Olympus SP-570 UZ

VP

New member
Does anyone here use this camera for taking pictures of your reef, especially macros? Does it take good in focus macros? Do you like the camera? What are the pros and cons for taking reef pics with this camera?

I would really appreciate seeing reef photos taken with this camera.

TIA
 
This is another one of those super zoom cameras such as the Canon Powershot SX10 IS, Nikon Coolpix P90, Sony Cyber-shot DSC HX1, and others. You are seeing all that telephoto (binoculars) and thinking "Oh, it must be good at macro", (microscope). Unfortunately you are mistaken. These cameras were built for kids soccer games, air shows, and other situations for taking pictures of objects FAR AWAY from you. These cameras are not built for taking pictures of objects 6 inches away. I would not recommend this camera for taking images of a fish tank unless Shamu lives inside it.

One thing it does have which surprised me is RAW. Most other brands neglect this. At least your colors will look correct...but the fundamentals stand. This camera and the others listed are like a pair of binoculars. Binoculars and microscopes are made for two very different purposes but so many people don't understand this.

Now you can take a snapshot of anything with any camera equipment. Depending the level of quality you want, this camera may do just fine for your needs. Based on the way you worded your origional post however, I think you are looking to take images similar to what you see throughout Reef Central. You can take a quality photograph of a specific subject with the right camera equipment for the job. Point and shoots cant change lenses, so they have to do as many jobs as possible with what they are made with. What you get is a jack of all trades and master of none. So they make point and shoots specialize. This way they are better in certain areas but have to make sacrifices to others. Macro specifically took a hit with the camera in question. They geared it for kids kicking a soccer ball 50 yards away and had to take away from a coral colony 5 inches away to compensate. The camera has a 1in focus range, so it is possible to take a "close up" (I didn't say "macro") image with this camera. It won't be a very good image compared to other cameras though. In order to take full advantage of this camera's macro (which even this is still at a disadvantage), you must be 1cm away from your coral. Come on...your glass isn't even that thick! Like I said...even if you do manage to get the camera 1cm away from the coral, it STILL won't be "true macro".

So many people use DSLRs for macro (not to mention news organizations, Sports Illustrated, wedding photographers, or any other professional company) because...if money is no object, the DSLR truly can become a master of all trades. The photographer buys the specific equipment which will allow him to master the disciplines he is interested in. You can go with portraits...birds...indoor sports...and among other things...macro. Each area can be mastered with the proper equipment, and with a DSLR you buy the equipment specific to your task (macro).
 
Last edited:
Thanks Titus, I'll keep looking. Money is key for me. I was looking for an advanced point and shoot that allows you to change ISO, aperture, etc and also take good macros. I'll keep looking. I have a Canon Powershot SD750 that I've had for a couple of years and it does have a macro function but I cannot get a decent picture with it.
 
Well that camera has only been available for 2 years and 1 month so you must have gotten one of the first ones! I agree it isn't much good for a reef either. If money is tight that means you simply can't get the best. You are going to have to settle for something. Maybe the Olympus mentioned above is what you should get after all. What is your budget anyway?
 
Titus,

What do you think about the Coolpix P90? It has 24x zoom but it says it also takes good macros. It doesn't list raw though. I like the $399 price. Is having raw worth an extra $100?
 
Having RAW is worth an extra $100 if your main subject is a reef tank and you want the color accuracy (aka everything isn't blue). I think having RAW is worth a lot more than $100 over not not having it actually. Notice I specifically listed the P90 in the origional response of "binocular cameras". It isn't good for macro.

AIG ran commercials stating you should bank with them because they are solid.

Merrill Lynch got the Law and Order guy to assure you they knew what they were doing.

The Nikon P90 runs adds saying it can do everything so why buy anything else? This is a binocular camera. I don't suggest you invest with it any more than AIG. ;) Of course you could pay the execs big bonuses but that is up to you.

If you can stretch to $1000 I would suggest a Canon Xsi and Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro. These will let you get true macro like you see everyone posting on these boards. Anything less is just an imitation. Some do a better job at imitating than others...but DSLR 1:1 macro is macro. Point and shoot Macro is just "close up pictures". I don't think any $500 camera meets the definition of truly being capable of macro. They certainly can't do what the Xsi and 100mm f/2.8 can do, and that is just barley hitting true marco.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, short memory here, should have noted you specifically listed that camera.
 
No, the Olympus Stylus 1030 SW is a waterproof camera. The Nikon P90 is not even close to being water proof. I wouldn't want to get it anywhere near water actually. The Olympus Stylus 1030 SW is in your budget though, go for it!

The Nikon P90 IS NOT A MACRO CAMERA. It is NOT meant for closeups. The P90 is specifically designed for the exact opposite of closeups. I would also take you origional Olympus SP-570 UZ over the P90 (or any of the other cameras I listed which are like the SP-570) any day of the week.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top