Best 10 mp camera
- Thread starter Bugzme
- Start date
IPT
Active member
You could buy my old Canon 10D : ). Oh wait, that's only 7MP - but you said you didn't want to spend a lot. You might want to look at some of the older Canons like the 5D (original - I'm selling one of those too if your interested), the 20D, or the 50D. Buying a used Camera will be the best deal. The 5D's are around, so are some 50D's since a lot of people went to the 7D and 5D MK2. You are shooting Canon right, 
, ?
, ?
IPT
Active member
hm, lot of people on here with lots of knowledge and suggestions. You are going to have to be more specific about what you want (P&S vs SLR vs some after market screw on filter for what you already have) and how much you are willing to spend. There are tons of options but your goals and financial limits will have a large impact!
I'm fairly new to the saltwater hobby, but I'm definitely not new to photography, so perhaps I can assist.
The first thing that alarms me here is that you specifically want a 10MP camera. One of the first and most valuable lessons you should learn about digital cameras is that their megapixel ratings are a very small component of the quality of a final shot. What's really going to affect your image quality is your lens, bar-none.
Also remember that lenses too have resolutions. Most of the crap for quality stuff out there is way below the MP ratings for cameras these days. IMHO anything 6 or more MP is usually fine. Keep in mind, if you were going for the best image quality in the world, my advice would be very different, but what you want is a quality camera for cheap (well, the quality part is assumed).
I would recommend looking into a used body. If you're looking at cannon's, remember the rebel series is really good. There are very minor differences between the rebel series and the 'pro' series like the 10D/20D etc, making the increased price tag hard to justify in many cases.
You may want to consider checking into some other brand cameras with good glass like the pentax, konika minolta, and olympus. I would recommend not getting wrapped up in any hype for any camera manufacturer and keep it simple. In the camera world, there are gimmicks that go on constantly, just like in the saltwater aquarium hobby. 99% of the time those special things are merely marketing hype.
When selecting a lens is where things will get tricky especially when looking for a good price to quality ratio. I would recommend investing up to 3x more into the lens than the camera body. If it was me, I would probably shoot for a good $300 macro lens (buying them used is going to save you very little) and a $100 used DSLR body. Probably a rebel or rebel xt could be had for $100 if you look hard enough. Remember to get the body only, the kit lens is pretty much useless and people selling them with the kit lens usually think it's worth a fortune for some reason. Where you'll find such a deal is usually among photographers themselves as just like computer enthusiasts etc some people just upgrade constantly and their old stuff they sell off to recover some of the cost.
The first thing that alarms me here is that you specifically want a 10MP camera. One of the first and most valuable lessons you should learn about digital cameras is that their megapixel ratings are a very small component of the quality of a final shot. What's really going to affect your image quality is your lens, bar-none.
Also remember that lenses too have resolutions. Most of the crap for quality stuff out there is way below the MP ratings for cameras these days. IMHO anything 6 or more MP is usually fine. Keep in mind, if you were going for the best image quality in the world, my advice would be very different, but what you want is a quality camera for cheap (well, the quality part is assumed).
I would recommend looking into a used body. If you're looking at cannon's, remember the rebel series is really good. There are very minor differences between the rebel series and the 'pro' series like the 10D/20D etc, making the increased price tag hard to justify in many cases.
You may want to consider checking into some other brand cameras with good glass like the pentax, konika minolta, and olympus. I would recommend not getting wrapped up in any hype for any camera manufacturer and keep it simple. In the camera world, there are gimmicks that go on constantly, just like in the saltwater aquarium hobby. 99% of the time those special things are merely marketing hype.
When selecting a lens is where things will get tricky especially when looking for a good price to quality ratio. I would recommend investing up to 3x more into the lens than the camera body. If it was me, I would probably shoot for a good $300 macro lens (buying them used is going to save you very little) and a $100 used DSLR body. Probably a rebel or rebel xt could be had for $100 if you look hard enough. Remember to get the body only, the kit lens is pretty much useless and people selling them with the kit lens usually think it's worth a fortune for some reason. Where you'll find such a deal is usually among photographers themselves as just like computer enthusiasts etc some people just upgrade constantly and their old stuff they sell off to recover some of the cost.
Last edited:
If you're mainly interested in tank shots, you're going to want a camera that performs well at a higher ISO (800 or higher) to help keep that shutter speed high - that is an area that P&S cameras cannot compete with.
As others have said, go with a used body. The Canon Rebel series is an excellent entry level DSLR and has top notch low light performance. Canon makes good macro lenses and either the 60mm or 100mm will perform well. Given your budget the 100mm may be out of your price range (the IS version will be for sure!) Both are relatively fast lenses at f/2.8 which will allow higher shutter speeds.
Whichever brand you choose, remember that you are buying into a system. The majority of your money should be spent on lenses.
As others have said, go with a used body. The Canon Rebel series is an excellent entry level DSLR and has top notch low light performance. Canon makes good macro lenses and either the 60mm or 100mm will perform well. Given your budget the 100mm may be out of your price range (the IS version will be for sure!) Both are relatively fast lenses at f/2.8 which will allow higher shutter speeds.
Whichever brand you choose, remember that you are buying into a system. The majority of your money should be spent on lenses.
The camera + lens for $500 is going to be a little difficult (though not necessarily impossible). I'm a Canon guy, so I'll give Canon suggestions, but they certainly aren't the only SLR on the market worth buying, so I suggest getting opinions for Nikon, Pentax, Sony, etc. But as far as my suggestion, I'd ask IPT how much he wants for his 10D and then pick up either the Canon or Sigma 100mm, non image stabilized macro lens (I think the Sigma is a 100mm, though it may be 105mm). A 20D - 40D would be better, but you may not be able to afford both the camera and a good lens.
As Kamel said, the Canon Rebel series are also good cameras. I find the 10-50D cameras easier to use, but the image quality really isn't any better than their corresponding Rebel counterparts. The double digit series aren't technically considered pro cameras by the way (the 1D series are Canon's professional cameras). Canon calls them their "pro-sumer" cameras. . .i.e. somewhere between amateur and professional. What that really means is they're still somewhat affordable.
As Kamel said, the Canon Rebel series are also good cameras. I find the 10-50D cameras easier to use, but the image quality really isn't any better than their corresponding Rebel counterparts. The double digit series aren't technically considered pro cameras by the way (the 1D series are Canon's professional cameras). Canon calls them their "pro-sumer" cameras. . .i.e. somewhere between amateur and professional. What that really means is they're still somewhat affordable.
Sorry, I realize they have many different marketing terms for their cameras, but atleast during the 350D (rebel xt) series, the rebels were the ones beginning to enter the market as the first DSLR's that were not considered "professional". Having said that, I don't buy into any of that. It's unimportant to me what is considered professional grade, I only care about quality and the ability to capture that quality in a way that's going to keep me from missing out on anything.
For this reason, I would never spend $4000 for a camera body. Also for this reason, I am not as respected of a photographer as some, because it tends to be a hobby that's very much so about appearance rather than performance (interestingly enough).
Saltwater tanks can have a similar problem while thinking of it actually! Hah. Seems when rich people gather it becomes a status thing as opposed to a quality of product thing.
At any rate, good luck. Invest in the lens, it's what's going to make your pictures great. $300 is not a bad budget for a good macro if you do it right, and as much as I don't care for nikon, they do have an amazing macro for right around $300. Being that you're using it for your fish tank, you're pretty much going to be shooting only macro. One thing to keep in mind is that macro lenses can be used for portrait etc pictures just fine, just aren't designed or ideal for them. This is important to keep in mind if you're ever scared about investing this much in a camera only to not be able to use it anywhere but really close up. That wont be the case.
Finally, if you want an exceptional lens for cheap look into getting a prime 50. This has got to be easily the best all around lens, and because of it being a prime and how common it is in portrait photography, the quality is absolutely outstanding. A good one can be had for cheap ($50-100 depending on your luck and the one you're getting). I wouldn't recommend it above a macro for aquarium photography, but if you want a cheap 'walk around' lens that's what I'd recommend. Honestly a prime 50 wouldn't be horrible for photographing your tank as the focus on them can be razor sharp and easily cropped, but would be nothing like a macro which is what you really need.
Just did some quick searches on fleabay and found this combination that would nail your price and what you're looking for (great camera, ironically exactly the MP value you were looking for, which isn't too important)
http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-D40X-10-2...772821?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item35aca52d15
http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-Nikkor-10...02985415?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a5f0ff8c7
Granted they are still bidding, they end soon and probably wont go up a heck of a lot, and currently are a bit under budget.
Having said that, I know nothing about either seller so do your own research, just shown as a working example. If I were to have $500 budget for a good macro setup, this would be what I'd get.
Small note I forgot to mention. When going for a good macro, the 100mm range is much better for aquarium photography as the 50-60mm range would work but wouldn't allow you to take full advantage of the macro due to not being able to get close enough to your subject.
http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-D40X-10-2...772821?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item35aca52d15
http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-Nikkor-10...02985415?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a5f0ff8c7
Granted they are still bidding, they end soon and probably wont go up a heck of a lot, and currently are a bit under budget.
Having said that, I know nothing about either seller so do your own research, just shown as a working example. If I were to have $500 budget for a good macro setup, this would be what I'd get.
Small note I forgot to mention. When going for a good macro, the 100mm range is much better for aquarium photography as the 50-60mm range would work but wouldn't allow you to take full advantage of the macro due to not being able to get close enough to your subject.
ducklabdad
New member
:hammer::hammer::hammer:
Last edited:
ducklabdad
New member
Rhizo
Member
First, why the demand for high MP? What exactly will you be printing for or cropping? Heck I'll take an old E-1 or Canon 1D over most of the new bodies anyday. Yes, I am talking about some 6MP and 4MP bodies.
The lens should have the highest priority, period. Find a nice 1:1 macro and then find the cheapest body you can get with your remaining money. Your $500 is a serious squeeze, but something like IPT's 10D is where I would start looking.
The lens should have the highest priority, period. Find a nice 1:1 macro and then find the cheapest body you can get with your remaining money. Your $500 is a serious squeeze, but something like IPT's 10D is where I would start looking.
Rhizo
Member
You are not reading.... clearly :hammer:
Beerguy would say: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1503490
First, why the demand for high MP? What exactly will you be printing for or cropping? Heck I'll take an old E-1 or Canon 1D over most of the new bodies anyday. Yes, I am talking about some 6MP and 4MP bodies.
The lens should have the highest priority, period. Find a nice 1:1 macro and then find the cheapest body you can get with your remaining money. Your $500 is a serious squeeze, but something like IPT's 10D is where I would start looking.
Completely agreed....
This is why I still recommend the nikon nikkor macro. This is probably the cheapest good quality macro you're gonna find.
Let me make this real easy for you... you can thank me later.
Order this: http://www.centraldigital.com/Product/?10579018&l=Froogle
Then find a body with your remaining money.
Also, keep in mind this is coming from a canon guy who doesn't care for nikon so I'm being as impartial as anyone could ever be.
IPT
Active member
Or an older G series.... The extension tubes were a good idea too, depending.
Having been at this a while I can tell you my experience has shown me a few things. First off, glass is where it is at. It's been said, but the lens is the most important part of the package. I'd take great glass with a cheep body any day over the opposite. It doesn't matter how low the noise, how good the AF system is, the ergonomics, weatherproofing, or how many MP's if the lens can't resolve the information and detail your sending to the body.
Okay, now for the kicker...you can buy once (big) or many times and then end up there anyway
.Over the years I worked my way thru a lot of gear. I used to look at the pro's images and wonder how they got such sharp images. Some of it is in technique, but some of it is the gear...and most people I think will agree it is the quality of the lenses. Once you choose a system (ie. Canon, Nikon) your glass will likely last you forever if you buy good stuff now. You'll change you bodies several times though.
I didn't have the money early on, so I bought what I could. As I got more into the hobby and got more money I upgraded and upgraded again. Knowing what I know now in the end I would have actually saved money if I bought better lenses early on. I also would have been happier with my results (sharper pictures due to the quality of the glass of larger F stop giving me faster shutter speeds). Now I have the good lenses, plus the cheaper ones I bought early on. I spent more than if I just bought the good stuff first.
Hey, that is the road I took. I'm sure other did too. If you think this is gonna be your thing get a good lens right up front. The other benefit to that route is if you don't like it you'll be able to sell it and recoupe a good chunk of your money. If you can't afford it get a good P&S with manual settings (like a G series) and start working on the basics and your technique until you can afford something better.
That's just MYO and thoughts. Take what you like and leave the rest. Good luck any way you go. This can be a pretty rewarding hobby. It can also get expensive, so put the money where you'll get the most out of it.
Last edited:
