Hi,
I realize that an SLR is the best way to take very good pen/nib photos, but I also want a small camera that I can easily carry around in my purse for taking quick pictures of birds (nice blue herons at a nearby city pond!), and that I can afford. Although I do repair my own vacs, and lust after nice tools, I'm less likely to get into the gory details of photography. What cameras at the small, budget end would anyone here suggest?
Thanks,
Gretchen

You can't find a better quality compact digital camera for your money than a Canon SD or A series. And there are plenty to choose from in all price ranges. And the macro on these compacts is outstanding for the price.

Steve

Panasonic have the best lens features of the ones I've investigated, new one has the first proper wide angle for a point and shoot. Think brand wise Kodak is OK, Casio is good and so is Nikon (various people I know have owned them). Canon's have good reputations too. Buy last year's model and you get much more camera for your money. IMHO the last two years have seen megapixel madness just to try sell the next generation camera, but anything in the region of 7 Megapixels is likely to take pretty good pictures. Most of these point and shoots will have images that are less sharp at the edges, but should be good in the main part of the picture. Oh, and only look at the optical zoom (3 times is the norm, 4 times is good), the digital zoom stuff is sales rubbish. All that does is crop the image on the sensor, nothing is gained that you couldn't do with the most primitive of software on your PC.

Consider the midrange cameras that are a bit bigger than the point and shoots, sometimes called prosumers. They look like a mini SLR but have a fixed lens. Again Canon and Panasonic have the better lense ranges and performance. With these cameras the sensor that collects the image info is much bigger than in the point and shoot's and so even a 5 Megapixel camera will take pretty stunning shots. I used a Minolta 5MP that was made some 6 years ago for 5 years and it took awesome pictures. Such cameras are now very affordable.

You can always get professional reviews for nearly every camera launched in the past few years from the dpreview website. Almost too much information.

Hope this helps. It is of course only my opinion (one hack amateur but recently re-awakened photographer after splashing out on a Nikon D300). Well you'd have to wouldn't you? The excuse was that my old film camera with nice lenses was sitting in the cupboard gathering dust, so might as well get a camera I can use the lenses on. Gosh, there's another hobby that's as self-propellingly dangerous as fountain pens!!!

Nic

I've heard great things of the Canon A series for amateur photography.

My dad has a canon, they're great cameras.

Look for a Panasonic DMC-FX01 that's been discontinued. If you're lucky, you'll be able to find one at an outstanding bargain. That's the only camera (until today) that I ever used for pen shots. Absolutely loved that camera. Here's the link to what DPReview thinks.

DMC-FX01

I also recommend the Canon A series. I still use my Canon A80 more than my Canon Xti DSLR. It takes great pictures.

At least as dangerous, I should know . (A 350D, 2 400Ds, replaced with a 40D and a 5D later, with a stack of lenses I am too ashamed to list here ).

Warm regards, Wim

Hi Gretchen,

Well, as others indicated, you can't really go wrong with a Canon A, Ixus/Elph/SD, etc., but the zoom range may not be enough to shoot herons.

The only camera I can think of, capable of doing that, which will fit in a purse, is a Panasonic, from the TZ series, the TZ4 and TZ5 are the latest models. Any other "compacts" capable of doing this are not all that compact; they are more like compact dslrs, and often priced similarly, although standard with a larger zoom range. Also, you have to be very careful which one you choose in that case; often these superzooms are not all that great, although there are a few exceptions. Best is to check sites like dpreview.com in that case.

BTW, the only reason the TZs are such compact cameras, is because they have a folded image path; part of the lens is at an angle of 90 degrees to the front lens - clever design.

If you do consider a superzoom compact, those dslr type compacts, you might want to consider an Olympus 420 or 520 instead. Dslr, 4/3 system, very compact. Lenses are expensive, however, although they do a few (cheaper) consumer lenses, including them even in a kit.

Warm regards, Wim

Seems a consensus that canons are the way to go.

The A series is great in that they use AA batteries you can get anywhere if needed (but use rechargables, which are cheaper in the long run, last much longer, and are more environmentally friendly). They also have more manual settings than the SD series, but sounds like you want something pocket-able and takes good pictures with less fuss. Plus the A series are much bigger than the SD.

The panny TZ* series have great leica lenses but don't do well in low light settings from what I hear, but if you want it for situations where you have a lot of available light, they take great pictures.

I did a lot of research and ended up getting a Fuji F31, but they are not being made anymore, the newer fujis may be ones to look at too (F100), but fuji also succumbed to the megapixel war and I don't know if the newer version is better.

My friend has a canon SD600 and likes it quite a bit.
I agree that anything over 7megapixels is probably overkill for most consumers, and is just marketing.

this is just food for though.

Wim, it's funny you mention the TZ5; today I was ready to plunk down the coin on it, as it'd gotten such an outstanding review on DPreview. The only thing that stopped me was the desire for a little more manual control. Ended up with the Sony A200, and I'm in hog heaven with it.

I can't, however, find enough good things to say about those little Panasonic point/shoot models.

I posted 5 separate threads in Photography today, and every single picture was taken with my dearly departed DMC-FX01.

I just bought a Canon S5is, which is not as small as a deck of cards, but it has a great macro function. I took this photo with it:




P.S. It has a 12x OPTICAL zoom.

You might want to look into the Olympus cameras. While these are not often mentioned, they have superb optics (I was first introduced to this manufacturer when I bought their laboratory microscopes). I have seen one or two just recently under USD300.00 and even one that looked light, portable and easy to handle under USD200. Olympus has a website for viewing their line http://www.olympusamerica.com/

I'd compare it very favourably to the Canon I own.

I wondered what you'd used for that pic, 'nautrix! Nice work!

This is so helpful -- thank you!

After looking over some of the reviews a few of you mentioned, and then the specification pages, I am curious about the centimeter number given for macro -- what does that mean in terms of use, and how does that translate to shooting pen nibs?

Who comes up with those auto-settings names???

Also, I hadn't realized that Panasonic has Leica lenses! That little TZ camera sounds great, but I also noticed that although it has manual white balance, it doesn't allow manual focus, which I would think would be a problem with macro. Yes? No?

And Olympus. Sigh. I have a wonderful old Olympus SLR film camera in the closet. A joy -- great lenses, amazing amount of light to the viewfinder, etc. Hence, when I bought a digital camera quite a few years ago, I bought an Olympus. It has been a hopelessly unreliable disaster that went back to Olympus about 3 times! Although a friend has the same basic camera but the later 4 mega pixel model, and his has been fine, I'm still leery of them.

I'm familiar with low end Sony and Canon digital video cameras, and Canon seems generally to have slightly better images, and is much easier to use (i.e. smart layout), but the sound on the Sony (I had to get one for work) is astoundingly good! (I went for the Sony because the equivalent Canon apparently has dreadful motor sound that goes straight to the tape!). The Sony's endlessly embedded and frustrating menus don't lead me to want another Sony camera, particularly since you can only get to them by poking the screen itself!!! Don't they know some people have ink on their fingers?

Gretchen

Hi gretchen,

Generally, not much. What you really need to know is magnification. However all of these cameras tend to be able to come close enough to do close-ups of the nib anyway.

The marketing department .

No, not really. AF works fine with these types of cameras, even in macro-mode.

My experience with (a multitude of) compact cameras is, that the only make where it doesn't matter which model compact camera you buy to get a model that works well, is Canon. With most other makes, you need to get into camera reviews to know how well they are doing, because it changes from model to model how good or bad they are.

However, the Panasonic TZ series comprise a range of cameras that have been consistently good, provided you don't use them at isos above 160 on a regular basis. Those are for emergencies only, to be very honest. Other than that, I wouldn't mind owning one myself .

No, they don't .


Warm regards, Wim

Wonderful image! Thank you -- I also love all the ink sampler pages, lol. (I just had dinner with a pen person who tried to dissuade me from bothering with finding a clip for one of my Conklin pens because inner-cap pulling is a royal pain).

That camera does look like it would do everything, but NOT likely to be a carry around everywhere just in case a cool something or other flies by. (After all, I've got four pens taking up a fair amount of space in my bag!).

Gretchen

Hi Wim. Where is magnification listed, or under what other term? Is it related to zoom and telephoto in some backwards way? (looking for budget macro info I found a great explanation for using Pringles cans between the body and lens on SLRs!)

ciao,
Gretchen

Hi Gretchen,

With slrs, magnification is listed with the lens, as it is lens dependent. A true macro lens goes to 1:1, i.e., magnification of 1X, at least, IOW, it can depict objects at lifesize scale on the sensor - 1 cm of the object is imaged as 1 cm on the sensor (resulting in huge final magnifications, obviously). With compacts, the magnification is rarely indicated, although it may be listed somewhere deep in the manual, and often depends on the zoom setting. You'll find there are several possibilities with compacts; they either focus very close, anywhere between 1 and 10 cm, as a standard, they may have a special macro setting, which allows them to do very close focusing, or they have both.

The macro setting internally often involves a trick done with the lens in compacts, where focusing is achieved by zooming rather than by properly focusing, just liek with slr "macro zoom" lenses, and often this means that at the wide end you have the closest focus and magnification.

In any case, I haven't come across a compact in recent years with close focus ability which couldn't do a nib shot, so there is no need to worry about that. Some reviews may indicate the close focusing ability of compacts, I guess, so if you really need to know it is useful to check out the review sites. And you don't need to go to 1:1 with compacts anyway; the sensor is rather small, and going to 1:1 with such a camera would result in an image filling nib tipping shot, almost, rather than a nib shot .

The Pringles cans idea is great, but a little difficult to do with some of the modern slr lenses, as the diaphragm only tends to stop down only when the electrical contacts are connected to the camera . It is fun to experiment with those types of things however, I have done a lot of that in the past, but I am in the fortunate situation now that my lenses can handle these types of extreme closeups anyway.

Warm regards, Wim

Hi Wim,

thank you again! I had been curious as to how these itty bitty cameras were managing their magic, so it makes sense that it might draw on what it's already doing when it zooms.

And the same site with the pringles can suggested that for non-slrs, you simply attach another basic lens from any camera, (or even a rifle site!), to the front and make use of it's magnification to achieve macro images. I didn't go into the details, so I don't know if this goes onto the list of yet more creative things to do with duct tape.

ciao,
Gretchen

Gretchen,

Since no one has mentioned it,I will. I use a discontinued Fujifilm Finepix E500 that I bought off of ebay. It's small enough
to carry around,takes great pictures,and has a macro/super macro setting for closeups. It doesn't have the ability to change
lenses,but from what I understand in your post you only have so much room in your purse anyway. I gave the seller a best
offer of $125 for mine and he accepted it. I would think that they could still be found on ebay.

BTW,I took my avatar with it.

John

Go with one of the Canon PowerShots. I've had the A95 for years now, and it's been a wonderful point-and-shoot camera. With the right environment, it is possible to take professional looking photos with it.

Hi Gretchen,

What I did with my Canon G5, which I had before I finlly got a dslr, was to use an adapter and a close-up lens. The ring around the lens could be replaced with the adapter, into which a close-up lens fitted. That way I could do 1:1 and even larger magnifications.

You can actually get Cokin adapters for most compacts, which will fit in the tripod mount, onto which you can attach close-up lenses as well. That is another option.

However, generally you won't need those for pen pics.

Personally, I wouldn't use duct tape to do this, considering the fragility of the lens systems on most compacts.

Anyway, here are a few links for the stuff I was talking about:
http://www.cokin.com/magneticholder.html
http://www.cokin.com/shoeholder.html
with these:
http://www.cokin.com/filtres6.html?=#101

Alternatively:
http://www.cokin.com/magnefix.html
http://www.cokin.com/ico6-DIGI-LENSES.html

HTH, warm regards, Wim

Thanks -- I will try to get my hands on a Fuji. I know very little about them.

I did get to spend about ten minutes with a Panasonic TZ5 and a Canon A50? or 70? yesterday. The Panasonic seems very well made, and without having a clue about it, I was able to quickly and easily figure out some basics, e.g how to go from macro to telephoto, how to turn the flash on and off. The sales guy also mentioned that the brand as a whole has just received a most reliable cameras rating from Consumers.

The Canon, which I know most people love, seemed far less responsive, and its controls were not immediately obvious -- I could not get it to focus in macro range. And it's plastic. I tried to remind myself that jet cockpits have plastic windows, and those do just fine, but after holding the Panasonic, it really felt like a lumpy toy! Also, turning the camera off and on took quite awhile compared to the TZ5.

Do those of you with the Canon A models quickly learn your way around them and forget that they are plastic?

Gretchen

Yes, I find them easy to use. The plastic doesn't bother me as long as the lens is glass. To use macro I press the flower symbol.

Here is a cropped picture taken with a Canon A80 using the "macro" mode, handheld indoors using window light.


A camera is a personal choice, so go with what you like.

I think I'll get in on this one, as it's about time I purchased a new camera myself...

I'm currently using a crapola Pentax that's at least five years old. Takes shots that are passably decent, but the white balance is horrible and inconsistent (even with manual adjustment), and the macro leaves something to be desired. I've scoured dpreview looking for a suitable replacement, and it seems each make/model has shortcomings.

To cut right down to it, I'm not looking to spend fortune (really, as little as possible), and don't mind a used camera that's a year or two, or even three, old...so long as it has a good lens, decent macro, and acceptable white balance.

Thoughts?

EDIT: I should note that I don't mind a large camera, and even prefer size for the added stability.

Some thoughts.

(1) The site "dpreview" is for very knowledgeable hobbyists on up. It requires a great deal of specialized knowledge to use their reviews. steves-digicams is much more suitable for novices on up to the average user.

(2) keh.com is a large internet pervayer of used cameras and equipment with a excellent reputation. You haven't stated your budget, and stock turns over quickly but today I notice that they had a Canon A630 in LN- condition for $139.

(3) Canon's "A" series and, as always, read the manual. Make sure it is one that will take a lens adapter so you can put one of the macro diopter lens on the front.

(4) If you like examples you can always check pbase.com for samples taken with most cameras. Since some cameras have so many examples posted you can pick out the owners who didn't read the manual.

(5) Year by year the "G" series are more desireable and cost more than the "A" series. The main reason is that the "G" series uses a larger sensor (not pixels but surface area) and hence year for year produces better tonality and less noise. This tends to not be relevant for most people as they seldom get prints larger than drugstore standard.

Best of luck.........

The budget is up in the air. On the one hand, I wouldn't mind throwing down some money, provided I knew the camera was going to last me a number of years -- as opposed to being outmoded in two.

I had a Canon Rebel 2000 film SLR that I used for years, but recently sold. I'm somewhat of an amateur astronomer, and am looking for an all around good camera that would also double as a basis for astro-photo (which generally means quality). I don't need ten billion megapixles, nor do I need all the consumer frills (superzooms, face-focus, etc), but I would like the aforementioned traits (solid macro, white balance, lens).

In short, I don't mind paying for quality, but I do mind paying for things I don't want/need.

Pep, that's a thousand choice words right there! Nice!

Handheld?!?!?!? That's remarkable -- wow. I would have thought it required both a tripod and holding your breath! Gorgeous. Thanks for posting the photo -- I will definitely spend more time with the Canons!

Gretchen

Hi Wim,

Those are so smart and cool -- thank you, I had no idea such things existed! I only knew about the standard screw-on lenses and filters. The tripod add-on gizzy is particularly wonderful. I'm reminded of the cinematographer for Wim Wender's Wings of Desire who apparently used his grandmother's silk stocking as a filter to soften some of the shots!

And fear not, I wouldn't go near a camera with duct tape!

ciao,
Gretchen

Thank you, these sites sound very helpful, particularly since, as you noted, dpreview does assume you already know what you're doing! Going through the details wasn't quite as daunting as reading through the console logs on my Mac (really, what is a dylib?).

Gretchen

I've been thinking about getting a new camera soon, too, and this post has been helpful. I was wondering how do these cameras do in indoor light? Also, are there any digital cameras that let you take pictures very rapidly, like several pictures over the course of a couple seconds?

Don't mean to threadjack, figure its better to ask here then start a new thread.

I think Olympus makes some of the best lenses around. Unfortunately these days their sensors are sub-par in a lot of their consumer models. Make sure you try before you buy, because some of their "higher grade" models cannot take a good picture even in good light. The colours are way off, there is noise everywhere, and there's no setting you can change to make it better.
Olympus has a new camera out that is completely waterproof, shock-proof, and freeze-proof (for polar bear swims?) that is really first of its kind. The photos I have seen so far look good but I haven't got a full-resolution shot to look at.

If you don't have a lot of time/energy to shop around and try a lot of cameras, get a Canon. Their compacts are pretty amazing!

Neill
Olympus C-3030, C-2040, E-500 owner

I have a Canon A series point and shoot and it gives me passable results at low ISO shooting pens or scenery. You may also want to check out the ultra compacts made by Sony like the T-200 which have a nice macro feature and 6x zoom.

Best,
Hari

Lots of options but for my personal choice Canon does the best overall "package" with the best final result. Others may be better in an individual area, like sensor, or lens, or processing, but they can't put it all together.

I really want an S5 IS as a more convenient camera than my DLSRs.

Sorry to hear that Olympus is not up to their once high standards. I have an older C700 UltraZoom and it is quite good at capturing most shots. I do think the newer models of this line were also highly rated. However, I believe Gretchen herself decided against an Olympus.

couple other thoughts........

(1) Metal bodies can be bent in non repairable ways, where modern plastics will be resilient and protect the innards.

(2) Since the digital camera put the LCD screens on the back that show you what the sensor is seeing, the slr has become a unnecessary for precision work.

(3) BTW, to get a 1.0x view on an slr you have to buy top of the line professional grade, down payment on a car, models. Even the higher niche armature models seldom go over an 0.8x mirror prism view. So you end up composing on the lcd on the back of the SLR anyway....................

(4) Lighting is more important than the camera for macro work.

(5) To get the lighting right you really have to read one of the books that you can get through your local public library.

(6) Even the least expensive tripod made is a good thing for a photographer to spend money on. Even today, with image stabilization, it should still be the second thing you buy.

(7) People should probably read one of those general photography books before they buy their first camera.


Best of luck..........

Very good point about the plastic! (lol, given this odd passion I've got for old plastic pens, you'd think I would prefer a plastic camera!)

And I'm happy to say I already have a wonderful Bogen tripod.

I am lost as to lighting however. Years ago when I was still doing sculpture and had to take good slides, I was careful to use only particular types of film and , hmm, is it 5700 k bulbs? I'm totally lost with digital in terms of getting correct color. From what I gather, each camera/brand seems to have particular color strengths and weaknesses. Does that mean that to get pen colors correct, one has to choose the lighting/bulb types based on the camera? Furthermore, if I'm looking at the images not in print, but on a Mac, and sending them to someone with a PC . . . .

I am curious about the viewfinder vs LCD screen. While that makes sense with controlled lighting indoors, LCDs can seem impossible outdoors in bright light. Is there a big range of viewfinder reliability in these non-SLR digitals? My old Olympus digital was dreadful for this, which I had forgotten until now -- what you saw was not what you got!

And yes yes, I'm a big fan of the public libraries! Nonetheless, reading a range of comments and questions from various people is wonderfully helpful, particularly since most people here are also trying to take pictures of shiny little pens!

Gretchen

Most digital cameras have auto white balancing, settings for most common lighting, or you can custom set the white balance for what ever lighting conditions you have.

These are some books you may want to check out, I got these suggestions from a forum on dpreview.com
the digital photography book by Scott Kelby
and understanding exposure by Bryan Peterson.

If you haven't read these posts yet, you may want to have a look.
http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/in...showtopic=62157

Which model of tripod and head did you get? I have been looking for an upgrade.

Thanks, Lisa, and Gretchen.

BTW, Canon has two different lines of cameras starting with "A." There was a cheaper line that got bad reviews. Make sure you look at the ones with the bigger sensors & stellar reviews.


Pep

The Canons with image stabilization are the way to go. I have a Canon Powershot 700SD IS, though that was on the tail of last year's models.

http://flickr.com/cameras/canon/powershot_sd700_is/

That said, you can probably find one inexpensively.

Hi, thanks so much for the recommendations -- those look very helpful.

I've actually got two Bogens and wouldn't get or recommend any other brand! One is a standard size 3001 with a #3047 head with two levels in it. This is a great, solid, stable, but not particularly light tripod. My friend discovered this when he schlepped it out to a park to try taking overlapped images for 360 panoramas.

The other is REALLY heavy! It's a 3050 for film and video with a truly glorious fluid head #3063. I believe that at the time I got it (20 or so years ago?) it was the "small" fluid head.

Any time I've happened to use someone else's non-Bogen tripod I've found them dreadfully rickety. Of course whenever I've had to carry the Bogens around I've recognized the virtues of lighter tripods!

Since I've had these for years, the models may not exist anymore, but I hope the info helps!

Yes, I've not heard anyone grumble about their Canons, which is impressive! And that's a great link; thanks! I didn't realize that Flickr had that much info about the cameras. Very helpful.

Gretchen

Most of the time, I only carry a monopod. I just don't have the patience to lug a good tripod around, and they tend to be difficult to get into historic sites.

If , as you say in your original post, you wish to take pics of birds, I'd suggest you look for a model with a good, long zoom lens, as most of those pesky things are small and difficult to get close-to.
I use a discontinued Minolta with a 12x optical zoom..... not exactly 'pocketable', but 'pursable', very versatile. Minolta lenses were, IMO, under-rated, and never 'fashionable'.
There is no point in having a 12Mp camera with a mediocre lens!

Those monopods have always looked like such a good idea, but I've never actually used one. Nice to hear you find them helpful.

Yikes -- that's lots of zoom! But very good to know that what's really necessary to get a decent shot. The little Panasonic TZ5 apparently has 10x zoom by using folded optics (someone explained it higher up in this thread), and it has a nice lense and is really sweet in hand. But I just had dinner with a friend who loves her Canon A570 and was talking about how nice it is to have the option to use manual focus, etc., which the Panasonic won't allow. I've not looked at the Minoltas, but will do so on your recommendation!

"Here birdy birdy birdy" won't work huh? (Actually I recently rescued fledging blue jays who were sitting in the middle of a dog walk and bike path while their frantic parents dive bombed everyone nearby. I carefully carried each one over to branch in a tree. One pooped on me and flew away, the other seemed quite happy to sit in my open hands watching its parents try to kill me).

I've always wanted a big optical zoom, and I use it a lot, actually (my 4mp camera has a 10x optical, which is the only reason it's still in service). There's a canon with 12x and image stabilization (ethernautrix has one, so you can see it in her flickr photostream).

Something small to carry around everywhere....

Try the FUJI Finepix F31fd (old) or the current replacement Finepix F100fd.(my wishlist)

I don't like flash photography. These little compacts handle very high ISOs with very very little noise.

Amazing compacts.

Goodluck

Yes, the Canon SX100 is wonderful! The positive mention of the camera in this thread, as well as the comments about how much zoom is really necessary for catching birds (okay, this camera is 10x, not 12x). I was first drawn to the Sony H10 (?) because its LCD screen is sooooo nice and the camera is very fast, but thanks to the careful reviews also mentioned here on dpreview it's obvious that the Canon takes better pictures!

HOWEVER, I notice that the SX100 came out last August, and it looks like Canon is somewhat regular in their new model introductions. In which case, the current crop would drop in price, and the new versions might have worthwhile bells and whistles. Does anyone here know anything about a possible new version of this camera?

Gretchen