[Closed] Whatcameratrackworld.

You could buy a half decent DSLR for about £500 or you if thats a bit steep there's some good point and shoot things out there.

If it's for print I'd go for a DSLR as they have bigger sensors which is like having more pixels on your tellybox.

The new Nokia phone has a 41mp camera and 7728 x 4354 pixels

Ok, so if we set a £500 budget, what DSLRs should I be looking at?

It might just be me but I'd never recommend a DSLR to a self confessed "technoluddite".

They don't take 'better' pictures, they just give you more manual controls to confuse yourself with. Plus they're big, heavy, fragile, cumbersome.

[url= http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-600d-18-55mm-dc-tamron-70-300mm-twin-lens-kit-89176/show.html ]Clicky[/url]

That's the new equivalent of what I got about 6 years ago, it was a 450D back then. You'll find that it's like bikes, everyone will recommend what they have, some like Canon, some like Nikon etc.

edit: should add, go to amazon and buy DSLR's for dummies, goes a long way to explaining what all the buttons do.

Compact System Camera as a halfway house?

All I have at the moment is a compact point and shoot, so this is an overdue purchase.

That Canon looks good northernmatt. Any others I should look at?

£500 gets you quite a lot actually.

For example Nikon:
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/nikon-d5100-digital-slr-camera-with-18-55mm-vr-lens-kit-16-2mp-3-inch-399-95-amazon-1513770
(if the cashback is still valid that's £359).
Then for extra sharpness towards the corner of the images for your paintings add:
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-35mm-f-1-8g-lens-144-sold-hd-sales-inc-fulfilled-amazon-1604024

or a Nikon Nifty Fifty lens.

Of course, you might want to budget for a tripod and some software (Adobe Lightroom is my recommendation). Which means you might have to wait for an even better deal to come along.

From Canon, I would get a grey imported 600D probably:
http://www.digitalrev.com/product/canon-eos-600d-with-18/MTExMDY_A
And again add a prime lens like the 50mm lens ( http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00005K47X/ref=nosim

Do the catalogue/magazine publishers have some piccy specifications? I ask because a friend met up with this. ISTR it ruled out her decent camera.

oops, senior moment: talk quietly amongst yourselves

To decide on brand, I would go and have a play with them in a shop.
See which feel comfortable in the hand.
See if you can imagine using the tilty/flippy screens.
See which dials and knobs feel the best.
Look through the viewfinder and see how bright and large they seem.

All the major brands have something to suit in your budget (although be aware that you will want other bits and pieces as you go on).

I would have bought a 600D if I hadn't held it and found it cramped and uncomfortable. It's much better with the battery grip added though.
I bought a 60D in the end - on grey import body only for £440

@mcmoonter I just went for what I know. I haven't looked at new stuff in a while so it's all a bit hazy. I'll let other more informed/up to date people help you out.

Great stuff guys. I wouldn't know where to start. I will look into those above more seriously this evening.

[DSLRs] don't take 'better' pictures, they just give you more manual controls to confuse yourself with.

Is completely untrue.

I'd also recommend the D5100 (or comparable Canon if you prefer the feel/navigation of their kit). The kit lens won't be the greatest at that price-point, so you'll probably find yourself needing (if you want) to remove colour aberrations in your outdoor shots. The f2.8 50mm prime (£100ish) is a beautiful lens, but bear in mind it's equivalent to around 75mm when on the cropped D5100 sensor.

As a technoluddite after something similar, I have been hugely impressed with this for half your budget - Was an £800 camera originally.

[url= http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-V1-Compact-System-10-30mm/dp/B005NFVVS2 ]NIKON V1 £229[/url]

If you really want a DSLR to play with though, then get one.

The tricky thing with my OP is that I need something with which to take close up details of either paintings or flowers, and also full size images of paintings which can be six feet square and wide and long shots within the garden. How many of these needs are achievable with a single lens?

Many are achievable with a single lens as long as you have complete control of the position of the camera.

But saying that...
Garden: A wide angle lens is really useful for the gardening stuff. On one of the crop sensor cameras above, that would be 18mm and less. The Sigma 10-20mm lens is a good budgetish ultra-wide angle if 17mm isn't enough.

Flowers: And a lot of SLR lenses don't actually focus that closely. There are reviews and views of how close they can get, but detail of the sepals of a flower might require a dedicated macro lens. You could easily go for an older non-autofocus lens for this job if needed.
For example, the Canon 50mm f1.8 gets you this close:
[img] [/img]

The tamron 90mm macro gets you this close:
[img] [/img]

Paintings: Edge focus and distortion are important as well as overall sharpness. So I would use a prime lens (single focal length) in this scenario - either a 50mm or a 35mm will do (the 50mm being cheaper, but requiring you to be further away) - set the aperture at about f4 and you'll get an amazingly sharp image as long as you are nicely square-on to the painting, .

(although to be honest at 50mm and above, most lenses don't distort too much).

These are the same price, which do you think would be the more intuitive to use?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B004U4UHTQ/ref=nosim#productDescription

http://www.digitalrev.com/product/canon-eos-600d-with-18/MTExMDY_A

They'd both be fairly easy to use, but it's more to do with which one sits you better.
I ended up with a Nikon because I didn't get on with the ergonomics and menu system of the Canon range when I was looking.

Have you also considered getting a second hand body from somewhere like eBay and spending more money on the lenses?
something like a Nikon d80 or d90 well take excellent pics and you can spend the rest if your budget on getting appropriate lenses.

I agree with stumpy.
That said, when you get started, if you're thinking of using JPG (as opposed to raw) I've always felt the Nikons give the most instant good photos at this end of the ranges.
If you're using raw, then it becomes moot.

Against the Nikon is that the body doesn't have an autofocus motor in it meaning your stuck with buying AF-S lenses (have a look to see if the lenses you want are AF-S).

The older D90 doesn't have that problem.

Canon D700, is what I bought after looking at all the optiiions.
Watch out for all the cheap offers on some of the websites. When you add delivery and all the other bits and bats the price creeps up.
I used John Lewis they give a 2 year warranty and free delivery, plus its a shop you can walk into and look at the cameras and take it back if you have a problem. Providing ther's'one near you.
Dont forget for what you will be using it for you will need a tripod

The jpeg vs raw reason might be enough to swing you to Nikon. Raw often feels like a good idea but is just a huge level of faff for a technoluddite. The more work you can get the camera to do rather than post processing on your lappie, the better.

huge level of faff for a technoluddite

There's also a 650D on the ebay outlet for £380
Advantage over the 600D are a touch-screen controls, faster stills per second and continuous autofocus during movies.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EOS-650D-Digital-SLR-Camera-EF-S-ISII-18-55mm-Refurbished-/290958933372?pt=UK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN&hash=item43be80fd7c

Some items are actually brand new, others are actually refurbished. They are slow to respond to complaints, but you can cut them out and deal directly with Canon for warranty afaik.

I nipped down to Currys and PC World, both the Canon 600D and the Nikon D5100 are on offer at £400, it makes a little sense to buy locally I suppose.

I liked the simplicity of the Canon menu on the screen but I preferred the Nikon.

Leffeboy is best placed to know my luddite credentials, so I think I'm Nikon bound.

Nikon it is when you can get a youtube tutor with a 'fro.

Against the Nikon is that the body doesn't have an autofocus motor in it meaning your stuck with buying AF-S lenses (have a look to see if the lenses you want are AF-S).

D80 onwards does.

Personally I'd go for a 2nd hand D80 body (£120ish) and a 35mm or 50mm prime lens.

I sold my D80 and a host of accessories for £125 a while back.

To acheive high resolution, half decent macro and wide angle shots, you could either spend a fair bit of money on a DSLR with a kit lens and also a macro lens, or (my recommendation) have a look at some 'bridge' style cameras.

I use full frame dslrs for work and have a ridiculous array of ridiculously pricey lenses, but I'm always buying and selling smaller cameras for weekends away / days out.

For your needs, you could do a lot worse than looking at a [url= http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/compact-digital-cameras/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz48-review-50005820/ ]Lumix FZ48[/url]. I've had a few similar cameras over the last year and this one would suit you perfectly from what you've said.

Fast (f2.8), wide angle (28mm) Leica lens gives fantastic image quality, a zoom range it would cost several thousands of pounds to buy for a dslr, idiot mode which actually works very well... I could go on. It even takes standard 52mm filters if you decide later on that you'd like to try a bit of landscaping - I've used mine with a full on set of huge Z-Pro filters and polariser!

You can pick them up now for around £200 brand new - just incredibly versatile for the money.

FWIW, from a repro point of view, a hi-res scan would be 300dpi, making an A4 CMYK about 45-50Mb. Even an iPhone can take a photo that's quite good enough for repro, unless the photo is going to be printed in a brochure using Stocastic screening at 600dpi or above, where any flaws would be glaring. A decent compact like a Lumix TZ30/40, with the zoom set at approx 50mm, using a grid to check for squareness ought to give a perfectly good enough result for either print or web.

Lighting is crucial for taking photos of artwork. I'll post again later, in the cinema now 🙂

For your needs, you could do a lot worse than looking at a Lumix FZ48.

You can pick them up now for around £200 brand new - just incredibly versatile for the money.

I had a look on Amazon but all those outlets around that price were no longer in stock. Can you suggest where else I might find one.

I like the sound of the versatility and the idiot function. I have seen the results from these cameras before and I was very impressed. If the older model has been superseded do you have a link to it?

I could use the saving elsewhere, I need a new scanner/printer too.

Wow! Newer version from a decent camera shop is just £150 - bargain! Can't vouch for the camera as I've never used it, but assume it's an improvement on its predecessor - I see they've upped it from 12 megapixels to 16 (not necessarily a good thing, mind you). I'm sure Google will provide plenty of reviews.

[url= http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC-LZ30_Digital_Camera?gclid=CM_strbJ87gCFaPHtAodHGgA7Q ]Clifton Cameras[/url]

I've bought a fair bit from this lot over the years and they're a good bunch.

EDIT - actually, the newest version of mine is £400ish - this one

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Panasonic-DMC-FZ200-Super-Zoom-Digital-Camera-/321181626661?pt=UK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN&hash=item4ac7eab125

The one above (LZ30) is a sort of in-betweeny camera with a slower lens.

If you decide to go the DSLR route

Pentax K-5 or K-30 should definitely be considered.. insane amount of camera for the money (particularly in the case of the K-5 right now)

Build quality is outstanding.. I own a K-7 (same as K-5 but older sensor) which I bought from a member on here (after much research as to which model/brand to buy)

Lighting is crucial for taking photos of artwork. I'll post again later, in the cinema now

True but I'd be sticking a white sheet over the window, using a tripod and keeping the iso down. Should give a nice, diffuse, even, flat light.

For your needs, you could do a lot worse than looking at a Lumix FZ48.

I love those as well but would the larger sensor of the DSLR not be better if the photo is blown up to poster size?

Lighting is crucial for taking photos of artwork. I'll post again later, in the cinema now

I was wondering that as well. Do you think that the auto white balance will still work if the whole picture is filled with non-natural colours or would it be better to explicitly set it yourself. Is there no end to the info. available on STW 🙂

My head is toast, I've been looking at reviews of the Lumix and the Nikon and cant decide between them. The prices are identical at £400.

I need a definitive push either way.

Have you considered Sony?

*runs and hides*

Go with an SLR and a prime lens 35-75 mm (probably 50). Don't worry too much which one.

Budget for a tripod.

Chose a room with good light. Even, no reflections. The white sheet mentioned earlier is not a bad idea. Otherwise you're paying money out for lighting - though halogen working lights pointing in the opposite direction are a cheap way to get something reasonable.

Low ISO.

F8

Take your time.

Take a few shot and chose the one you like.

Email a friend and check it looks good on their PC - screens differ.

Keep fettling.

If you feel you might want to use your camera for other things in the future (fast-moving objects for instance), and if you don't mind spending extra for close up capability, get the dslr. Same if you feel you might want to add a flashgun to your setup.

If not, get the Lumix. From what you've told us, it would be the best bet imho 🙂

I love those as well but would the larger sensor of the DSLR not be better if the photo is blown up to poster size?

Yes, but only marginally. The only other thing which I didn't mention is that the dslr will shoot raw files containing much more info than the jpegs produced by the Lumix. Useful if your exposure is slightly off and you need to substantially lighten or darken an image.

Mcm - if you can wait until Tuesday, I've a Canon 350d and a couple of lenses you are welcome to have on loan to try things out. Relatively old tech, but should give you a feel for what to expect from a DSLR.

Some of the Lumix range do RAW

Go with Geoff's offer I think

Still the Nikon IMHO. The sensor has over 10 times the area of the Lumix. The lumix is a truly fantastic camera if you needed something compact with a wide zoom range but thats not what you want here. You need great resolution so the bigger sensor will help and it may also help with the garden shots where light through trees can often result in some funny colouring. The Lumix also doesn't allow you to change lens so if it doesn't do what you want you are stuffed

Leffeboy, fair point about the sensor (really? Ten times? I'm surprised) but there's very little a 25-600 constant f2.8 lens [i]doesn't[/i] do 😀 That's astounding! Unprecedented too.

And given that catalogues are likely to be A4, you'll not see any difference in print quality even with a full page image.

I think the lumix is 6mm wide sensor but the nikon is 23mm wide so it's over 10 times area (unless I read those numbers wrong but I think it is correct). For a4 catalogs you would be right but there is always a risk that someone decides to blow one up to poster size and then things change. The lumix lens is truly astonishing but it might be better to have something that works better at this one specific task

Mcm - if you can wait until Tuesday, I've a Canon 350d and a couple of lenses you are welcome to have on loan to try things out. Relatively old tech, but should give you a feel for what to expect from a DSLR.

Cheers that's a great offer. Will you be in Fife?

As leffeboy will be my primary lifesaver I think I will go with the Nikon.

As leffeboy will be my primary lifesaver I think I will go with the Nikon.

Slightly high risk as I get the impression that folks here understand photography way better than me but for the moment I think the Nikon still matches your original spec best. I'm with igm on the other stuff as well but await the return of molgrips from the cinema...

I'm with igm on the other stuff as well but await the return of molgrips from the cinema...

😀

Fair dos, and I am Nikon for all my slrs :-). But do remember to factor in almost the same spend again for a macro lens for your detail shots - something that most compact and bridge cameras do very well - the Lumix is no exception. You can buy cheap magnifying filters for slr lenses but they're a faff and image quality will suffer - so a macro lens is à necessity.

I don't anticipate taking super close up pictures of my paintings or of single flowers. The closest I'd imagine I'd get to a painting would be about a foot away.

Edit, something like this...

[img] [/img]

My brother is an artist, I photograph his work for his website. These were all taken in a gallery so the light wasn't ideal. Nikon D7000 and f2.8 17-50mm lens.

In an ideal world they need processing in Photoshop to straighten the frames and remove the shadows.

[url= http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6169/6261870318_c7f341f109.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6169/6261870318_c7f341f109.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/6261870318/ ]Headland[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr

[url= http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6038/6261337665_1361f10afb.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6038/6261337665_1361f10afb.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/6261337665/ ]Pillbox, Barn, Fell and Rocks[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr

[url= http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6237/6261868024_6c1a5d896b.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6237/6261868024_6c1a5d896b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/6261868024/ ]Fell[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr

In that case, no macro lens required. If you want to avoid any warping you'll probably want to be a fair distance from your painting, and zoom in. Still don't think you need an slr though, unless (as above) you're likely to be making billboard posters. And tbh, I'd struggle to remember which of my 12x16" prints come from the lumix and which come from my full frame Nikons.

Nice work footflaps.

Usually when my gallery needs high res pictures taken for illustration purposes they get a pro in with fancy lights and stuff. It makes sense for them.

I'm really only after some half decent images for my forthcoming website. I don't mind if they are too rustic, they may compliment my painting style.

I-phone 😀

Still don't think you need an slr though, unless (as above) you're likely to be making billboard posters.

It has been known 😉

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Crumbs! But yes, leave that to the gallery's / agent's pros. (I may be slightly impressed!).

I think your problem is going to be lighting. Natural light is pretty inconsistent, so you probably could do with artificial light. You can either use flash or filament lamps, if you use flourescents or energy savers then the colours won't be right - although this is a tricky subject anyway even with the correct type of light.

If you are in a room it is hard to get even lighting. You can use high powered lamps if you have them, or flashes, but flash is trickier to set up and you need a camera with a hot shoe. SLRs and better compacts have them. You also must not point the light directly at the picture cos it won't be evenly lit. You can either bounce the light around the room (although this can introduce a colour cast depending on what's on the walls or in the room) or use a diffuser or reflector.. Did someone mention a bed sheet above?

Try photographing a blank white piece of paper first, you will be able to see how even the lighting is and if there is a colour cast much more easily.

As for the camera - I would go for an slr personally. My wife got a mint condition Olympus E-420 and lens £120 from ebay. Like new. The excellent 35mm macro if it's ever needed goes for about £120 too. There are bargains out there.

Most lighting in galleries is poor for photography as the lamps do not have a high CRI rating and you get spikes in the output, plus the lighting isn't even as shown by footflaps pics, the colour balance is also off and different in all 3 pics.
Using a gretag colour card would help as would consistent lighting.
Doing just a 'good enough' job is always going to show in the quality of the images but with a bit of care you can get something acceptable. I would start with a DSLR and 50mm lens as these usually are the cheapest but best corrected lens so will have a flat field with little barreling or pincushion distortion that compacts and zooms usually have.

the colour balance is also off and different in all 3 pics.

That's mainly laziness as they're just jpegs, if I shot RAW it wouldn't be an issue.

Try photographing a blank white piece of paper first, you will be able to see how even the lighting is and if there is a colour cast much more easily.

Assuming that the lighting actually is even then it should be possible to get rid of the cast by just fixing the white balance in the camera at that point? Get rid of the smoke from the wood stove may be a different matter though...

Cheers that's a great offer. Will you be in Fife?

I've got to go to Edinburgh, but could swing by en route,

whatever you end up with if you're going to be reproducing artwork I would suggest you shoot RAW and use a white balance card [url= http://michaeltapesdesign.com/whibal.html ]like these[/url]. That way you will have a good chance of getting very close to the right colours. Whilst a prime like the 35 or 50 is ideal, you can remove almost any lens distortion in software nowadays, [+1 for Lightroom].
Edit... no software will fix soft edges though, so depending on your kit lens you may still want to use a prime for the artwork.

a gretag colour card would be more useful as it includes colour patches as well as the white/grey/black
and if you know the RGB colour values (below) you can get close to the actual colours in the paintings
[img] [/img]

Oh and I would also advise listening to MrSmith, he knows what he is talking about 🙂

.........my Pentax Q mirrorless micro slr (currently listed in the classifieds) would be ideal! 😉

[url= http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5531/9223062262_06c1886d77.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5531/9223062262_06c1886d77.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/10286353@N03/9223062262/ ]IMGP0573[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/10286353@N03/ ]jcabuckley1974[/url], on Flickr

geoffj - Member

Cheers that's a great offer. Will you be in Fife?

I've got to go to Edinburgh, but could swing by en route,

Geoff, do you still have directions to here and my mobile number? If not email me, yours isn't listed in your profile.

McM ygm