Camera for up close coil pics...

[dfranks04]

Once again I've gotta say it's subjective. What do you consider acceptable? Do you want posters that look good when you are standing right in front of them or from across the room? There is a bit of difference in those two situations. Both require a good lens and good lighting but you can get away with a little less camera to get results that look good from across the room.

I agree with what dripdaze said. There are a lot of factors and if you do not know a lot about cameras it can be difficult to find the best "bang for the buck". A lot of people will say that if you want to be able to take images that will be good for poster prints than just get the highest megapixel you can afford. That is simply just false. Pixel count is important but perhaps even more so is the quality of the camera sensor. And most beginners won't even know what to look for as advertising or info on a camera box will make even the worst quality camera sound like it is something great.

My advice.. ask lots of questions and recommendations. Go to Flickr and look at lots of photos (as most tell you what type of setup was used) or ask others on here for pictures that they have taken with their own camera. The proof is in the pudding. 8^)

 

[mujuru]

For anyone who is VERY critical about photography. I'm no expert just something I love doing. Also note this was about 3 mins of work (including slight Lightroom work) with no tripod and ISO around 12800 in my basement office.

Everyone else... please enjoy the photo. 8^)

nice pics...

Just curious... are these with the 100L? I was just curious how close you can get with the 100L... i presume closer than these. I'm not critiquing, etc... lol. Trust me, i'm no one to critique in that sense... like you, just something i enjoy doing. I'm only looking at the magnification of these and i'd just presume that the 100L would be able to do more... disregarding composition, etc.etc..etc.. i'm just talking pure magnification.

 

[beckdg]

cheap point and shoot photo in macro mode with cheap, antiquated light bar with horrid bulbs and a disgusting background that complicated the lighting issues through a scratched up magnifying glass...

that 7MP camera was purchased a few years back with a case and tripod for $50 full retail for my then 6 yr old son.

same camera, identical coil...

 

[dfranks04]

mujuru... No problems asking questions. These were taking with the Canon 100L Macro lens. I could have gotten closer but there is still a focusing distance that has to be factored in. You cannot have the lens right on top of the object if you want it to be in focus. I could have easily cropped it in closer and it still would have looked really good and lots of detail. These are what you get for 3 mins while I'm busy working. HAHA I love talking about photography so please ask as many questions as you would like.

 

[mujuru]

OP... I just looked at Flickr's print ordering recommendations and for a 20"x30" print, they recommend a minimum resolution of 1800x2700 which isn't terribly difficult to achieve.... so looks like they're comfortable with printing at roughly 100dpi. That should make things a bit easier for you.

 

[dfranks04]

I went back to the image to crop it in MUCH tighter... here are the results.

** I should add. The Canon 100L Macro is probably one of the sharpest lens that I own, perhaps tied with the Canon 70-200 L f4 IS. I actually use the macro len more often for portraits and other fun shots as it is just amazingly sharp. **

 

[dfranks04]

OP... I just looked at Flickr's print ordering recommendations and for a 20"x30" print, they recommend a minimum resolution of 1800x2700 which isn't terribly difficult to achieve.... so looks like they're comfortable with printing at roughly 100dpi. That should make things a bit easier for you.

I have not ordered from Flickr before but have done a few orders from Shutterfly and was not even impressed with there 4x6. I have a Canon Pro-100 printer that I use and do all my own printing now. I have some amazing 13"x 19" photos that look great with my camera's 5472 x 3638 resolution. 8^)

 

[Nate Rager]

This thread is turning into one of the the best "pics of your coil" threads I've seen. Pretty cool to have all the pics in high quality.

Whenever I do something for fun I tend to go all out with it. Just they way I do things. Damn the cost. It's what I work for. If i cant spend my money when I'm dead, I'm going to enjoy it now.

So, what camera would you guys recommend to get poster quality images that look good no matter where you are?

 

[mujuru]

mujuru... No problems asking questions. These were taking with the Canon 100L Macro lens. I could have gotten closer but there is still a focusing distance that has to be factored in. You cannot have the lens right on top of the object if you want it to be in focus. I could have easily cropped it in closer and it still would have looked really good and lots of detail. These are what you get for 3 mins while I'm busy working. HAHA I love talking about photography so please ask as many questions as you would like.

yeah... just cuz i BELIEVE the 100L is a true 1:1 macro... so i'm thinking that the 22mm atty should be able to occupy 2/3s of your frame or there about. the MFD is 1' so i'm thinking you can move in a bit more. of course, DoF is factor and such.. but i'm just thinking about magnification, etc.. But of course, all theoretical since i don't own the lens.

I used an inexpensive tokina 35mm of my shots.. but the MFD is VERY close to the lens (almost touching)... But hate getting that close since the hood starts to make shadows and such, making things difficult to work with. The tokina does what its advertised to do... but for all practical purposes, its not practical... lol.

Edit: damn... am i hijacking this thread? Sorry OP.. back on topic.

 

[dfranks04]

This thread is turning into one of the the best "pics of your coil" threads I've seen. Pretty cool to have all the pics in high quality.

Whenever I do something for fun I tend to go all out with it. Just they way I do things. Damn the cost. It's what I work for. If i cant spend my money when I'm dead, I'm going to enjoy it now.

So, what camera would you guys recommend to get poster quality images that look good no matter where you are?

It would honestly be more helpful for me (and perhaps others) to give us a price you desire to pay for a camera/ lens setup. I could throw out some crazy recommendations that might give you a stroke when you see the sticker price. 8^)

 

[mujuru]

cheap point and shoot photo in macro mode with cheap, antiquated light bar with horrid bulbs and a disgusting background that complicated the lighting issues through a scratched up magnifying glass...

that 7MP camera was purchased a few years back with a case and tripod for $50 full retail for my then 6 yr old son.

same camera, identical coil...

Through a magnifying glass... now that's brilliant!

 

[beckdg]

It would honestly be more helpful for me (and perhaps others) to give us a price you desire to pay for a camera/ lens setup. I could throw out some crazy recommendations that might give you a stroke when you see the sticker price. 8^)

how true. the sky's the limit. some cameras cost as much as many peoples annual incomes and then some.

fantastic photos, guys. seriously. that last one is super crisp.

Through a magnifying glass... now that's brilliant!

thanks.

 

[sneakerpimp]

what lens you use on the rebel... and uncropped?

kit lens with extension tube, 25% cropped.

...But anyways... my point really was that if you want to print large size, you need large files... so cropping pics out of the camera is a counter intuitive way of "zooming." For uses online, its fine... but large prints is a completely different ball game.

8mp is adequate for poster size... i do grand format at my print shop and that resolution works just fine.

 

[dfranks04]

yeah... just cuz i BELIEVE the 100L is a true 1:1 macro... so i'm thinking that the 22mm atty should be able to occupy 2/3s of your frame or there about. the MFD is 1' so i'm thinking you can move in a bit more. of course, DoF is factor and such.. but i'm just thinking about magnification, etc.. But of course, all theoretical since i don't own the lens.

I used an inexpensive tokina 35mm of my shots.. but the MFD is VERY close to the lens (almost touching)... But hate getting that close since the hood starts to make shadows and such, making things difficult to work with. The tokina does what its advertised to do... but for all practical purposes, its not practical... lol.
Edit: damn... am i hijacking this thread? Sorry OP.. back on topic.

While we are off topic... 8^) The closet you can get with the 100L is about 1" away from your object. Also as I use a full frame camera there is not added "magnification" that you get from crop sensor camera. Yet with the amazing sensor in the Canon 6d and the amazing detail of the lens, you can crop in very tight and still have an amazing photo. Hope that all makes sense.

 

[mujuru]

I have not ordered from Flickr before but have done a few orders from Shutterfly and was not even impressed with there 4x6. I have a Canon Pro-100 printer that I use and do all my own printing now. I have some amazing 13"x 19" photos that look great with my camera's 5472 x 3638 resolution. 8^)

that makes sense. But just curious if Flickr has some good upscaling techniques/software, etc.... if it were me, i'd probably upload a 100dpi 4x6 and see what i get back, etc. I tend to believe junk in junk out... but hey, who knows what a company like Flickr can do. I generally stick with the 200-300dpi formula and i've always been happy with my prints. And its no surprise your prints come out nice...300dpi. I have have much lower level Pixma printer, but have been more than happy with it as well.

 

[Nate Rager]

Ok then let's see what happens with a 1k budget.

 

[mujuru]

While we are off topic... 8^) The closet you can get with the 100L is about 1" away from your object. Also as I use a full frame camera there is not added "magnification" that you get from crop sensor camera. Yet with the amazing sensor in the Canon 6d and the amazing detail of the lens, you can crop in very tight and still have an amazing photo. Hope that all makes sense.

absolutely makes sense... i was just curious about the lens itself though... Just cuz i've had thoughts of buying it in the past just for its claimed sharpness. But opted for the 135/2 for the extra stop since i rarely do macro shots.

 

[Completely Average]

You do not NEED expensive macro lenses to take detailed close up shots.


In fact, you would probably be quite surprised what you can do with a Telephoto lens.....

But I've found that even a "standard" 18-55mm lens can handle the job you're wanting...

For a sense of scale, that capital A is 2mm tall.


Both of those shots were taken with a cheap Canon Rebel T3. The top one with an equally cheap 75-250mm telephoto lens and the bottom with the 18-55mm lens that came with the camera. The camera and both lenses, carrying case, and lens cleaning kit cost me about $800 two years ago.

 

[dfranks04]

Ok then let's see what happens with a 1k budget.

I will stick with my earlier suggestion. I started with a Canon t3i with the kit lens and am still impressed with that camera. Amazon has it for about $500 with a decent kit lens. Use the remaining money and get the Canon 100mm (non L version) which is also about $500 if you want to get into macro photography. If that isn't the main thing you want to take pictures of than I would suggest the Canon 50mm 1.4 for $340.

If you want something much smaller than check out the Sony Nex 6. I think the Canon t3i would be the better way to go but with a bigger body and several lens it can be a pain to carry around. Also most Sony Nex lens will be cheaper to purchase. Not as high-quality as the Canon gear that I have purchased but these cheaper lens can still take great photos.


** I saw someone else mention using extension tubes. That is a very cheap way to get macro shots but you should also be aware that you lose detail/ sharpness when using these. You can still get good images but I find that they are not as nice as if you were actually using a true macro lens. **

 

[dfranks04]

absolutely makes sense... i was just curious about the lens itself though... Just cuz i've had thoughts of buying it in the past just for its claimed sharpness. But opted for the 135/2 for the extra stop since i rarely do macro shots.

Yeah I considered the 135/2 as well but I have read/ researched (although not used) that the 100L is sharper. With that said, I have seen some amazing shots taking with the 135/2. It is an amazing lens.