Macro Camera
- Thread starter Newlin
- Start date
nmywrx
New member
I don't think macro camera and tight budget go together. :sad2: I guess it all depends on what you mean by tight budget.
Most good macro shots are with an SLR, macro lens and a lot of practice. Point and shoot camera aren't going be able to get the good macro shots you see here.
Where you looking for just a point and shoot or were you going to get serious with an SLR?
Most good macro shots are with an SLR, macro lens and a lot of practice. Point and shoot camera aren't going be able to get the good macro shots you see here.
Where you looking for just a point and shoot or were you going to get serious with an SLR?
I want to get serious about this and take some good pics of the smallest corals. But, I don't want to spend 2K+ for just a camera and another 1K+ for the lens that I need to take the shot. I guess I need to just save up for a while and see if there is a used one out there for a decent price. I'm about tired of the point and shoot, just about every pic that I have taken of my tank is fuzzy and you can see the different colors in the rainbow coming out of the camera. So, if you know anyone that is willing to part with there SLR camera let me know. I will see what I can do to come up with the cash. Better more now than twice as much later 
Phyl
New member
You're going to need to spend 600-900 on a good macro lens. You can get away with a D40, D40X, D80 (or Canon equiv) camera for 400-1000$. If you get a good general purpose lens you can get the camera, a good lens and a set of extension tubes for 1500 or less. That will get you to the point where you'll have to hone your skills.
Any 1/2 decent point and shoot should take nice, well focused pictures of your tank. If it isn't then you need to work on your technique before any camera will produce good pictures for you (DSLR or not).
Any 1/2 decent point and shoot should take nice, well focused pictures of your tank. If it isn't then you need to work on your technique before any camera will produce good pictures for you (DSLR or not).
That is kinda what I was thinking. And you saying that $400 for the body on the low range, that makes me happy to know that you can get one that cheap and actually make it work. I did take some shots today with the one that I have (Fuji S700) and it did okay. But, I think I'm going to take it back and get one that I can use for a lot of stuff rather than just point and shoot.
Here is a couple pics that I took of a little feather duster (one of many) that just showed up in my tank about a year ago. The base of the duster is only about 1.5mm in dia. So, this one takes pretty good pics, but I still want better.
Here is a couple pics that I took of a little feather duster (one of many) that just showed up in my tank about a year ago. The base of the duster is only about 1.5mm in dia. So, this one takes pretty good pics, but I still want better.
hockeyismylife
New member
i have a very cheap camera that is only 2.2mp and im getting amazing macros ill post some in a few min.
hockeyismylife
New member
new macro
new macro
i hold an old film cameras macro lens over the front of my camera.
[/URL][/IMG]
new macro
i hold an old film cameras macro lens over the front of my camera.
hockeyismylife
New member
and btw i just point and shoot.
oct2274
New member
here is a link of some of the best point and shoot macro cameras
http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM?view=dp_macro
http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM?view=dp_macro
maroun.c
New member
You can still get a good setup for macro that can also be used for other stuff for much less than 1.5 K
I wouldn't go for the D40 as it does not autofocus with non AFS lenses which means you are more limited in the lenses choice to more expensive ones and eventually you pay the difference. I would rather get a D50 if you can still find one or maybe a used D70s or a new one if you can find one. A d80 would also be a good choice but that's more expensive.
As for the lens the 105 non VR is still a very good choice and very its price has dropped since the VR version came out. The Vr would be a nice addition but still for real macro shots you have to be on tripod especially when not using flash or not shooting outdoors whith lots of light.
a cheaper but still very good option would be the 60mm macro it won't be as convenient as a 105 for corlas in the back of the tank but still you would get decent magnification. both the 60 and 105 can double as very sharp portrait lenses. for every day shooting you can use the kit lense that comes with the camera usually a 18-55 18-70 or 18-135. usually as kit lenses they come much cheaper than buying them separate and they are much better in quality than the canon kit lenses. if you want to have pro quality pictures for the family and for everyday shooting the 50mm although a bit long (=75 mm on a digital body) can be bought for around 100 usd.
you could also substitute the kit lense for the tamron 17-50 or the sigma 18-50. both are 2.8 and are much faster and sharper than the kit lenses. you would pay a bit more for them than the kit lense but the tamron 17-50 is remported to be equal in sharpness to the Nikon 17-55 even at 2.8. it only costs around 3-400 usd where the Nikon one costs close tt 1500.
If you search enough and make an informed buy I think you will manage to get a body, macro lens and every day shooting lense starting 1100-1200 USD
I wouldn't go for the D40 as it does not autofocus with non AFS lenses which means you are more limited in the lenses choice to more expensive ones and eventually you pay the difference. I would rather get a D50 if you can still find one or maybe a used D70s or a new one if you can find one. A d80 would also be a good choice but that's more expensive.
As for the lens the 105 non VR is still a very good choice and very its price has dropped since the VR version came out. The Vr would be a nice addition but still for real macro shots you have to be on tripod especially when not using flash or not shooting outdoors whith lots of light.
a cheaper but still very good option would be the 60mm macro it won't be as convenient as a 105 for corlas in the back of the tank but still you would get decent magnification. both the 60 and 105 can double as very sharp portrait lenses. for every day shooting you can use the kit lense that comes with the camera usually a 18-55 18-70 or 18-135. usually as kit lenses they come much cheaper than buying them separate and they are much better in quality than the canon kit lenses. if you want to have pro quality pictures for the family and for everyday shooting the 50mm although a bit long (=75 mm on a digital body) can be bought for around 100 usd.
you could also substitute the kit lense for the tamron 17-50 or the sigma 18-50. both are 2.8 and are much faster and sharper than the kit lenses. you would pay a bit more for them than the kit lense but the tamron 17-50 is remported to be equal in sharpness to the Nikon 17-55 even at 2.8. it only costs around 3-400 usd where the Nikon one costs close tt 1500.
If you search enough and make an informed buy I think you will manage to get a body, macro lens and every day shooting lense starting 1100-1200 USD
