic composed, timer set to 2 second, push button, get out of way, picture taken!  I would not even want a remote.


----------



## Texatdurango

MesquiteMan said:


> George, that is how I take ALL of my photos. Camera on tripod, pic composed, timer set to 2 second, push button, get out of way, picture taken! I would not even want a remote.


 
Exactly what I was hoping to hear!  I'm tired of wasting a lot of film on blurred shots because I have a heavy finger.

Oh my... I just said "film"!  I wonder if people these days realize how well off they have it, not having to mail film off then waiting a week for the photos. Ah... the good ole days!:biggrin:


----------



## alphageek

Texatdurango said:


> *Question:*  None of the cameras I looked appeared to have "remote shutter" capabilities, something I would like to have.  I'm assuming this a feature normally found with the more expensive cameras but noticed the Sony has a delay timer feature.  I wonder if one could press the button then a few seconds later the photo snaps when my hands are away from the camera?



The Canon has that feature too... And like Curtis said, this is a great way to take pics on a tripod.. No shake, and no real need for a remote.


----------



## Lenny

Definitly use the 2 sec timer ! Also try experimenting with the different metering modes .... I find that simply switching to spot metering mode can vastly affect the photo quality (sometimes even in a good way)   =0)


----------



## writestuff

*Macro camera!*

I,ve been using LOMLs canon powershot 570 but recently went to refurbdepot.com and bought a canon SX10is for a little over $300.00.  It is the next best thing to an SLR without the extra lens luggage.  It does have a longer learning curve that the point and shoot cams, but @ 10,000 mpixels it realy rocks.  
WS.


----------

