Hello, I need a camera to take close detailed photographs. Are there differences in the macro zoom on different cameras? I will be using a tripod to make sure everything is keep still when pics being taken is there anything else you can recommend?

Many thanks

More info is needed! I take it you are looking for a camera to buy and don’t have one now? Budget? What are you going to use the images for? This could dictate how good the quality needs to be and as such what kind of kit you should look at.

Edit…also how detailed? What kind of subject matter?

Thanks seavers, budget £500, I don’t have a camera at the minute although I have used a friends Sony nex 5 before, the photos are of a dissected limb from an animal and they will form part of my thesis. Hope that info is more helpful 😀

Cheers

If it’s a one-off shoot, why not borrow or rent a DSLR with a decent macro lense? £50-60 will get some lovely kit for a day.

How important is the specific photographic quality? Where does the Sony you’ve been using fall short?

You won’t need to spend £500 unless you want to.
A lot of compacts and bridge cameras will focus to within a few cm of the lens.
Look at the reviews on places like dpreview and go from there.

If you want to go down the slr route, I’d probably get a second hand body like a Nikon d80 and then the Sigma or Tamron 90mm macro. And budget for a decent tripod.
You also might need to consider lighting.

I didn’t realise you could hire the kit, where would that be from then?? The Sony I’d borrowed was good but I hadn’t asked to borrow it again as I don’t live as close to the mate I borrowed it off last time. Pics from the Sony were crisp I just didn’t know if a proper dslr would be better for this type of work?

Sounds interesting!

From a technical point of view you could probably get away with a compact camera with a decent macro feature. I would be doing some research and reading reviews to find a good option, it could come in well under budget.

The other option is a DSLR. You would also have to buy a lens with a macro feature. Its more costly but both Canon and Nikon etc have relatively low cost bodies. You might find a body and lens kit for that budget but you would need to check the lens has the feature you need.

As you could get away with a compact it’s really worth thinking how much camera you need. If it is something you will use a lot after you have done your thesis it may be worth going DSLR and spending more.

Do a web search for DSLR hire – here’s the first one that I came across (link) If there aren’t any local options for you, there’ll be somebody doing rental with delivery. If you call them and tell them your requirements, then they should be able to fix you up with their most appropriate lens.

I’m presuming that you’re at university; surely you’ll have media students with gear? The faculty may even have its own stock for student’s use.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t buy a camera if that’s your need, just that it’s very easy to get the photographs you need without spending much money at all. I’ll leave the buying recommendations to other people…

If its outdoors a Pentax K-5 or K-30 would allow you to shoot macro in a downpour coupled with the 100mm WR macro lens whilst everyone else hides as this chap demonstrates

those two also have v good sensors, just read around the net to find out – severely underrated/under-marketed products/brand

The tamron 90mm is also a good shout is available for multiple systems

Don’t spend £500 for a one-off. Compact cameras have pretty good macro capabilities.

If you’re near Cardiff I can help you out.

Pics from the Sony were crisp I just didn’t know if a proper dslr would be better for this type of work?

Not necessarily. For a complete novice it’s not likely to make a lot of difference. A decent compact can produce an image as good as that of a dSLR to the untrained eye. In fact, out of the box they sometimes come out better because they’re intended to be easier to use and do some good post-processing within the camera itself. You can do better with a dSLR, but it can take a lifetime of practice to get the best out of it.

How close do you need to be exactly? Macro is generally very close. A regular lens may have a minimum focus distance of half a metre or a metre – something like that.

Three_Fish’s idea is a good one. You could hire a couple of lights at the same time. Constant will be cheaper than flash and easier to use. If you need any lighting tips email in profile. Happy to help.

Not necessarily. For a complete novice it’s not likely to make a lot of difference. A decent compact can produce an image as good as that of a dSLR to the untrained eye. In fact, out of the box they sometimes come out better because they’re intended to be easier to use and do some good post-processing within the camera itself. You can do better with a dSLR, but it can take a lifetime of practice to get the best out of it.

Absolutely. I have a Panasonic Lumix TZ30, which has a fairly basic macro function, but it allows you to get very close to small subjects, like this Bee Orchid, which I photographed opposite my workplace earlier this year. The flower is approximately 1.2-2cm across.

You can get the TZ30 now for around £170, I paid around £250 for mine eighteen months ago. Excellent little camera, small enough to put into a pocket, and it’ll take excellent photos at gigs; you’ll get a DSLR confiscated, worth a consideration if you like going to concerts.
A non-macro photo, from the TZ30:

Not tried any macro on my current compact, but here’s a couple from my old mans old 5mp Olympus, taken some time ago – agree DSLR’s are obviously better for most photography, but a compact can be so much easier for macro