Looking for digital camera recommendation

[WatchNut]

Hello all:

I'm seeking opinions on the following digital cameras (or others which I may not have considered):
Canon G7 or Sony DSC-H5

Basically, I'm looking for a good, robust point & shoot, and am specifically interested in one with good built-in macro capability, since I take a lot of photographs of wristwatches (see here: http://www.minutemachines.com).

The camera I've been using up to this point is a Nikon Coolpix 5700, which served me well for over three years before recently dying.

Any thoughts, comments and feedback from the folks here would be greatly appreciated. I have included questionnaire information below.

Best Regards,

Michael


What budget have you allocated for buying this camera? Up to $750
What size camera are you looking for? Not of primary importance
How many megapixels will suffice for you? Would prefer 7+
What optical zoom will you need? Not or primary importance, but a nice-to-have. As previously stated, macro is an important issue
How important is “image quality” to you? 9
Do you care for manual controls? Not of primary importance
What will you generally use the camera for? Macro photography, plus general family use
Will you be making big prints of your photos or not? Only occasionally
Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos? Yes
Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos? Not generally
Are there particular brands you like or hate? Have prior experience with Nikon Coolpix 5700 and Canon G1. Both were good experiences.
Are there particular models you already have in mind? Canon G7 or Sony DSC-H5
(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD): Good macro/close-up capabilities

[SpecialK]

I know you said point and shoot, but you might be able to get a good used Canon XT (recently replaced by XTi), or even a Nikon D40 (new) or D50 (used) body only, and a macro lens designed for it for under $750, and have much better quality. Oh, and a good tripod.

[WatchNut]

I know you said point and shoot, but you might be able to get a good used Canon XT (recently replaced by XTi), or even a Nikon D40 (new) or D50 (used) body only, and a macro lens designed for it for under $750, and have much better quality. Oh, and a good tripod.


Thanks SpecialK....now you have me intrigued. As a point of reference, I've never in my life operated a SLR camera (sacrilege, I know).....hence my preference for point and shot.

That said...I'd be interested in hearing more of your thoughts. Specifically....what sort of macro lens would I need to buy to replicate the kind of photos that I linked in my initial post in this thread? Basically, I'm looking for pretty good magnification, since watch movement parts can be pretty tiny.

Many thanks in advance.

Michael

[WatchNut]

...as a further note....this is the sort of thing I'd like to be able to do...except I'm looking for even more magnification. The shot below was done with the Coolpix 5700.

Thanks so much!

Michael

http://www.minutemachines.com/watches/GlashutteOriginal/Panomatic09.jpg

[Rooz]

intersting, i have had a 5700 for 3 years and it also recently shit itself. i was very happy with the quality of it while it lasted.

[John_Reed]

Those older Nikons were boss of the macro heap. That's a really nice shot, I like the details, and even the composition. Well done. I wondered, if adding a macro adapter to an ordinary P&S would be out of the question for you? As an example, here's a macro, perhaps equivalent in magnification to yours, taken with my Panasonic DMC-TZ1 with a +4 diopter magnifying lens in place:
http://john-reed.smugmug.com/photos/70611277-L-1.jpg
To add the adapter to this point & shoot camera is quite simple, as the adapter itself is jury-rigged from an aerosol can cap and an old 49mm filter ring, which mounts the set of magnifiers I have (from +1 to +7 diopters). In practice, the "adapter" slip-fits onto the TZ1's lens bezel, and stays put until you're ready to pop it off and move onto other scenery.

[SpecialK]

Hi:

A "real" macro lens is normally a fixed-focal length lens and will focus down to a lifesize (on "film") ratio of 1:1. They generally are pretty fast with a maximum aperture of f2.8 or better. However, you will normally stop down considerably to keep your depth of field.

Some examples (new on Amazon)
Canon EF-S 60mm 2.8 $382
Sigma 105mm 2.8 $355
Sigma 150mm 2.8 $542

The longer lens will give you a bit more working room between your lens and subject for lights or whatever.

Note that "macro" is also a generic marketing term added to the end of many lens descriptions (such as the "Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro") that really means "sort of close". With the Sigma, you can get 1:2 size but only at 200-300mm, and it is somewhat unwieldy.

Using the camera to set the exposure manually is no problem and will take about 5 minutes to understand the procedure. It is easy enough to take 3 slightly different exposures and pick the best one.

There is a "macro" thread elsewhere and you should ask over there to get really detailed opinions :-)

And as John points out, some supplemental close up lenses on your existing camera may do the trick.

[forno]

Watches drooooool, why do I always like the $$$$$$ ones

http://www.minutemachines.com/watches/BellRoss/BellRoss01s.jpg

http://www.minutemachines.com/watches/GirardPerregaux/Ferrari02s.jpg

http://www.minutemachines.com/watches/Three/IWC12s.jpg

http://www.minutemachines.com/watches/PatekPhilippe/Patek5970/Patek5970_03s.jpg

[WatchNut]

Watches drooooool, why do I always like the $$$$$$ ones



Actually, the first two cost me well under $1,500 each. Both are terrific watches, and really good bang for the buck.

The third one you show is a limited edition from 1993, and would likely go for somewhere close to $20,000.

The fourth one (the Patek Philippe Ref. 5970 perpetual calendar chronograph) is a shade over $100,000.

[forno]

I have one of the first auto winders by Girard Perregaux, never seen another one like it, no idea what ist worth either, plus a current Tag Heuer F1 Chrono as a daily driver

[WatchNut]

I have one of the first auto winders by Girard Perregaux, never seen another one like it, no idea what ist worth either, plus a current Tag Heuer F1 Chrono as a daily driver

Would love to see the GP.....feel free to email me at watchnut@optonline.net or ms@timezone.com

Regards,

Michael

[forno]

Would love to see the GP.....feel free to email me at watchnut@optonline.net or ms@timezone.com

Regards,

Michael

Ill post it here later;)

[forno]

Terrible pic but you get the idea, watch needs a bit of TLC

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9146/img5613dt2.jpg

[WatchNut]

Nice looking watch! Doesn't seem to be in all that bad shape.....but if it hasn't been serviced in a while, it's probably worth having it done. The lubricants in the movement deteriorate over time, and cause metal-on-metal rubbing, which is obviously not desirable.

MS

[zmikers]

Terrible pic but you get the idea, watch needs a bit of TLC

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9146/img5613dt2.jpg

Ya ya, congratulations on the ashes, now will you stop posting photos of it......LMAO.....just kidding;) :D Congrats though mate, England will get it back, you wait and see.

[SpecialK]

Let's see... I have a TV that indicates the time, a DVR that indicates the time, a computer that indicates the time, a microwave that indicates the time, a car that indicates the time, an alarm clock that indicates the time, and just about anyone on the street can tell me the time. Oh, and my camera indicates the time if I'm really in a pinch. What possible use is a watch?

Very nice photos, expecially the thread starter :-)

[WatchNut]

Let's see... I have a TV that indicates the time, a DVR that indicates the time, a computer that indicates the time, a microwave that indicates the time, a car that indicates the time, an alarm clock that indicates the time, and just about anyone on the street can tell me the time. Oh, and my camera indicates the time if I'm really in a pinch. What possible use is a watch?

Very nice photos, expecially the thread starter :-)

Well since you asked ;-)

.....it's not only about telling time. It's about the art and the workmanship. While I'm sure many folks here appreciate the technology that goes into modern digital cameras, aren't there also folks here who appreciate a vintage Leica for what it is....an outstanding piece of engineering?

Mechanical watches are a throwback to a prior era. There are not chips, circuits or batteries inside. The first photo I posted (the partial shot of a watch movement) is of a watch from a German company that makes fewer than 7000 watches each year. All of the finishing is done by hand, right down to the mirror finish polish on the heads of those tiny screws. Some of the part tolerances are measured in nanometers. And without the chips, timing circuits or batteries....that watch runs about 1 second fast a day. That's roughly 0.001157% error....from a completely mechanical device only 38mm in diameter and a few millimeters thick, containing over 300 individual pieces. What else do we, as humans make, at that scale, that contains no circuitry or electronics and still performs as well? I can't think of much. These little guys are a testament to engineering. They're art. I love them for that.

MS

[TNB]

And without the chips, timing circuits or batteries....that watch runs about 1 second fast a day. That's roughly 0.001157% error....from a completely mechanical device only 38mm in diameter and a few millimeters thick, containing over 300 individual pieces. What else do we, as humans make, at that scale, that contains no circuitry or electronics and still performs as well? I can't think of much. These little guys are a testament to engineering. They're art. I love them for that.

MS

So in a way, the human race is actually losing time instead of gaining it. ;)

[SpecialK]

Hi WatchNut:

I agree about the mechanical marvel aspects, and hope you realize my tongue was in my cheek. My last watch, several years ago, was a pocket watch - I had to keep it there because the band broke :-0

[forno]

Well since you asked ;-)

.....it's not only about telling time. It's about the art and the workmanship. While I'm sure many folks here appreciate the technology that goes into modern digital cameras, aren't there also folks here who appreciate a vintage Leica for what it is....an outstanding piece of engineering?

Mechanical watches are a throwback to a prior era. There are not chips, circuits or batteries inside. The first photo I posted (the partial shot of a watch movement) is of a watch from a German company that makes fewer than 7000 watches each year. All of the finishing is done by hand, right down to the mirror finish polish on the heads of those tiny screws. Some of the part tolerances are measured in nanometers. And without the chips, timing circuits or batteries....that watch runs about 1 second fast a day. That's roughly 0.001157% error....from a completely mechanical device only 38mm in diameter and a few millimeters thick, containing over 300 individual pieces. What else do we, as humans make, at that scale, that contains no circuitry or electronics and still performs as well? I can't think of much. These little guys are a testament to engineering. They're art. I love them for that.

MS

If I was a man of means, I would have a SERIOUS watch collection:)

For alot of the reasons you mention, the design, the engeering, the craftsmanship and for the feel too

[WatchNut]

If I was a man of means, I would have a SERIOUS watch collection:)

For alot of the reasons you mention, the design, the engeering, the craftsmanship and for the feel too

Agreed. Most of the watches pictured in my original link in this thread are mine or were mine in the past.....but there are many, many more I'd love to have.

MS