Advice on buying the best (sharpest) P+S "macro" camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Stig Holmberg, Oct 26, 2005.

  1. I need advice on buying a P+S camera with the best possible macro rendering,
    i need macro shots that are really sharp and detailed.

    Currently i own a Canon G6 but i don´t think it´s very sharp in the macro
    area (for allround shooting very fine though).

    I have also tried Nikon Coolpix 4500 that is sharper in macro mode, but it
    has only 4M pix. and a bit noisier compared to current cameras and no RAW
    format.

    Some may suggest a DSLR with a macro lens but i prefer a P+S camera for
    macro because of the larger depth of field.

    All suggestions welcome, thanks.

    Regards Stig
    Stig Holmberg, Oct 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Stig Holmberg

    imbsysop Guest

    On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:59:48 +0200, "Stig Holmberg"
    <> wrote:

    >I need advice on buying a P+S camera with the best possible macro rendering,
    >i need macro shots that are really sharp and detailed.
    >
    >Currently i own a Canon G6 but i don´t think it´s very sharp in the macro
    >area (for allround shooting very fine though).


    care to elaborate 'cos with my G6 I have no complaints whatsoever on
    sharpness for macro except that the macro modes do not allow to come
    close enough (except with some CU lenses)
    any examples of those "unsharp" macros ?
    imbsysop, Oct 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Stig:

    Consider the Nikon CoolPix 8400.

    The 8400 follows on the footsteps of the older CoolPix 5000 that could focus
    down to a distance of only 1" (one inch) from the subject. This is the
    closest any point-and-shoot camera is capable of focusing in terms of
    minimum focusing distance. The photos are very good and another advantage is
    that this camera allows you to store images in RAW format (Nikon's NEF)
    unlike most point-and-shoot.

    Best regards,

    Joseph

    ---

    Dr. Joseph Chamberlain
    Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On 10/26/05 1:59 PM, in article , "Stig
    Holmberg" <> wrote:

    > I need advice on buying a P+S camera with the best possible macro rendering,
    > i need macro shots that are really sharp and detailed.
    >
    > Currently i own a Canon G6 but i don´t think it´s very sharp in the macro
    > area (for allround shooting very fine though).
    >
    > I have also tried Nikon Coolpix 4500 that is sharper in macro mode, but it
    > has only 4M pix. and a bit noisier compared to current cameras and no RAW
    > format.
    >
    > Some may suggest a DSLR with a macro lens but i prefer a P+S camera for
    > macro because of the larger depth of field.
    >
    > All suggestions welcome, thanks.
    >
    > Regards Stig
    Joseph Chamberlain, DDS, Oct 27, 2005
    #3
  4. Stig Holmberg

    imbsysop Guest

    On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 07:37:28 GMT, "Joseph Chamberlain, DDS"
    <> wrote:

    >Stig:
    >
    >Consider the Nikon CoolPix 8400.
    >
    >The 8400 follows on the footsteps of the older CoolPix 5000 that could focus
    >down to a distance of only 1" (one inch) from the subject. This is the
    >closest any point-and-shoot camera is capable of focusing in terms of
    >minimum focusing distance. ..


    I think it is high time for you to read a number present day's
    cameras' of tech specs .. your statement starts to sound quite
    "prehistoric" :)
    (Canon S2 0cm (yes zero!))
    imbsysop, Oct 27, 2005
    #4
  5. imbsysop wrote:
    []
    > I think it is high time for you to read a number present day's
    > cameras' of tech specs .. your statement starts to sound quite
    > "prehistoric" :)
    > (Canon S2 0cm (yes zero!))


    I second the Nikon range - of all that I've used the Coolpix 990 is the
    best.

    Zero cm I treat as a pure sales gimmick - how are you going to light the
    subject, and do you really want a coin scratching the lens surface or an
    insect depositing goodness know what substances on the lens?

    David
    David J Taylor, Oct 27, 2005
    #5
  6. Stig Holmberg

    imbsysop Guest

    On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:10:59 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:

    >imbsysop wrote:
    >[]
    >> I think it is high time for you to read a number present day's
    >> cameras' of tech specs .. your statement starts to sound quite
    >> "prehistoric" :)
    >> (Canon S2 0cm (yes zero!))

    >
    >I second the Nikon range - of all that I've used the Coolpix 990 is the
    >best.


    seem pretty much history to me .. it used to be, 5 yrs ago .. mind you
    we still use it on our microscopes but that is a matter of money not
    of technology ..

    >
    >Zero cm I treat as a pure sales gimmick -


    apprently not .. people have shown pictures of "objects" just running
    over the lens

    >how are you going to light the
    >subject,


    ever heard of optic fiber ? we currently use optic fiber lights in
    microscopy illumination so ?? (I'm pretty much convinced that any
    dedicated DIY'er can make such device at low cost ..)

    >and do you really want a coin scratching the lens surface or an
    >insect depositing goodness know what substances on the lens?


    ha .. seems you have seen the insect pictures then as well ? but
    besides these irrelevant situations, very small lens to object
    distances can be used and with the propper technique correctly
    illuminated and at 0.5", light may be more than sufficient/adequate
    ....

    The point is in the fact that the statement that the Nikon is the only
    cam that can focus at 1" is long "depassé" .. a lot of other can do
    much better ..
    imbsysop, Oct 27, 2005
    #6
  7. imbsysop wrote:
    []
    > The point is in the fact that the statement that the Nikon is the only
    > cam that can focus at 1" is long "depassé" .. a lot of other can do
    > much better ..


    I still regard being able to focus at the front of the lens as somewhat of
    a marketing gimmick, to be honest. At 0cm, the Canon S2 IS has 20 x 15 mm
    coverage (with some of barrel distortion), whereas the Nikon 990 offers a
    20mm working distance for the same field. Isn't that working distance
    worth having? Yes, I know the 990 is 5 years old, but that means it might
    be cheaper as well!

    David
    David J Taylor, Oct 27, 2005
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Michael Scarpitti

    Re: sharpest pictures at any price

    Michael Scarpitti, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    426
    Tom Monego
    Sep 5, 2003
  2. Jeff Gorman

    Re: sharpest pictures at any price

    Jeff Gorman, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    313
    greensteak
    Sep 6, 2003
  3. Randy Given

    Sharpest Lenses

    Randy Given, Nov 30, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    610
    Ilya Zakharevich
    Dec 8, 2005
  4. m Ransley

    Sharpest photos

    m Ransley, Feb 21, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    54
    Views:
    1,327
  5. asdf3b

    Sharpest shirt pocketable camera

    asdf3b, Jul 9, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    549
    John Turco
    Jul 12, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page