Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 22, 2004, 12:09 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2
Default Wjat is reccomend for taking pictures of color stones :macro

I need to take pictures of color stones very small anywhere from 4mm to 40mm in size but the average size is 8mm I would say. Basically I would want to buy a camera with amazoning clarity and color, and I would need to purchase a macro lens since the items are very small. Thank you for any reccmendations you may have.
edlivian is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 22, 2004, 12:47 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd probably take a look at the Nikon Coolpix 4500 if you can find one.

It can "fill the frame" of a 4 Megapixel Image with an object as small as 17mm across (no macro lens needed). Even though the smaller stones won't take up the entire image area, you should get plenty of detail with an image this large. This model can focus from less than an inch to infinity in macro mode, so it will work with your larger stones, too.

Also, because the macro "sweet spot" is at around half zoom, you'll get virtually no distortion.

The small sensor/lens design in this model will also give you good depth of field, and you have plenty of manual control over aperture/shutter speed to increase depth of field using a smaller aperture if desired.

Nikon also makes a macro light for this model that attaches to the front of the lens. It surrounds your object with a ring of bright white LED's:

http://www.nikonmall.com/product.asp...&searchcatid=3
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 7:18 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 659
Default

I agree with JimC, the CP4500 has a very good macro. Here's three examples. The first is a wood louse, the second a small broach, and the third is a close-up of a rock.







Regards,
Graham.
checklg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 12:04 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2
Default

How about the Nikon 5400, i noticed that its macro performance is also pretty good, and is a little bit easier to fine than the 4500.
edlivian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 7:01 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

If you want the best "straight from the camera" macros, you can't beat the "swivel bodied" Nikons. Although the 5400 compares quite well to other camera models, it doesn't really compete with the 950, 990, 995 or 4500 (swivel bodied models).

These models (950, 990, 995, 4500) can "fill the frame" with an object close to half the size of the 5400's ability, with lower distortion. In other words, you've got much better frame coverage (i.e., a smaller object occupies more of the frame) with the Swivel Bodied Models. They can fill the frame with an object of around 17-18mm across.

Checking multiple reviews, the 5400 seems to only be capable of around twice that amount (32mm or more minimum object size to fill the frame -- with higher distortion).

The much better frame coverage of the 4500 would give you much more detail for your small stones (since they would be represented by more pixels in the image area occupied).

I guess we really need to know the purpose of the images (how they will be used). The 5400 may be a terrific choice for some purposes (and users are really found of it's 28mm wide angle, too).

If your photos are for onscreen viewing only, then most digital cameras will work fine (you can simply crop a portion of the image from the center, and a lower resolution image will work fine for onscreen viewing). I would make sure that I was getting a model that worked well at other than wide angle settings (like the Nikons), as well as one that gives you good control over depth of field (via Aperture Priority mode).

However, if you want to print a detailed photo of a tiny stone (at much larger than actual size), then this may require a totally different set of requirements from a camera.

Personally, if my primary use was for the best macros possible of tiny stones, and I planned on printing the images at larger than life sizes, I'd spring for the 4500 with the SL-1 Macro Cool-light.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 AM.