Which DSLR to look for on ebay ?

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 08:41:38 -0700 (PDT), J_P_S
wrote:

Hi

I have never used/owned a DSLR camera. I have a digital point and
shoot camera.
Want to buy an earlier model DSLR to take some close up shots of
electronic parts.
Which camera I should be looking for? I am on low budget.
How much Mega Pixel?
Is it possible to use the lens of earlier film SLR cameras on DSLR?
If yes Can i buy a body of DSLR and and and compatible lens of film
SLR?
Which combination to look for?


thanks and regards.

If your P&S camera has a threads for a filter you can use a reverse-adapter
ring (also called a macro-coupling ring) to mount your old SLR lenses on it
in reverse. You can get images better than any DSLR because the P&S camera
affords you much more DOF than any DSLR + lens can ever provide.

Go to Adorama and enter this in their search: macro coupling

For $8-$14 you can have macro images with a P&S camera that clearly rival
anything you'll ever get with any DSLR, no matter how much money that you
throw at it.

Name-changing anti-DSLR Troll wrote:

If your P&S camera has a threads for a filter you can use a reverse-adapter
ring (also called a macro-coupling ring) to mount your old SLR lenses on it
in reverse.

I assume there's something more balanced to use but that general
approach should work, or just a P&S with macro mode.


You can get images better than any DSLR because the P&S camera
affords you much more DOF than any DSLR + lens can ever provide.

That is the typical bull**** and lies which this name-changing troll is
known for. DSLR macro lenses can stop down for whatever DOF needed and
open up much further than P&S. However, P&S is going to be a lot easier
and cheaper unless you have some very extreme needs and more budget,
that's probably the way to go. You'll probably want some software to
correct the barrel distortion.


Go to Adorama and enter this in their search: macro coupling

Nope, that doesn't help at all. Ignore this lying fanatic quack ASAP.


For $8-$14 you can have macro images with a P&S camera that clearly rival
anything you'll ever get with any DSLR, no matter how much money that you
throw at it.

Here's a helpful discussion:
http://photo.net/digital-camera-forum/00RaOq

If you can be much more specific about what size subject and what size
end result, we can make more suggestions. I could recommend a cheap
bellows 35mm setup for extreme magnification if that's what you need but
it's not going to be easy to learn the ropes and get a system working
for your needs. Once it's figured out, it's just an easy click so if you
need such a thing for long term use under controlled conditions in an
office/lab then it's worth doing. It might looks something like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehil...7603231101723/
and could be done for maybe $600 and up.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:42:42 -0700, Paul Furman
wrote:

That is the typical bull**** and lies which this name-changing troll is
known for. DSLR macro lenses can stop down for whatever DOF needed and
open up much further than P&S

I see. So now you are claiming that a smaller sensor camera doesn't have
superior DOF over a larger sensor camera. Whereas you DSLR-Trolls are
continually claiming that a smaller sensor camera can't provide the shallow
DOF that a larger sensor camera can provide. (Which is also a lie because
all one needs to do is increase the focal-length to get the same shallow
DOF as any DSLR lens.)

C'mon now, which one is it?

F/2.0-f/2.4 on a P&S camera is more than anyone might need for large
aperture. And combined with the greater DOF they excel for macro
photography. Hand-held available-light macro photography with any decent
P&S camera is a cinch. A DSLR requires that you use flash, tripods,
frame-stacking, and you have to jump though all kinds of hoops to get a
useful DOF for macro-photography. Whereas if you open up a DSLR lens then
you get a DOF so narrow that you can't even get more than one bit of dust
in focus at any one time.

You sure are an ignorant DSLR-Troll. You prove it over and over again.

How's that pretend-camera working out for you in your pretend-photography
career in your virtual-life online?

Nutbag wrote:
I wrote:

DSLR macro lenses can stop down for whatever DOF needed and
open up much further than P&S

I see. So now you are claiming that a smaller sensor camera doesn't have
superior DOF over a larger sensor camera. ...
continually claiming that a smaller sensor camera can't provide the shallow
DOF that a larger sensor camera can provide.

Both. DSLRs can stop down and open up, P&S can't open up much.


all one needs to do is increase the focal-length to get the same shallow
DOF as any DSLR lens.)

Sometimes that's possible but the options are much more limited.


C'mon now, which one is it?

F/2.0-f/2.4 on a P&S camera is more than anyone might need for large
aperture.

Not even close (except at very long zooms) and there is a strategic
price to pay for that.


And combined with the greater DOF they excel for macro
photography. Hand-held available-light macro photography with any decent
P&S camera is a cinch. A DSLR requires that you use flash, tripods,
frame-stacking, and you have to jump though all kinds of hoops to get a
useful DOF for macro-photography.

No, you can stop down just as far and raise the ISO for the exact same
math. Or keep the ISO low & use a tripod. And/or keep it open & focus
stack or a bunch of options. Yes it's simpler to use a P&S and I'll bet
that's all the OP needs. Normal laws of physics apply though, no magic.


Whereas if you open up a DSLR lens then
you get a DOF so narrow that you can't even get more than one bit of dust
in focus at any one time.

A grain of dust that the P&S could not capture at extreme magnifications
with limited light. You can always mount a P&S on a microscope, given
the budget. Or mount a DSLR on a microscope for even better performance
and more budget. It depends what you need. The laws of physics will not
bend though, no matter your choice, needs or bias.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:13:22 -0700, Paul Furman
wrote:


Both. DSLRs can stop down and open up, P&S can't open up much.

Stop down any DSLR lens for enough DOF for macro photography and you are
then limited to artificial looking images taken by flash. There's no way
around it and you know this, if you know anything at all about photography
and cameras, you ****ing useless pretend-photographer DSLR-Troll.

the Ignorant DSLR Trolls wrote:
F/2.0-f/2.4 on a P&S camera is more than anyone might need for large
aperture.

If you can't have f1.4 then f2 is all you "need". After all, of what
use is a shallow depth of focus?

And combined with the greater DOF they excel for macro
photography.

The idiot troll doesn't know the difference between macro and
low-light.

Hand-held available-light macro photography with any decent
P&S camera is a cinch. A DSLR requires that you use flash, tripods,

And when the troll starts lying his ass off you know that he's lost
any argument he was trying to win.

--
Ray Fischer

On 28 Sep 2009 05:50:15 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

the Ignorant DSLR Trolls wrote:
F/2.0-f/2.4 on a P&S camera is more than anyone might need for large
aperture.

If you can't have f1.4 then f2 is all you "need". After all, of what
use is a shallow depth of focus?

Rarely, to a seasoned photographer who knows that subject and composition
is more important than anything their camera will ever do. The only ones
that go on about it so much are the ignorant virtual-photographer
DSLR-Trolls who pride themselves on how blurry they can make their
photographs. Talk about insane.


And combined with the greater DOF they excel for macro
photography.

The idiot troll doesn't know the difference between macro and
low-light.

No. You don't comprehend that in order to get enough DOF out of a DSLR by
stopping down the lens enough that you lose all the light you needed to
take a decent macro-photograph, no matter how much ISO you throw at it.
Hint: Go buy and use some real cameras some day.


Hand-held available-light macro photography with any decent
P&S camera is a cinch. A DSLR requires that you use flash, tripods,

And when the troll starts lying his ass off you know that he's lost
any argument he was trying to win.

Thanks for proving, without a doubt, that you have NEVER done any
macro-photography in your lifetime. I doubt you've ever even held a real
camera at all. Go fondle more of those DSLR advertisements and
downloadable manuals so you can continue to pretend to own a camera. It's
all that you are capable of. You've proved that, without one doubt left
unturned.

J_P_S wrote:
Thanks for the replies and information.
I want to take the pictures for web publishing only not for taking
prints.
I want to take pictures like these where the number etched on glass is
also visible.

http://www.tubemongerlib.com/gallery...lgium.jpg.html
I have sony V1
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/page2.asp

Well, that doesn't look too difficult in terms of what
the camera requirements are! Your Sony will focus down
to 10cm, according to the specs, and while I'm not sure
what the actual magnification is at that distance, it
most likely is more than you'll want for most vacuum
tubes.

The problem you'll have is trying to get the lighting
adjusted to see the "number etched on glass". It is
actually painted on, not etched, and it is pretty easy
to rub it off in many cases (particularly older,
pre-WWII tubes). You'll find that when you look at such
tubes it's necessary to roll the tube around and get it
positioned just right to even read the numbers.
Photographing them is even harder if for no other reason
than that you need a lot more light, which generally
means more reflections.

Whatever... for web publishing of course you don't need
more resolution than about 800x600, so even a 2MP camera
is overkill. For 8"x10" prints, probably 6MP is enough,
though 10MP provides a lot of room to crop if need be,
and even at 3.5MP you'll usually get decent prints. (For
very high quality prints, figure 300 pixels per inch or
7.2MP for an 8x10; for just good prints figure half
that.)

If you never do anything smaller than an entire tube at
once, magnification of 2:1 is enough (and hence many
lenses with a "macro mode" will work just fine). If you
might want to get a shot of one pin, or just the base,
or something like an internal connections seen through
the envelope, go for either a 105mm macro lens or a 90mm
that can do 1:1 (virtually all 105mm macro lenses will
do 1:1, but not all 90mm lenses will).

You'll probably need to use a "light box" or a tent,
with a couple of flash units. The basic idea is highlhy
diffused shadowless light with no reflections off the
glass.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:47:35 -0700 (PDT), J_P_S
wrote:

Thanks for the replies and information.
I want to take the pictures for web publishing only not for taking
prints.
I want to take pictures like these where the number etched on glass is
also visible.

http://www.tubemongerlib.com/gallery...lgium.jpg.html

Any decent P&S camera can handle images like that. Just use some
multi-coated close-up filters in diopters of +2, +3, or +4 (the +4 made by
stacking +1 with a +3). Even if your camera doesn't have filter-threads to
attach filters you can still just hold the close-up filters over the front
of the lens. I've done that plenty of times with simple magnifier lenses
when I didn't have good achromat close-up filters readily available or if
the camera didn't have filter-threads on it.

Something like the images you need isn't even a challenge for a P&S camera.
A P&S camera's extended DOF will easily keep all the tube markings and
internal tube elements in focus. With a DSLR you'll be lucky to get just
part of one number in focus due to their extremely shallow DOF for
something like this. Many P&S cameras also have built-in macro modes where
you don't even need the close-up filters. The Canon Powershot cameras for
example can focus as close as something touching the front lens element.

Judging by the extreme DOF portrayed in your sample image I strongly
suspect that it was taken with a good P&S camera. No DSLR nor its lenses on
earth can provide that much DOF for a macro subject of that size.

Capturing the white letters etched on the glass is a lighting issue, not a
camera issue. If lit correctly any camera on earth will capture them
properly.


I have sony V1
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/page2.asp

regards

That Sony V1 is perfectly capable of doing the photography you need. Just
learn how to use it for this kind of subject. From that review it shows
that you can also attach conversion lenses to it, so there must be some
filter-threads or a filter adapter that you can use on that camera too, to
attach close-up filters if needed. See bottom of page 4 of that review,
under accessories.

Have you even tried the macro mode in that camera first? It will focus from
3.9 to15.7 inches (10-40 cm). That should be more than enough
close-focusing for the kind of subject that you want to photograph. Even if
not, since you'll only be posting images to the web, you can always shoot
from further away and then crop down to the part of the image you need. You
don't need all 5 megapixels of resolution for a simple web image.

J_P_S wrote:
Thanks for the replies and information.
I want to take the pictures for web publishing only not for taking
prints.
I want to take pictures like these where the number etched on glass is
also visible.

http://www.tubemongerlib.com/gallery...lgium.jpg.html

Well, those tubes are a difficult subject. But the problem is not so
much the magnification or the camera but the setup and in particular the
lighting. You want an even, bright light without nasty reflections and
that will require some learning.

I have sony V1
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/page2.asp

Does it have a "macro" mode? While a SLR will give you much more control
over parameters your camera in macro mode is probably sufficient to get
close enough for an enlarged picture.
And for web publishing you really, really don't need a 15MPixel camera,
a 1MP camera would be more than adequate.

jue