Re: Macro and High res woes

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dick, Jun 29, 2003.

  1. Dick

    Dick Guest

    I did not have the facts on the macro of the c4040 before me but it seemed
    way bigger focal distance, so I went to the below site to compare again

    http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/productcompare/productcompare.asp

    Note that the macro focus distance of the C4040 is 7.9" to 31.5" not as
    short as you write below, while both the C-4000 and the C5050 have 1" - 8"
    in Super Macro and 8" to 31" Macro.

    I wish that you were correct in saying "...Don't be put off by the working
    range of a camera's macro mode which in the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m but rather
    focus your attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."

    Can you explain the leavel of maginfication that I should focus on I do not
    imediatly know what to look for.

    I do not have a long tome to decise on the C4040 if by chance Olympus made
    an error in teir spec sheet on the C40404 please please inform mr quickly!!!
    ICan get the C4040 used for about $399 shipped to me if it is not sold soon.
    if the focal distance is what I stated above what is your opinion then?

    Tomorrow Sunday I am considering looking into getting a refurbished C5050
    from some dealers.
    Anyond have experience getting refurbished Digital cameras? Pro...? Con...?




    "Tesselator" <> wrote in message
    news:bdkotq$8un$...
    >
    > "Dick" <> wrote in message

    news:ADiLa.127379$...
    > > The Olympus C-4000 4MP has a wonderful Macro feature going to about one

    inch
    > > to take a shot of a bee. The C4040 4.1 MP, suposedly a super set of the
    > > C-4000 does not have that super Macro and begins near 8". The new C5050
    > > 5MPhowever is outfited with that macro of near 1".
    > > So either I seek the C4000 4MP or the C5050 at 5MP.
    > > What other cameras have such a Macro near 1" ?

    >
    > Many (all?) models in the CoolPix line have 4cm or less in macro mode.
    >
    >
    > > This News group seems very focused near the 3MP. I have read all your

    posts
    > > comparing te A40/A60/A70 With te Nikon 2100/3100 looked at the pictures,

    but
    > > have no such input for the C4000 Olympus nor any for the C5050 to see if

    I
    > > would ever need such resolutions of 4MP/5MP and the expense of them.

    >
    > It's probably just a result of the depth of the average consumers
    > pocket-book. Both the 4040 and the 5050 are excellent cameras I will
    > buy a 5050 soon I think to add to my collection. Don't be put off by
    > the working range of a camera's macro mode which in the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8

    m
    > but rather focus your attention of the level of magnification it is
    > capable of. I would much rather have a working range of a foot or more
    > if I could still get the same magnification as a macro engeneered to
    > operate at minute distances.
    >
    > As far as the expense and usefulness of a 5MP unit I guess you alone
    > can answer that. What will you be using the camera for? etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > >
    > > I welcome suggestions beands and models to look at and consider. And the
    > > advice of where to limit the quality persuits (weakness) I or many of

    you
    > > may have :).
    > > What to do what to do....hmmmmm
    > >
    > > Dick in Hawaii

    >
    >
    > Someone should make a FAQ if there isn't one already, of the "ideal"
    > features to look for in a digital camera. Like:
    >
    > The ability to go manual in as many aspects as possible.
    > The ability to store and transfer uncompressed images.
    > The ability to add attachements (PC, Hotshoe, Tripod mount, lens filters,

    etc.)
    > Readable LCD menus
    > Tilt/Rotate/Swivel LCD Pannels.
    > All glass (coated) lens elements.
    > Other than plastic body frame,
    > USB or Serial Camera Control via computer or etc. (other than downloading)
    > Etc.
    > Etc.
    > Etc.
    >
    >
    > And thier _simple_ respective explaination. Like:
    >
    > USB/Ser. Cam. Control -- Will allow you to to create ultra hi res stop

    motion
    > and time-laps motion sequences.
    >
    > Non-Plastic Cam Body -- Will save you a trip to the repair shop if you

    drop
    > the thing.
    >
    > Etc.
    > Etc.
    > Etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > Anyone know of a faq like that?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Dick, Jun 29, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dick

    Tesselator Guest

    "Dick" <> wrote in message news:QBwLa.57021$...
    > I did not have the facts on the macro of the c4040 before me but it seemed
    > way bigger focal distance, so I went to the below site to compare again
    >
    > http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/productcompare/productcompare.asp
    >
    > Note that the macro focus distance of the C4040 is 7.9" to 31.5" not as
    > short as you write below, while both the C-4000 and the C5050 have 1" - 8"
    > in Super Macro and 8" to 31" Macro.


    I said: "the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m" 2 tenths of a meter is 20 centimeters.
    20 centimeters sure sounds like 7.9 inches to me.

    O :)



    > I wish that you were correct in saying "...Don't be put off by the working
    > range of a camera's macro mode which in the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m but rather
    > focus your attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."


    first, I guess my expirience is a little wide as I've had exposure to many
    different cameras with lenses of varring focal lengths so in lou of what
    JK had to say:
    "Since the cameras being discussed have lenses of almost
    the same focal lengths and sensors of similar sizes, the degree of
    "magnification" will vary depending on the distance."
    My comment doen't
    carry as much weight as it would have if this discussion were open to a widder
    range of camera models and lenses. Good call JK!



    > Can you explain the leavel of maginfication that I should focus on I do not
    > imediatly know what to look for.


    Also as JK clarified "magnification" in this sense should be measured in
    pixels per inch or pixels per CM. which is correct ofcourse. With this
    in mind it's simple math to abstract the "Magnification" based on the
    dot-pitch (resolution) of YOUR output device.

    Monitors are about 72 dpi (max) etc. etc.



    > I do not have a long tome to decise on the C4040 if by chance Olympus made
    > an error in teir spec sheet on the C40404 please please inform mr quickly!!!
    > ICan get the C4040 used for about $399 shipped to me if it is not sold soon.
    > if the focal distance is what I stated above what is your opinion then?


    Ya, /maybe/ not what you're looking for (?).



    > Tomorrow Sunday I am considering looking into getting a refurbished C5050
    > from some dealers.


    I briefly looked at the 4040... but played extensivly with the 5050...
    So without being able to compare the two models directly I can only
    say how impressed I was with the 5050! So impressed infact I'm adding
    it to my collection having just bought a 5700 (Nikon) only a few months
    ago. But that's me... My wife and kids are thoroughly convinced that
    in just a few years the entire family fortune will have been invested in
    cameras. Heh! You should see my cam-corder equiptment...

    O :p


    > Anyond have experience getting refurbished Digital cameras? Pro...? Con...?


    I almost always buy used (from a used SHOP!) and then have them send it off
    to the manufacturers for "referbbing" shortly after purchasing on the 3month
    (or whatever) warrentee that the shop offers. I /always/ get back a camera
    that has been hand tuned, bios upgradded, etc. and so is really better than
    new.

    Nikon is the best for this and Sony is the worst! But any digital camera
    manufacturer who also had some fame in the 35mm SLR sector will probably
    be good for this kind of practice.



    > > > The Olympus C-4000 4MP has a wonderful Macro feature going to about one inch
    > > > to take a shot of a bee. The C4040 4.1 MP, suposedly a super set of the
    > > > C-4000 does not have that super Macro and begins near 8". The new C5050
    > > > 5MPhowever is outfited with that macro of near 1".
    > > > So either I seek the C4000 4MP or the C5050 at 5MP.
    > > > What other cameras have such a Macro near 1" ?

    > >
    > > Many (all?) models in the CoolPix line have 4cm or less in macro mode.
    > >
     
    Tesselator, Jun 29, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dick

    Charlie Guest

    I like to use diopters with my 5050.
    The super macro specifies a focal length of 59mm (equiv to 35mm), has a
    very short lens to subject distance of 1 inch and has barrel distortion.
    I have a Hoya doublet +10 diopter which gives around 1.4 times the
    magnification of the "super macro" at a lens to subject distance of
    2 3/8 inches with no distortion. Being a doublet, it has excellent
    quality.

    Here's a comparison picture.
    http://tinyurl.com/7voc

    Here's a picture showing the super macro compared to +4 and +2 single
    element diopters. That combination equals the magnification of the SM
    with a lens to subject distance of 3.2"
    http://tinyurl.com/6qjb

    --
    Charlie Dilks
    Newark, DE USA
     
    Charlie, Jun 29, 2003
    #3
  4. Dick

    Dick Guest

    Please forgive my error indeed I just noticed the"m" and that it ws not "cm"
    nor "in"
    and I stand corrected you are absolutely correct :)
    So now I need to understand your additional input on the"...focus your
    attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."
    Could you give an example, Kind Sir? it will then be assimulated quickly,
    else I will need to get the manual ( which I still plan to do) read it and
    find my way to the correct understanding, od how Super Macro results are
    affected by the leavel of magnification.


    "Tesselator" <> wrote in message
    news:bdmc59$pr8$...
    >
    > "Dick" <> wrote in message

    news:QBwLa.57021$...
    > > I did not have the facts on the macro of the c4040 before me but it

    seemed
    > > way bigger focal distance, so I went to the below site to compare again
    > >
    > >

    http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/productcompare/productcompare.asp
    > >
    > > Note that the macro focus distance of the C4040 is 7.9" to 31.5" not as
    > > short as you write below, while both the C-4000 and the C5050 have 1" -

    8"
    > > in Super Macro and 8" to 31" Macro.

    >
    > I said: "the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m" 2 tenths of a meter is 20 centimeters.
    > 20 centimeters sure sounds like 7.9 inches to me.
    >
    > O :)
    >
    >
    >
    > > I wish that you were correct in saying "...Don't be put off by the

    working
    > > range of a camera's macro mode which in the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m but

    rather
    > > focus your attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."

    >
    > first, I guess my expirience is a little wide as I've had exposure to many
    > different cameras with lenses of varring focal lengths so in lou of what
    > JK had to say:
    > "Since the cameras being discussed have lenses of almost
    > the same focal lengths and sensors of similar sizes, the degree of
    > "magnification" will vary depending on the distance."
    > My comment doen't
    > carry as much weight as it would have if this discussion were open to a

    widder
    > range of camera models and lenses. Good call JK!
    >
    >
    >
    > > Can you explain the leavel of maginfication that I should focus on I do

    not
    > > imediatly know what to look for.

    >
    > Also as JK clarified "magnification" in this sense should be measured in
    > pixels per inch or pixels per CM. which is correct ofcourse. With this
    > in mind it's simple math to abstract the "Magnification" based on the
    > dot-pitch (resolution) of YOUR output device.
    >
    > Monitors are about 72 dpi (max) etc. etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > > I do not have a long tome to decise on the C4040 if by chance Olympus

    made
    > > an error in teir spec sheet on the C40404 please please inform mr

    quickly!!!
    > > ICan get the C4040 used for about $399 shipped to me if it is not sold

    soon.
    > > if the focal distance is what I stated above what is your opinion then?

    >
    > Ya, /maybe/ not what you're looking for (?).
    >
    >
    >
    > > Tomorrow Sunday I am considering looking into getting a refurbished

    C5050
    > > from some dealers.

    >
    > I briefly looked at the 4040... but played extensivly with the 5050...
    > So without being able to compare the two models directly I can only
    > say how impressed I was with the 5050! So impressed infact I'm adding
    > it to my collection having just bought a 5700 (Nikon) only a few months
    > ago. But that's me... My wife and kids are thoroughly convinced that
    > in just a few years the entire family fortune will have been invested in
    > cameras. Heh! You should see my cam-corder equiptment...
    >
    > O :p
    >
    >
    > > Anyond have experience getting refurbished Digital cameras? Pro...?

    Con...?
    >
    > I almost always buy used (from a used SHOP!) and then have them send it

    off
    > to the manufacturers for "referbbing" shortly after purchasing on the

    3month
    > (or whatever) warrentee that the shop offers. I /always/ get back a

    camera
    > that has been hand tuned, bios upgradded, etc. and so is really better

    than
    > new.
    >
    > Nikon is the best for this and Sony is the worst! But any digital camera
    > manufacturer who also had some fame in the 35mm SLR sector will probably
    > be good for this kind of practice.
    >
    >
    >
    > > > > The Olympus C-4000 4MP has a wonderful Macro feature going to about

    one inch
    > > > > to take a shot of a bee. The C4040 4.1 MP, suposedly a super set of

    the
    > > > > C-4000 does not have that super Macro and begins near 8". The new

    C5050
    > > > > 5MPhowever is outfited with that macro of near 1".
    > > > > So either I seek the C4000 4MP or the C5050 at 5MP.
    > > > > What other cameras have such a Macro near 1" ?
    > > >
    > > > Many (all?) models in the CoolPix line have 4cm or less in macro mode.
    > > >

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Dick, Jun 29, 2003
    #4
  5. Dick

    Tesselator Guest


    > So now I need to understand your additional input on the"...focus your
    > attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."
    > Could you give an example, Kind Sir? it will then be assimulated quickly,
    > else I will need to get the manual ( which I still plan to do) read it and
    > find my way to the correct understanding, od how Super Macro results are
    > affected by the leavel of magnification.
    >


    Huh? Did you read the full reply or just the top part?

    BTW, Super Macro (or zoom for that matter) affects the level of magnification
    and not the other way around.

    Huh? Am I missing something???
     
    Tesselator, Jun 29, 2003
    #5
  6. Dick

    Charlie Guest

    In article <kIDLa.131159$>,
    "Dick" <> wrote:

    > Charlie,
    > I tried finding information on "Hoya doublet +10 diopter " in both
    > google.com and in Lap.com search engins, with zero results. where would I
    > look to read up on what it is? I went to the 2 links you so kindly provided
    > and find it a bit over my head ( I do have a BS in Physics and Math 1963
    > grad) I would love to fully understand, and don't mind additional reading to
    > fill me in so I can make full use of your valuable input :)


    Hi Dick,
    B&H has the lens
    http://tinyurl.com/fklw
    it comes in 49, 52, and 55mm sizes.
    It's expensive, $75, but being a doublet it's excellent optically.

    http://tinyurl.com/7voc
    My pictures just show the relative magnification of a 1 cM square of
    graph paper with different diopters, a reversed 50mm lens and the "super
    macro" setting of the 5050. The super macro equals around +6 dipoters
    magnification, but it has to be a lot closer to the subject since the
    camera defaults to 59mm (35mm camera equivalent). When using the
    diopters you can use the 5050 lens at 105mm full zoom-in. This gives you
    more working distance and also gets rid of the barrel distortion the
    lens exhibits in SM mode.

    --
    Charlie Dilks
    Newark, DE USA
     
    Charlie, Jun 29, 2003
    #6
  7. Dick

    Tesselator Guest

    "Dick" <> wrote in message news:WhJLa.89758$...
    > I read everything once, and even though I commented on one thing, may
    > things were difficult to vissualize I will need to reread it but I
    > downloaded the manual and will read that too then try and see why I could
    > not follow it with step by step images in my mind that youy wished me to
    > see.
    >



    Reread JK's post again.. that might be more clear. I have a tendancy
    to ramble on and on.
     
    Tesselator, Jun 30, 2003
    #7
  8. Dick

    Tesselator Guest

    "Tesselator" <> wrote in message news:bdocv2$jak$...
    >
    > "Dick" <> wrote in message news:WhJLa.89758$...
    > > I read everything once, and even though I commented on one thing, may
    > > things were difficult to vissualize I will need to reread it but I
    > > downloaded the manual and will read that too then try and see why I could
    > > not follow it with step by step images in my mind that youy wished me to
    > > see.
    > >

    >
    >
    > Reread JK's post again.. that might be more clear. I have a tendancy
    > to ramble on and on.
    >



    Or, hey I know.. bring a ruler that has mm on it to the camera shop.
    put the camera models to be tested in macro or super macro or whatever
    mode and shoot the ruler as close as you can but still in focus. Assumeing
    you tested cameras with the same sized LCD and megapixel rating you can
    just put the ruler on the picture of the ruler and measure a mm in the pic
    or count mm across the pic.

    At least that sounds right. O :)
     
    Tesselator, Jun 30, 2003
    #8
    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. Ed Ruf

    Re: Macro and High res woes

    Ed Ruf, Jun 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,132
    Ed Ruf
    Jun 28, 2003
  2. Tesselator

    Re: Macro and High res woes

    Tesselator, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,215
    Tesselator
    Jun 29, 2003
  3. Dick

    Re: Macro and High res woes

    Dick, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,154
  4. Dick

    Re: Macro and High res woes

    Dick, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,271
    bruce sayers
    Jun 29, 2003
  5. Dave Martindale

    Re: Macro and High res woes

    Dave Martindale, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,005
    Charlie
    Jun 29, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page