What's a good Camera w/ Macro lense..

[TRIGGERMAN]

I have been poking around stores checking some stuff out and looking online as well. The cameras I have seen are pretty expensive like 500-700 for the most part so before making such an investment I would like to get personal experience from people out there who take such beautiful pictures. I know there is quite a few camera junkies/pro photographers here so any help would be great.

I was shopping yesterday and saw a few w/ big fat lenses but they didn't seem to be too high on the mm's. Most of them were 55 at max despite that huge lense. From what I have gathered more or less the more mm the better the zoom. They had 2 models that peaked my interest.


Canon SX30IS 14.1mp, 2.7" LCD, 24-840mm

Nikon L110 12mp,3.0" LCD 28-420mm wide angle lens.

Anyone use either of these?

 

[stbarnabas]

when come tonight to my house ill show you my stuff ( camera and lens )

id go with canon ....

 

[jejton]

First - decide what you want the camera for.
Second - Spend lots of time reading, reading, reading and if you can, playing with other people's cameras
Third - Go to camera shops to look.
Fourth - Read rread read
Fifth - Decide your budget and buy.

It seems like you're referring to SLR ( if that is foreign to you, go back to step 2 ). They are a big investment because not only do you buy a camera body, but you need to buy separate lens for whatever applications you have in mind, as well as other accessories. Digital has complicated it further and increased costs too ( except of course no film to buy ). If you go with SLR, important to try and save money for the better lens, not necessarily the body, because if you get hooked, you will upgrade to a a newer and/or better and/or more appropriate body sooner or later but your lens will stay with you and last for many many years if properly care for. The lens is actually the second most important part of your photography and the body is third. Number one is your artistic talent and technical skill ( digital has allowed everyone to be a photographer but has made it harder to be a really good photographyer because now you need to know how to use many more settings and software than before ). The camera body, especially current entry level models, are all good and very similar in capablities. The difference is in their details - something you will find important when you have some experience.

 

[jejton]

SLR for Dummies
and dpreview.com are good starting points.

 

[kidninja]

i love my Panasonic Lumix ZS7, i can bring it over later for you to try out

 

[jejton]

Ok scratch that. i just reread your post and saw the cameras you listed are not slr.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

I was looking at some SLR camera I forget which one it might have been a canon but it had this big lens and the zoom was only up to 55mm and it was like 500 or 600 bucks. I know the cameras are expensive I want it for taking pics of corals and just getting great pics in general (but mostly corals LOL). I have been reading but I want people's personal experience. I also want to know if anyone has used the cameras mentioned and what they are currently using.

ANYONEEEEEEEEEE?

 

[MSunkin23]

My input

So, I recently purchased Nikon D3000 ~$500. It came with the kit lens 18-55mm. With the kit lens, I was able to get some pretty good pictures of corals.

Corals, for the most part, do not move and are easy to capture. Fish are quicker and may require a faster lens, or a camera with higher ISO settings.

For me, I am doing fine with the D3000. If I did it again I would get the D3100.

As far as the Macro work. I purchased a macro filter off amazon for probably $5.00 or $10.00 shipped. It screws right on front of the kit lens. The enables you to focus at a closer distance from the lens, as well as magnification (link on bottom).

Keep in mind, a DSLR does not guarantee unreal shots. It takes thousands of practice shots to get it down, probably more than thousands. Good news is that there are tons of informational websites online to get the skills down.

I will link my thread so you can take a look at some of my shots. All taken with a Nikon D3000 with our without the macro filter.

http://www.manhattanreefs.com/forum/tank-threads/75205-oceanic-biocube-14-setup-3.html



http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002VSM7LE/?tag=reefs04-20

 

[blueink]

if u really want good macro, get a cheap slr body and a great macro lens. the lens itself will run u at least 5 big ones. it aint cheap. if u want cheap, go with a point n shoot. u get what u paid for.

 

[doma25]

Nikon, Canon and Sigma macro lens

If you're looking to purchase a macro lens for the first time, it's easy to get confused by the range that is available. For Canon Digital SLR camera's, there are 3 popular choices.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens
SIGMA 50mm f2.8 EX Macro 1:1 Lens for Canon SLR digital camera's
For photographers who use Nikon SLR camera's, there is:

Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens
Nikon 60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor Lens
Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras
What is the main differences between a 50mm, 60mm, 100mm and 105mm macro lens?

The lower the focal length of the lens, the lower the cost. For example, a Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens is cheaper to buy than a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens. Similarly, a 60mm Nikon lens is cheaper than the 105mm Micro Nikkor lens.

The lower the focal length of the lens, the smaller and lighter it will be to carry. For example, the Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens weighs 27.9 ounces or 790 grams, whereas the Nikon 60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor Lens weighs half that at only 15.5 ounces.

However, the lower the focal length of the macro lens, the closer you also need to be to the subject you're photographing. This is an important consideration to take into account when it comes to macro photography. Personally I recommend spending that bit extra to purchase the Canon 100mm or the Nikon 105mm macro lens.

It's common to come across photographers who had purchased a 50 or 60mm and later wished they'd upgraded to a 100 or 105mm macro lens. Most complain that they need to be physically positioned too close to an insect to properly focus their 50/60mm macro lens. This can scare away the insect before they get a chance to take the shot. Another complaint, concerns the shadow that can be thrown over a subject when you need to be closer. Light is an important aspect in macro photography to enable you to keep a fast enough shutter speed to capture insects on the move.

To give you an idea of the difference in shooting distance between focal lengths, a 100mm macro lens used at approximately 45cm from the subject will have the same magnification as a 50mm lens used at only 23cm from the subject.
What macro lens should you buy? Which one's are the best?

Ideally, if you own a Canon SLR camera, then the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens is currently the best glass for both insect and flower photography. For Nikon users, the 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens is the way to go.

 

[doma25]

found that on a good website, hope it helps

 

[smoq]

Good info Doma. That's what I always tell people to do, get the longest macro they can afford. There's not much difference between 90mm from Tamron and Nikon's 105mm (about 1 inch of focusing distance) but if you can afford Nikon/Canon, go for it, you can't get any better.

 

[TheHun]

and don't forget this Tokina 100mm f/2.8, great lens great price...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/100mm-f28.htm


"This Tokina 100mm f/2.8 AF Macro is a great lens for macro, and especially good for any use as a portrait or telephoto lens. It is probably the best 100mm or 105mm macro there is, and costs half of what other lenses cost."

 

[Quang]

Also consider the new Micro Four Thirds type cameras - they might fit your need.

I own an Olympus E-PL1 with a Panasonic prime lens and it takes pretty good tank pics. There are also macro lens available but I have not tried them. The cool thing about the Micro Four Thirds system is that the lens are swappable between major brands without the need for an adapter...like in my case a Olympus camera with a Panasonic lens.

 

[DHaut]

Keep in mind, a DSLR does not guarantee unreal shots. It takes thousands of practice shots to get it down, probably more than thousands. Good news is that there are tons of informational websites online to get the skills down.

This.

For DSLR, I'd get a used 30D in good condition and a used Sigma 150mm. That's what I shoot with - solid setup.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

Thanks a lot guys I going to be doing some more camera shopping in a lil bit and see what's in a couple stores. Has anyone used the 2 particular cameras I mentioned? Or at least know if they are good? The specs sound pretty good to me and they were pretty well priced the Nikon was around 200 and the Canon was around 400.

 

[FocusReefing]

Check craiglist. Theres always someone selling used gear. You can get a used 30d or 20d even cheaper cause its much older. If you just want it for shooting corals you wont need anything serious. Slrs much offer more control & better/ faster lense than a point & shoot. I got my 100mm macro used in mint condition for $200 about 2 years ago. That was a great deal! I love craigs list! Just remember the great pics people take dont just come by way of a good camera but mostly from experience.

 

[TRIGGERMAN]

Thanks bro, I'm doing some more camera shopping today I'll list what I saw and liked on here when I get back. I would still like to know about the ones I mentioned though. They were up to 420 and 840 mm and according to the prices I am seeing for 55mm these seemed very cheap.

 

[DHaut]

Check www.photography-on-the.net for used canon gear. I nabbed my sigma 150 on there for $400, in mint condition. i know they have used 30D and 40D bodies all the time.

 

[Hadakiri]

Awesome advise dogma.