Camera Suggestions

[WildBill]

I am looking to buy a new camera. I have only two requirements.
1) $200 Maximum Price
2) Must be able to take close up shots of handguns that are clear and sharp enough to show obvious defects like scratches, bluing, dings, etc.

Many people who post here have excellent pictures. I know some of you have some high grade camera gear, but what do you recommend for $200?

[A-R]

Despite $$$$thousands$$$$$ of pro camera gear, I take a lot of my gun pics with a Canon S410 that is "only" 4 megapixels and at least 7 years old. It's my wife's old camera. Crapped out a few years ago, so bought wife new camera. But then I sent the S410 into Canon under some special recall/warranty, they fixed it and it works fine now.

The key is HOW you use the camera, not the camera itself. Just be sure the camera has a "macro" setting of some kind for the really close up shots - usualy indicated by a little flower symbol on the menu or buttons. Any quality modern digital camera should have this setting regardless of price.

Also - megapixels have a been a completely meaningless feature for years now. So buy fewer megapixels and more features or a better brand name. I don't even know how many MPs a $200 camera has now-a-days. But I'd take a Nikon or Canon with 6 MPs over a lesser brand with 12 MPs. Sony also makes decent point-n-shoot digicams. Olympus and Panasonic also not bad.

DO NOT USE YOUR FLASH for close up shots - or it will look like a deer in headlights -blindingly overexposed.

Other important point is a TRIPOD - vital for taking close up shots under available light with no flash. For gun pics, a little table-top tripod is fine. I use a $25 Gorilla pod half the time.

Beyond those basics, learn to use Photoshop to make cruddy pictures look like professional photos

Have fun ...

[G26ster]

There's a zillion cameras out there for under $200. As for megapixels, while that may overrated, most cameras today will be 10mp or greater. It's a good selling point to consumers. As for brands, I spent over 30 years as a professional photographer and I never bought into the Canon/Nikon fan club. Many other makers, like Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Minolta, etc. make eery bit the cameras that Canon/Nikon do. Don't get excited about the brand. Any $200 consumer camera will only be manufactured to $200 standards.

As austinrealtor said, you must have a macro setting to do what you said you need to do, and do NOT use flash. Find some open shade outside, or use window light indoors (flat light, not sun shining in). If you taking photos of guns to sell, I wouldn't use Photoshop to make them look better than they really are, unless these pics are for your own collection. Practice a lot, as megapixels are fee, and always remember, it's the photographer that makes the shot, not the camera. It's just a tool.

[WildBill]

I appreciate your comments. I know that the megapixels aren't that important and that the photographer makes the picture. Most of the cheaper cameras are designed for "snapshots" of people at parties and weddings and vacation pictures at the beach or in the mountains. I was just wondering if there was a camera that was has better "macro" or "close up" capabilities that then average point and shoot. Most of my photos will be taken indoors where the ambient lighting may be dim. I will probably stay with a name brand like Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. I am not looking at "photoshopping" or hiding defects. My goal is to make them more visible. The sharper the picture, the better.

[G26ster]

I appreciate your comments. I know that the megapixels aren't that important and that the photographer makes the picture. Most of the cheaper cameras are designed for "snapshots" of people at parties and weddings and vacation pictures at the beach or in the mountains. I was just wondering if there was a camera that was has better "macro" or "close up" capabilities that then average point and shoot. Most of my photos will be taken indoors where the ambient lighting may be dim. I will probably stay with a name brand like Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. I am not looking at "photoshopping" or hiding defects. My goal is to make them more visible. The sharper the picture, the better.

A $200 camera is a $200 camera. That said, there are some models that have both Macro and Super Macro. The best site on the net, for me anyway, is:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Everything you want to know is there. Select a camera, and read his review and look at test shots. Have fun

[BrianSW99]

I've used several brands of digital cameras and always keep coming back to Canon, particularly in the smaller point and shoot variety. They have several models in that price range.

[paulhailes]

Despite $$$$thousands$$$$$ of pro camera gear

What do you shoot? My main workhorse right now is the 1D III, would love a IV but I can't afford an upgrade right now.

To the OP, most point and shoots these days do a real good job, just stick with a name brand and you should be fine. I'm a Canon fan myself but Nikon, and Olympus both make some good cameras. There are alot of other brands but for the most part they are all the same. Video is a nice addition if you can get it, you never know when you might need it. Most point and shoots have a decent macro, due to their small sensor size, some however do have macro setting and you will just have to look for those. With cameras you tend to get what you paid for so get the best one you can, but don't worry if you dont size up to the guys on the side of the fb field, we spend way to much on our gear

P.S. If I said something that someone else said my bad, I'm on my iPhone since I'm about to move and disconnected my internet

[flintknapper]

Canon here too.

[Jasonw560]

Ditto on the Canon. My wife takes awesome pictures. Me, not so much. But she loves the Canon. We also have a Kodak P&S that's decent.

[A-R]

To clarify:

1. Photoshop - learn to use this amazing program not to "cheat" or "fake" am image but to enhance/improve a subpar exposure often achieved with a basic camera, inadequate ambient light, etc. I know this is not big deal these days with all the "RAW" camera file abilities, but I learned to pull an extra three stops of light out of ANY digital image (even JPEGS) with PS years ago and still use those skills today when I'm too lazy to go setup a proper multi-flash exposure with pre-exposure metering and white balance correction for a simple shot of something I'm selling online on eBay or whatever.

2. Camera brands ... for DSLRs I strongly recommend Canon or Nikon simply because that's what pros use and there is a huge and worthwhile market in used pro gear in those brands. For a $200 point-n-shoot, anything will work but I still prefer "camera brands" - Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Sony (bought out Minolta), Panasonic (joint ventures with Leica) - over electronics brands (Samsung, Sanyo, Casio etc). A camera is still only as good as it's glass. The old camera firms still make/sell the best glass.

[A-R]

Despite $$$$thousands$$$$$ of pro camera gear

What do you shoot? My main workhorse right now is the 1D III, would love a IV but I can't afford an upgrade right now.

I stopped doing semi-pro photography years ago, so my gear is a little outdated (though still cost me a bundle years ago).

All Nikon 35mm SLR and DX format DSLR equipment. D2H, D200, D100, F100 etc. 70-200 f2.8 VR, 17-55mm f2.8 AF-S, 12-24 f4 plus a nice set of primes (85, 50, 20). Four speedlights with multi-unit sync capabilities.

Had a 300mm f2.8 AF-S for a while when I was heavy into sports. Best piece of glass I ever owned. Razor sharp.

Of course, these days all I use much is the 12-24 for real estate pics and an 18-200mm for pics of the kids.

[G26ster]

C'mon guys, lets get some "real" cameras

[Fedaykin]

I modify a lot of elctronics (circuit boards) and I take pictures with my Motorola Droid phone. When it's set to Macro mode I can take closeup pictures of tiny circuitry and you can see tiny flakes of dust, dead skin and hair resting on the surface of the components in vivid detail.

You don't need to spend a ton of money on a fancy camera to see those kinds of defects. You probably have a camera on your phone that will do what you need it to do.

[WildBill]

A $200 camera is a $200 camera. That said, there are some models that have both Macro and Super Macro. The best site on the net, for me anyway, is:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Everything you want to know is there. Select a camera, and read his review and look at test shots. Have fun

Thanks for the link. It will be very useful to me.

[A-R]

A $200 camera is a $200 camera. That said, there are some models that have both Macro and Super Macro. The best site on the net, for me anyway, is:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Everything you want to know is there. Select a camera, and read his review and look at test shots. Have fun

Thanks for the link. It will be very useful to me.

This one is OK too for consumer-level gear

http://www.dpreview.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And if you want a good laugh and a few decent pointers from a guy who's VERY opinionated ...

http://www.kenrockwell.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;