Cameras

[Longhair]

I am not big on photography but I do find the need to be able to take a good picture every now and again.

This week I picked up the Panasonic Lumix TZ10 point and shoot camera because it was able to take very good macro/close up pictures.

[saturation]

It probably also does videos too, very useful for dynamic items like varying voltages and scope traces.

[Longhair]

I haven't had a chance to read the manual yet but there is a stereo mic on the top of it.

To be honest, I was only looking at the big name camera makers (Canon, Nikon, Sony) for a small point & shoot camera. The sales person seen the frustration on my face when I was trying to get a good picture of the object above (I brought it in for a "real world" test), walked away and came back with the Panasonic. As an added bonus, it was less than I was about 50- less than what I was planning to spend.

[RayJones]

Yeah I just bought a Canon 550D DSLR simply because I've always wanted a decent camera for ages.
I always was very disappointed with the results I was getting with my point and shoot device, but was always impressed by my ancient EOS1000FN 35mm film camera.

Looking at the above images, they are crying out for a polarising filter on the lens. Not so easy to do with a compact though :-(
Other than that, yeah great macro shot for a compact.

[GeoffS]

Auto focus on closeup/macro work was my biggest complaint with the point and shoot camera I had , a fairly old Olympus C740.
I have a Canon EOS that does a great job but I miss having something I can just pick up and take a picture with. This is especially true if I'm taking pictures in the workshop (metalworking) where I don't want to risk my expensive camera in that environment.
Oily fingers, metal shavings and cameras do not play well together 

[Longhair]

My other camera is a Sony Cybershot DSC-W7 (2005) and was one of the first Cybershots that came out. They sold attachment lenses and filters for the camera but it ended shortly afterwards. Great camera but I wanted something that would take better macro shots.

The biggest problem I found out with the reviews (at least from what I seen) is that the person doing the review cannot break away from using a high end DSLR as their personal base line. I actually seen a person comparing the Canon Powershot S95 and the Canon EOS 7D with EF Lenses side by side. "The boken doesn't look good with the aperture at F/2.0 on the S95 compared to boken with the aperture at F/7.0 using the EF 17-40mm L Lens."

[Mechatrommer]

thanx to the OP for reminding me my +4 closeup filter that has been tucked in the bag for years. there is even +10 lens filter cheapy in the market to make your camera even closer. mod your lens!

[Mechatrommer]

i believe its bokeh longhair, not boken.

[Kiriakos-GR]

Well I will say that the image quality and the colors , are not at the level that would be called as perfect for my taste.

But if is good for you , this all that matters.

All that I can tell , are that its hard to find true quality at anything that is priced below the 500$ mark.
What you always pay for, are the quality of the lens , and the electronics comes second.  

[Mechatrommer]

Well I will say that the image quality and the colors , are not at the level that would be called as perfect for my taste.

it will depend on your profession imo... hobbiest, just to show the circuit and parts clearly for open source, blog etc, a company showing to their client, or professinal photographer hired to create a product display or promotion. as i have suggested earlier to mod your lens if the target is for simply a non pro users. of course you can have dedicated thousands of dollars worth of macro lens. you get what you pay, and... you will lose what you pay, if... you are not pro enough.

[Zero999]

I've found a scanner is good for some flat items but it depends on the quality of the scanner, a cheap one will only work with truly 2D items such as unpopulated PCBs, a better one will be able to handle populated PCBs as long as the components aren't too large.

[Simon]

yes I've used a scanner before. Having an interest in photography I got a Pentax K10D, this is a very nice semipro DSLR for the money although now about 2 years out of production. for some reason pentax is always overlooked and they make the very best bang for buck in the semipro range. they have proper image stabilization in the camera so it works even on old manual lenses that are still compatible.

the only true way of getting nice macro is an extension tube, I've tried the clip on the front "filters" but that causes a lot of cromatic aberation, extension tubes give you great effective magnification (in reality you are just focusing and getting closer) and produce nice shots as your using your original nice lens without any cheap crap messing it up.

Yes what you pay for in a camera is the lens and the image sensor, the rest is just cheap electronics. My 55-300mm lens cost more than my camera is currently worth

[GeoffS]

Yes what you pay for in a camera is the lens and the image sensor, the rest is just cheap electronics. My 55-300mm lens cost more than my camera is currently worth

Tell me about it! My Canon 70-200 lense cost more than the rest of the kit combined. That includes camera (40D), kit lense, batteries, filters, CF cards, etc, etc..
I've had it 3 years and I'm still learning to use it.

[Longhair]

I don't own a scanner

[Simon]

Yes what you pay for in a camera is the lens and the image sensor, the rest is just cheap electronics. My 55-300mm lens cost more than my camera is currently worth

Tell me about it! My Canon 70-200 lense cost more than the rest of the kit combined. That includes camera (40D), kit lense, batteries, filters, CF cards, etc, etc.I've had it 3 years and I'm still learning to use it.

that's why i buy pentax, i can use 30 year old lenses if i want and the new lenses are nicely priced and are nice quality

[Longhair]

All that I can tell , are that its hard to find true quality at anything that is priced below the 500$ mark.
What you always pay for, are the quality of the lens , and the electronics comes second.  

I can guarantee you that if I was in a studio of a professional photographer and we were told to take pictures of the same object using the other person's equipment, they get my point & shoot and I use their professional gear, the pictures that the professional takes would be 1000% than what I would be able to shoot.

True quality comes from the end user's knowledge to work with what they have in front of them without the need of Adobe Photoshop later.

[Simon]

true in a way but if the camera is crap it is crap, most point and shoots are very hard to use in manual because the settings are hiden, At work i used mt SLR I can't be bothered with their P&S

[Zagroseckt]

ok let me show what i got.
These are "quick" shots taken with a Kodac Z700.
I'll add shots taken with my new camera soon as the battery is charged up some
I've had this Kodac for years
These shots were taken from about 3ft away zoomed in on macro mode.
it's a 4mp camera glass sense.

[Mechatrommer]

sometime high end camera discussion too delusive that everybody forgot what pictures are really made of.... light! if you have enough of it, you can lower your cheapo iso and make cleaner image. you can reposition/diffuse the light/object to avoid harsh reflection and get rid of the most poisonous chromatic abberation that make you cry at the more expensive optic, even if the cost is not justificable/recoverable.

ps: my 2k 70-200 cannot get a good macro, so what should i expect for a good macro? sure i'll get one if there is a "niche market" for it

[saturation]

P&S vs SLR is like Wordpad versus Word, just how much do you need to do determines the complexity.

I prefer P&S, because chosen correctly they are faster to use, easier to handle and take good photos, but nothing like an SLR!

Often, cameras show weakness in their lenses. But among SLRs, given you can interchange lenses the electronics moots mostly one models advantages over another, except for the auto features and reliability ratings.

But in P&S, the lenses make a big difference, and paying for electronics is not worth it; today image stabilization and facial recognition are selling points in new P&S, but one can work without that easily by technique.

For me, a P&S must be able to fire quickly, and be in focus.  That means turn on time, flash recycle time, setup time, focus are as fast as I can point and shoot.  The reason for this is to minimize the time I spent fussing with the camera and having people pose, also you can snap before anyone reacts to the camera being there, and makes for best spontaneous photos.

In news photos, you never know what happens, so being able to rapidly deploy and snap is key and seize the moment before something happens!

[FreeThinker]

Wasn't Pentax taken over recently?

[TopherTheME]

I picked up a Pansonic Lumix FZ40 a couple months ago and absolutely love it. It has no problem picking up the dust off a PCB. I can literally place the lens right on top of an object and get a perfect focus. Pretty dam good for a <$300 camera.

These are the 0805 LEDs off the sparkfun FTDI breakout board


I've posted this one in another thread but I'll post it again....

[DJPhil]

Holy crap! I'm glad that fellow remembered his safety goggles.     Looks like he was in the water at least once already by the color of his shirt.

I'm really out of my league in a discussion about cameras, but I wanted to mention a neat project that might be a help to some of you. For a while now there's been a community working on overhauling the firmware of Canon point and shoot cameras. The project is called CHDK, and they've got a huge wiki of info over at their site. If you own one of these cameras, or have a project that might require cannibalizing one, you might want to check it out. Their custom firmware can be temporarily loaded from a memory card and provides just about all the features you could ever think of.

Hope that helps, I'm off to take more pictures of my cat. 

[Simon]

Wasn't Pentax taken over recently?

yes Hoya took them over a couple of years ago. I personally prefer a DSLR over a P&S, firstly it is better quality and gives me more to play with, secondly I make the choices that determine the operation, sure you have scene modes and all that rubbish but as long as you understand the basics of photography and what light does you can be as fast if not faster than a P&S.

At work if I'm taking a picture of a black radiator I know that I need to under expose as the exposure system assumes an average grey scene, I don't need a P&S to do this for me and possibly mess it up. Taking pictures of shiny metal fitting is hard with a P&S as it totally screws up the exposure.

But for the bulkiness of a DSLR it is a far better solution

[saturation]

Here's a photo I took deep underwater somewhere in the Pacific.  I take about 300-400 photos per session underwater using one hand, so most time is spent finding subjects and dealing with the surroundings over fussing with the camera.

None of my SLR friends could take it at the time, because the nature of the rushing currents made them worry about smashing their cameras or drowning.

it's an $80 Canon in a $130 housing.