# Camera Opinion



## twychopen (Dec 17, 2008)

Hey everybody I need to get a high quality camera for taking pics of fish, tanks (my 3d backgrounds etc...), and planted tanks. I am looking at spending $600-$800. Any suggestions on a model or what to look for in a camera?

Thanks!


----------



## redman88 (Dec 12, 2008)

high optical zoom then MegaPixal other then that i don't realy know


----------



## plakat (Mar 2, 2008)

Big fish, small fish, full tank, macro? What kind of things are you trying to do? Do you want a point and shoot or a DSLR?


----------



## twychopen (Dec 17, 2008)

I have at least 10 cichlid tanks. I have 1 planted tank and am starting an ADA 75p next week. (waiting for the filter and lights). I don't know anything about DSLR. I hear they are great but don't know why.


----------



## plakat (Mar 2, 2008)

Ok. So I guess a range of shots.

http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/B000EMWBV0/192-7524768-0887456?SubscriptionId=02ZH6J1W0649DTNS6002 

and

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Powershot-SX10IS-Digital-Stabilized/dp/B001G5ZTZO/ref=dp_ob_title_ce

Both have good reviews and wide zoom range so they might be places to start looking at cameras. You really should figure out what you want to shoot then that will help determine what kind of camera to get.


----------



## airborne_r6 (May 2, 2008)

I would recomend a DSLR, because you can change the lenses giving you the widest range of use from the camera. I havent shopped for one for a while but a quick recomendation would be the following:

this camera:
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1232516777&sr=1-1
add this lens:
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300m...r_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1232516299&sr=1-11
and this flash:
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-SB-600-...p/B0002EMY9Y/ref=acc_glance_foto_ai_114_1_tit

total about $770.

This setup or something similar would allow you to take just about any picture you could want.


----------



## plakat (Mar 2, 2008)

airborne_r6 said:


> I would recomend a DSLR, because you can change the lenses giving you the widest range of use from the camera. I havent shopped for one for a while but a quick recomendation would be the following:
> 
> this camera:
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1232516777&sr=1-1
> ...


If you go this route which isn't bad but requires more learning get a cord so you can put the flash on top of the tank or you will get some serous glare.


----------



## Akwar-e'um (Jan 16, 2009)

If the flash is tiltable (as it seems to be) you can aim it at the cieling and put something opaque between the flash and tank. That can easily take care of the glare. Might take a few tries to get the proper flash power though, but hey, gives you a reason to drain the batteries and make use of the LCD screen....
On a diff note, I dont know if this applies to digital cameras (I still swear by my 35mm SLR) but depending on the actual "shutter speed" used in digital cameras, a remote trigger and tripod might be useful. Helps remove what I call the "trigger shake".

Akwar-e'um


----------



## daverockssocks (Dec 1, 2008)

There's no reason to spend more than $250 on a point and shoot camera in this day and age, they're just too good at that price point and you're not getting enough extra for the price beyond that.

If you want to spend more than a DSLR is really the best option.


----------



## DaveS (Mar 2, 2008)

daverockssocks said:


> There's no reason to spend more than $250 on a point and shoot camera in this day and age, they're just too good at that price point and you're not getting enough extra for the price beyond that.
> 
> If you want to spend more than a DSLR is really the best option.


I'm not sure I completely agree with this. There is a huge difference from a simple point and shoot to something sophisticated like the Canon SX10IS, which is still a "point and shoot" camera. I guess you could call cameras like that "advanced point and shoot" or "almost DSLR", but the difference in controls and quality is enough to justify paying more than $250 in my opinion. If I didn't have a DSLR and I didn't want to drop $1000 (and that is going pretty cheap) in a decent body and lenses, something like the SX10 would be at the top of my list.

Dave


----------



## DaveS (Mar 2, 2008)

airborne_r6 said:


> I would recomend a DSLR, because you can change the lenses giving you the widest range of use from the camera. I havent shopped for one for a while but a quick recomendation would be the following:
> 
> this camera:
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1232516777&sr=1-1
> ...


I don't think I would go with a lens that long or slow to do aquarium photography. The flash won't be able to cover much of the zoom range either. I am in the Canon world, but I find myself using my 60mm f/2.8 macro lens for most of my aquarium photos and that is still a little too long. If I was really serious (which I'm not) I would get a fast zoom lens in the 17-40mm range.

Dave


----------



## twychopen (Dec 17, 2008)

Thanks everybody! I found a great site (for future forum searchers) that I am reading through to learn the basics. http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/define-digital-slr.html. I have been reading up to figure out what is the best option. Most cameras I am seeing online come all together. Am I supposed to get everything separate i.e. the flash, lens, and camera?
Thanks for all your help guys.


----------



## plakat (Mar 2, 2008)

twychopen said:


> Thanks everybody! I found a great site (for future forum searchers) that I am reading through to learn the basics. http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/define-digital-slr.html. I have been reading up to figure out what is the best option. Most cameras I am seeing online come all together. Am I supposed to get everything separate i.e. the flash, lens, and camera?
> Thanks for all your help guys.


You don't have to get everything separate. Most DSLRs will have kit options that come with a lens or two so you can take pictures but generally these aren't the best quality or built for taking pictures of fish. If you are serous about taking good quality picture of fish most places will tell you to get a macro and a flash with either a sync cord or a wireless remote which you will have to buy separately.

Give this site a look http://www.aquatic-photography.com/


----------



## t0p_sh0tta (Jan 24, 2008)

If you don't current have plans to jump any farther into photography, I'd save some cash and pickup a decent point and shoot. Canon's S5 IS is a great all around camera with a great optical zoom range (Much clearer and higher quality images than digital zoom), and a super-macro function (good for closeups). 

As mentioned earlier, you'd face a problem with glare from the aquarium's glass using the flas straight on. However, you could pick up an extrernal flash for off camera lighting.

edit: You can check out a review and sample pics here. It's an awesome camera at a great price. I may have to pick one up for those occasions when the 40D is too cumbersome.


----------



## davesnothere (Oct 21, 2008)

Akwar-e'um said:


> On a diff note, I dont know if this applies to digital cameras (I still swear by my 35mm SLR) but depending on the actual "shutter speed" used in digital cameras, a remote trigger and tripod might be useful. Helps remove what I call the "trigger shake".
> 
> Akwar-e'um


This is still valid in every DSLR as you can set Shutter Priority in every single on of them, like in old 35mm SLR.

To take good pictures of your fish, you need a macro lens, period. The problem with a point and shoot camera is you do not have that option. If the reason for buying the camera is to take "good" pictures of your fish, a point and shoot should not even be considered. I have point and shoot, SLR and DSLR, wont even consider bringing out point and shoot for any fish picture.

This is where I would go for in depth camera review : http://dpreview.com/


----------



## plakat (Mar 2, 2008)

DaveS said:


> I don't think I would go with a lens that long or slow to do aquarium photography. The flash won't be able to cover much of the zoom range either. I am in the Canon world, but I find myself using my 60mm f/2.8 macro lens for most of my aquarium photos and that is still a little too long. If I was really serious (which I'm not) I would get a fast zoom lens in the 17-40mm range.
> 
> Dave


I think he might be able to get away with the setup if he also got the flash but I really don't think it will work too well with fish. Personally I wouldn't chose it.

I was very close to getting your lens but ended up with the 100mm f/2.8 macro. I still need a flash. Even with t5s I find I don't have the light I need.
If you are referring to full tank shots I absolutely agree somewhere in the 17-40mm range is what you need. Well its what I use with the room I have. If you are talking about fish pics I don't know I would agree that something that wide would be good.


----------



## t0p_sh0tta (Jan 24, 2008)

I need to pick up a macro myself.

I've tried shooting my with my 70-200 F4 before and it was okay, but the minimum focusing distance in >3 feet.


----------



## airborne_r6 (May 2, 2008)

DaveS said:


> I don't think I would go with a lens that long or slow to do aquarium photography. The flash won't be able to cover much of the zoom range either. I am in the Canon world, but I find myself using my 60mm f/2.8 macro lens for most of my aquarium photos and that is still a little too long. If I was really serious (which I'm not) I would get a fast zoom lens in the 17-40mm range.
> 
> Dave


The reason that I suggested that lens is primarily the price with the macro feature and the zoom. Its not a bad lens for the price but you are right it is a little slow. The camera I suggested comes with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 which is still slow but should be adequate for aquarium shots. Basically I was trying to give him a camera that didnt cost a lot and would do almost anything he wants it to. If I was recommending a camera for just aquarium shots I would recommend a good point and shoot, a tripod and several studio lights.


----------



## DaveS (Mar 2, 2008)

airborne_r6 said:


> The reason that I suggested that lens is primarily the price with the macro feature and the zoom. Its not a bad lens for the price but you are right it is a little slow. The camera I suggested comes with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 which is still slow but should be adequate for aquarium shots. Basically I was trying to give him a camera that didnt cost a lot and would do almost anything he wants it to. If I was recommending a camera for just aquarium shots I would recommend a good point and shoot, a tripod and several studio lights.


It's a good recommendation, I was just giving another opinion. Well, it was good until I saw it was Nikon .... 

Dave


----------



## daverockssocks (Dec 1, 2008)

DaveS said:


> I'm not sure I completely agree with this. There is a huge difference from a simple point and shoot to something sophisticated like the Canon SX10IS, which is still a "point and shoot" camera. I guess you could call cameras like that "advanced point and shoot" or "almost DSLR", but the difference in controls and quality is enough to justify paying more than $250 in my opinion. If I didn't have a DSLR and I didn't want to drop $1000 (and that is going pretty cheap) in a decent body and lenses, something like the SX10 would be at the top of my list.
> 
> Dave


The SX10IS isn't worth the premium over the SX100IS (which can be had at the $250 price point). It's a fun snappy little camera and will make most users more than happy.

Also for a beginner I would point them away from buying a new DSLR body. A slightly used body of better quality can be had from places like B&H and offer more bang for the buck and will more readily grow with the user.


----------



## twychopen (Dec 17, 2008)

Well I am looking to take a lot of pictures. I have about 20 tanks not including my 2 new planted tanks. I am planning on getting a higher quality camera and learning to use it to the fullest potential.


----------



## airborne_r6 (May 2, 2008)

DaveS said:


> It's a good recommendation, I was just giving another opinion. Well, it was good until I saw it was Nikon ....
> 
> Dave


Its cool I just realized that I should explain why I was recommending it. 

The only SLR's that I have used are Nikon. I actually wouldn't mind trying a Canon. :icon_eek: The local photography store carries Nikon and thats the primary reason I went with it over Canon.


----------



## t0p_sh0tta (Jan 24, 2008)

I've used both Nikon and Canon SLR systems extensively. and I still stand by my recommendation of the Canon S5IS. Great features and price. 

-Lamar


----------



## DaveS (Mar 2, 2008)

t0p_sh0tta said:


> I've used both Nikon and Canon SLR systems extensively. and I still stand by my recommendation of the Canon S5IS. Great features and price.
> 
> -Lamar


That is a sweet camera for sure. I was thinking the SX10 was the newest camera in that lineup but perhaps I was mistaken. I have used the S4, and and it made me wonder if all the money I dropped on my DSLR was really worth it.

Dave


----------



## guitardude9187 (Aug 22, 2006)

look up ken rockwell, read as much as you can, and do more research. for 800 you can get a d90 if you are a deal hunter like me. otherwise get the nikon d40 body for 250 or less (you can find a use kit with the macro 18-55 AF S for 250 sometime of craigslist) then use the rest on how you want your set up to be. you have lots of quality options for 800 if you do your research. IMO i would stay away from 3rd party companies.


----------



## guitardude9187 (Aug 22, 2006)

DaveS said:


> It's a good recommendation, I was just giving another opinion. Well, it was good until I saw it was Nikon ....
> 
> Dave


what is wrong with nikon? have you taken the time to compare the lenses? i have both canon and nikon, pictures from the canon is a little better but beside that nikon got everything by the handle bars.









_NIKON D40 with NIKKOR 18-55MM AFS DX ED_
I just took this picture, completely raw (except going through photobucket) with 130watts of CF light 1½" away from the glass on top of the frog. i didn't adjust the setting before i used it either, the camera did everything, just to show you the ease of use.

Generally flashes are a great addition but if you can manipulate the lighting, shadows, and aperture then the pictures will turn out just as good or better. how would you use flash on a big tank anyways? multiple, big flashes? seems expensive.

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/tank-journals-photo-album/75246-uncharted.html
This is my canon, after editing.


----------



## t0p_sh0tta (Jan 24, 2008)

I have no issue with Nikon, but I wouldn't recommend the D40 series due to lens compatibality issues. Spend a $100 or so more and pick up a D80/D90. They'll grow with you and offer far more features.

FWIW, I started out with a D50, and I'd recommend even that over the 40 series.


----------



## guitardude9187 (Aug 22, 2006)

If you're worried about Auto Focus then I completely agree but when you're doing macro, manual focus would be quicker and more accurate, in experience (nikon d40 can take pre Ai S lenses ,1959, there won't be auto focus or metering but what's the point of using a lens this old?). Plus, the lenses now can _nearly_ replace all the older ones. The d40 is smaller and lighter, thus letting you maneuver it lots faster and accurate then a heavier camera. The D90 is hands down the better camera but that's comparing a $650-750 body to a $250 body.


----------



## DaveS (Mar 2, 2008)

guitardude9187 said:


> what is wrong with nikon? have you taken the time to compare the lenses?


There's nothing wrong with Nikon ... it was just a joke (thus the smiley face). There is always a sort of friendly rivalry between Canon and Nikon people, I think mainly because each wonders if the other one is actually better.

Dave


----------



## jrafael (Jan 7, 2009)

I just find some good sites about this topic.

8 Tips for Taking Great Aquarium Photos
http://blog.fotonomy.com/tips/8-tips-for-taking-great-aquarium-photos/

Basic Aquarium Photography
http://www.aquatic-hobbyist.com/profiles/misc/photography.html

Planted Aquarium Photography with a Point and Shoot Camera
http://www.projectaquarium.com/plantedAquariumArticles_PhotographyPointAndShoot.aspx


----------



## plaakapong (Feb 28, 2008)

Check out the Nikonians website if you wan to buy Nikon. There are some great deals to be had on used equipment.


----------

