DSLR camera - which one for macro images?

Dr Strange

Hi,

I have a question regarding digital cameras with good macro functions (approx 1cm) for scientific imaging.

I would like to buy a camera which permits the recording of surface structures on bones (such as cut marks, etc.) and in bones (trabeculae, etc.) as well as taking good quality pictures of whole bones/skeletons. Can you recommend something that is versatile and not too expensive but would do the job to a high standard?

Also, when recording fine structures what output would be preferable? Most do jpeg but what about RAW CCD?

Please note that I don't really know much about photography at all but would still need to produce good scientific results.

paudie

If you are looking at getting a dslr camera then you will be looking at getting a macro lens. All the bodies will have pretty much the same ability it's the lens that is important. One difference between them might be if one camera has more megapixels it would let you zoom in digitally after the photo has been taken and still provide a usable shot. There are also things called extension tubes which allow normal lenses to work as macro lenses, although I'm not very familiar with them. Any of the low range cameras would be fine provided you get a good macro lens and tripod.

That said there are compact cameras that have fairly good macro ability. The Canon Powershot series or even the Canon G10 models are pretty good in this area.

wersal gummage

you should check the minimum focusing distances on cameras (bridge types) or on lenses (for SLRs).

I have an SLR and a fairly decent macro lense - it wont focus down to 1cm though.....

Dr Strange

wersal gummage wrote: »

I have an SLR and a fairly decent macro lense - it wont focus down to 1cm though.....

Hi,

yes, that's why I was thinking of going for a digital slr (it seems that some have a super macro function like some of the Fuji Finepix DSLR that allow you to go to approx. 1cm?)

Digital would be necessary for me anyway, as I need to work immediately with the images.

Beano

arent the macro capabilities more of a function of the lens rather than the body on an SLR?
If you are serious about macro photography take a look at this

Canon 5X Macro Lens

wersal gummage

Preusse wrote: »

Hi,

yes, that's why I was thinking of going for a digital slr (it seems that some have a super macro function like some of the Fuji Finepix DSLR that allow you to go to approx. 1cm?)

Digital would be necessary for me anyway, as I need to work immediately with the images.

Sorry for any confusion - I have a DSLR (well, actually SLR and DSLR!) - it is the lense that really counts. I meant that my macro lense, on the DSLR, wont focus down to 1cm. This is canon - I cant comment on the fuji - but was just throwing it out there to check the mimimum focussing distance on whatever you are looking at.

Dr Strange

Most important is that it is a fool-proof system, meaning that I (the fool) can just use it without having to know much about manual settings, changing lenses, etc.

wersal gummage

Beano wrote: »

take a look at this

Canon 5X Macro Lens

Preusse wrote: »

Most important is that it is a fool-proof system, meaning that I (the fool) can just use it without having to know much about manual settings, changing lenses, etc.

the MP 65 canon lense would be regarded as a difficult lense to get to grips with , never mind for fools:D;)

Beano

wersal gummage wrote: »

the MP 65 canon lense would be regarded as a difficult lense to get to grips with , never mind for fools:D;)

Fair point But for the kind of work he intends doing i think the OP will have to invest some time learning how to do it properly. I cant see him getting the results he wants with a compact or a bridge camera.

CabanSail

1cm is really going to be quite difficult as that is very close.

I would more advise going for a specialty Macro Lens that would allow you to get a bit further away, something like the Nikon 105mm Micro (same as Macro) as that is a 1:1 lens. The longer focal length will allow you to be a bit further away. This will also allow you to get some more light on the subject so that you can increase your Depth of Field.

You will also require some off camera flash, a stand for that & a good tripod for the camera. All this does not come cheap.

CabanSail

Preusse wrote: »

Most important is that it is a fool-proof system, meaning that I (the fool) can just use it without having to know much about manual settings, changing lenses, etc.

You are talking about some fairly specialist photography here. This will require some, if not a lot, of understanding if you want anywhere near decent results.

TBH you may be better to get a Photographer in to take the shots you require as it will get you better results & save money.

Dr Strange

Beano wrote: »

Fair point But for the kind of work he intends doing i think the OP will have to invest some time learning how to do it properly. I cant see him getting the results he wants with a compact or a bridge camera.

CabanSail wrote: »

1cm is really going to be quite difficult as that is very close...
You will also require some off camera flash, a stand for that & a good tripod for the camera. All this does not come cheap.

Oh dear. Just before I make any decisions at all, has anyone experience with the Finepix DSRL cameras such as the S9600 or any of the other models?

Dr Strange

CabanSail wrote: »

You are talking about some fairly specialist photography here. This will require some, if not a lot, of understanding if you want anywhere near decent results.

TBH you may be better to get a Photographer in to take the shots you require as it will get you better results & save money.

Maybe it sounds a bit more complicated than it is. I had a camera in our lab some years back which was stolen. This was a digital camera with macro function of approx. 2cm. I got really good pictures out of it (bone details etc) and some were even published. The only set-up I had was the camera, natural light and flash (on the camera) and a tripod. Unfortunately, I cannot remember the make of the camera but was told at the time when it was stolen that they couldn't get that model anymore. Now I am looking for something similarly easy to use but with equally good results.

elven

I think you're looking for a bridge camera, rather than a DSLR. A DSLR is built to take interchangeable lenses which is why most people are talking about lenses here. There are quite a few threads on bridge cameras although i don't know if anyone has approached the specific topic of serious macro with them. Try googling "bridge camera macro" or "finepix s9600 macro capability" and you'll probably get a few useful hits.

Also check any camera review site like DPreview, and it'll tell you the minimum focusing distance in the specifications list.

CabanSail

Here is information on the Fuji S9600

It says it will focus down to 2cm.

Beano

CabanSail wrote: »

Here is information on the Fuji S9600

It says it will focus down to 2cm.

The 9600 has a super macro mode that goes to 1cm according to that review. That may suit the OPs needs. I have the predecessor of the 9600 and its fairly straightforward to use.

FoxT

Hi, the distance from the camera to the subject is not enough info to determine what you need, as subject distance will depend on the lens focal length, camera sensor size, desired print size, etc., etc. .
It sounds though, that you want to be able to take a decent photo of something say 1cm square and then be able to print it to say half the size of an A4 page? You should be able to do this with pretty much any decent compact camera.
I suggest that to start off try a compact with a macro function. See if you can borrow one & experiment with it. Post a few photos here for C&C & I am sure you will get good advice on how to proceed further.
I also suggest that go for a camera/lens combination that enables you to take the photo with the camera at least 20cm from the subject. This will make setup & lighting much easier. Best of luck, FoxT

PaulieC

I have a Canon G9 and the minimum macro focussing distance is 1cm. I think if you are taking macros shots at this focal length then you almost definitely need a ring flash to get some light on your subject. The build-in flash is going to be useless.

Here are some macro shots I took with the G9, all from pretty much minimum distance (or as close as I could get)








I actually sold a print of the snail this morning, which was nice

Dr Strange

There's a lot of good advice here - thanks very much!

FoxT suggested to post some images as well and I like that but would my "subject" area be suitable at all? Obviously, I am not going to post anything offensive or sensitive info/images.

I will have a look at our local photo shop and see what they have in stock on Saturday. If they don't have anything decent are there any recommendable online shops for cameras?

CabanSail

Where is local to "the eagles nest"?

If you are close to Dublin I would go to Gunns on Wexford St. You will get some good advice there & their prices are normally the best for a Bricks & Mortar shop.

Dr Strange

CabanSail wrote: »

Where is local to "the eagles nest"?

If you are close to Dublin I would go to Gunns on Wexford St. You will get some good advice there & their prices are normally the best for a Bricks & Mortar shop.

In Bray. The Eagle's Nest (although many link it with Austria due to my militaria collecting hobby) was a coffee shop situated on Bray Head.

charybdis

Presumably, the lens needs to be of sufficient focal length and not just have a low minimum focusing distance. As such, I'd say any dedicated macro fixed-focal length lens would work well.

You should also look into buying a good tripod and some lighting equipment as these will probably make the greatest difference in the quality of your output.

paudie

**** did anyone bother to read my post?

Get the Canon g10, make sure there are lots of bright lights, you'll be fine.

Dr Strange

Just had a look at the G10. That is quite expensive! What about the G11? It is cheaper apparently (but still quite steep at €499).

EDIT: Just saw that I was looking at a different online shop. The G10 is actually a bit cheaper on the other website. Still over 400 though!

paudie

Yeah whatever the newer one is, someone mentioned a g9 so I figured g10 was the new one.
They reduced the MP but it cleaned up the picture nicely. I've seen a good few macro shots with it and it seems to be the business.

PaulieC

you could go for a secondhand G9. I see them from time to time on adverts

I my g9 !!

seclachi

Id say borrow a dslr and macro lens if possible (or go into a camera shop with a sample you want to photograph) and see it suits your needs. I think a DSLR and macro lens (or maybe a super zoom) would get you good results, even a relativity cheap DSLR is miles ahead of any compact camera you may have used in the past. Decent lenes tend to be pretty steep though, so a body + lens is a bit of an outlay. I have an Sony A200, its fantastic camera, I think the 230 has supersceded it, its about 350 sterling, so I would say with the macro lens it would be around 500 euro.

Dr Strange

cambo_gueno wrote: »

you could go for a secondhand G9. I see them from time to time on adverts

I my g9 !!

I actually started looking last night on adverts

I am just a bit wary when it comes to buying second hand electronic material. And it is difficult to check everything (lens etc) until you actually got it and have taken some pictures.

Barname

Preusse wrote: »

I actually started looking last night on adverts

I am just a bit wary when it comes to buying second hand electronic material. And it is difficult to check everything (lens etc) until you actually got it and have taken some pictures.

early adopters and gadget freaks always have good stuff to offload

some of this stuff is barely used by them...

some folk have had a G9 followed by G10, G11

The burst bubble may have restrained them...

anytime I have gone to Camera shops in Dublin lately they have been packed though ??? busy busy

DK32

Last time I was in Conns they had a load of second hand cams including a G10