# Best Camera for taking aquarium photos



## jcardona1

What's your budget? Generally speaking, the DSLR is the hands-down winner for all photography, not just aquariums.


----------



## fleshwound

Not much of a budget but I can pay 100$-200$ for one... The cheaper the better. And yes I keep hearing that dslr is what I need. If I cant get slr i just want something that wont take blurry photos... Im getting a tripod for the piece of crap camera I got now it seems to help, and changed the ISO to 1600. Dont have a clue what it does but it seems to help a little. The secret so far seems to be keeping the camera still, but the picture is still slightly blurry... Some of my best shots are posted here but they could easily be better...

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/tank-journals-photo-album/128102-29g-planted-newb-aquarium.html


----------



## ZID ZULANDER

I seem to get ok photos out of the Canon powershot SD1200Is that I have. if the animal or whatever is up close in the tank its great. back from the front not so great as the auto focus never seems to be able to go clear.


----------



## jcardona1

May be tough to find a DSLR for that price. I've seen used ones go for $300-400 though. The key to aquarium photography is light, and lots of it. Even a DSLR will take crappy pics w/o enough light. Sure, you can bump up the ISO but then the picture looks terrible. 

I suggest you add lots of extra light on the tank when taking pictures. Get some cheap shop lights up there if you have to. If you have an extra T5HO fixture, even better. 

With lots of light, you can use a lower ISO, faster shutter speed, and smaller aperture, all which translate into a much better and sharper image. When I take pics of my fish, I use a wireless overhead flash. The intense blast of light lets me use the settings which will give the best results, like:


----------



## fleshwound

jcardona1 said:


> May be tough to find a DSLR for that price. I've seen used ones go for $300-400 though. The key to aquarium photography is light, and lots of it. Even a DSLR will take crappy pics w/o enough light. Sure, you can bump up the ISO but then the picture looks terrible.
> 
> I suggest you add lots of extra light on the tank when taking pictures. Get some cheap shop lights up there if you have to. If you have an extra T5HO fixture, even better.
> 
> With lots of light, you can use a lower ISO, faster shutter speed, and smaller aperture, all which translate into a much better and sharper image. When I take pics of my fish, I use a wireless overhead flash. The intense blast of light lets me use the settings which will give the best results, like:


Ya wow thats exactly what Im trying to do jcardona1, your pictures are gorgeous. Im not a photo expert at all but Im sure more light wouldnt hurt at all. I just dont have enough money for a small photo booth in my apartment. Dont get me wrong id love to through money at it just cant at the moment... Im lucky ive found a few used dslrs for 200-300 bux so maybe ill just have to save a little. Thanks for the info everyone


----------



## zdnet

fleshwound said:


> And yes I keep hearing that dslr is what I need.


Getting a more expensive camera almost always helps because it can take picture faster, be able to shoot at much lower light, and even have anti-vibration technology. 

But using a much less expensive point-and-shoot can have very clear close up if you use a tripod along with better lighting condition.





fleshwound said:


> If I cant get slr i just want something that wont take blurry photos... Im getting a tripod for the piece of crap camera I got now it seems to help, and changed the ISO to 1600. Dont have a clue what it does but it seems to help a little. The secret so far seems to be keeping the camera still, but the picture is still slightly blurry... Some of my best shots are posted here but they could easily be better...
> 
> http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/tank-journals-photo-album/128102-29g-planted-newb-aquarium.html


While browsing through your posted images, I noticed that almost all of them included a note left by your camera saying that it was not held steady when the pictures were taken. Therefore, your camera is not that primitive. Using a tripod alone would have eliminated those blur and gave you clear images.


----------



## kibri

For your budget, I think a Canon Powershot is the best out there.

You could certainly try increasing the light with your fujifilm, that might help.

I would not recommend an SLR unless you are willing to also spend money on a decent lens and learn a little about lighting, shutter speed, and aperture. Remember, a more expensive camera doesn't mean better shots, it's the knowledge behind it.


----------



## fleshwound

kibri said:


> For your budget, I think a Canon Powershot is the best out there.
> 
> You could certainly try increasing the light with your fujifilm, that might help.
> 
> I would not recommend an SLR unless you are willing to also spend money on a decent lens and learn a little about lighting, shutter speed, and aperture. Remember, a more expensive camera doesn't mean better shots, it's the knowledge behind it.


Yes I completley understand, and agree with you. Though it doesnt hurt to have good equipment either. I definatly plan on learning as much as I can until then, I think I take decent photos. Hard to learn on a camera thats limited though...


----------



## zdnet

fleshwound said:


> Hard to learn on a camera thats limited though...


That can be fun for someone who enjoys playing the guessing game. :hihi:


----------



## g01ngog

zdnet said:


> While browsing through your posted images, I noticed that almost all of them included a note left by your camera saying that it was not held steady when the pictures were taken. Therefore, your camera is not that primitive. Using a tripod alone would have eliminated those blur and gave you clear images.


How did you see these notes? Or do you mean they're just blurry?


----------



## fleshwound

zdnet said:


> Getting a more expensive camera almost always helps because it can take picture faster, be able to shoot at much lower light, and even have anti-vibration technology.
> 
> But using a much less expensive point-and-shoot can have very clear close up if you use a tripod along with better lighting condition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While browsing through your posted images, I noticed that almost all of them included a note left by your camera saying that it was not held steady when the pictures were taken. Therefore, your camera is not that primitive. Using a tripod alone would have eliminated those blur and gave you clear images.


 
I figure a tripod would help, I try to use a chair to steady the camera when I take the pics, but where do you see that I dont see anything lol


----------



## zdnet

g01ngog said:


> How did you see these notes?


It is in the image's EXIF tags.


----------



## fleshwound

zdnet said:


> It is in the image's EXIF tags.


EXIF tags is that embedded? or the way the file is named? Either way pretty clever man, least I got an idea now... Its hard to focus the camera at all, specially when your using manual settings. I figured a tripod would go a long way. Like I was saying I use a chair or some other stationary thing to steady most shots. Id love to be able to use what I have but its a gut feeling a camera that I have more control over will help... Im considering just going crazy and buying a bunch of special equipment just just for taking pics of my tank. Hopefully I can come up with the cash lol...


----------



## mordalphus

exif are imbedded into the image file. You can get an exif reader plugin for firefox, then you just right click on photo and click exif data, and it shows you all of the information your camera leaves on the image... (including GPS data for some smart phone pics )


----------



## zdnet

fleshwound said:


> EXIF tags is that embedded? or the way the file is named? Either way pretty clever man, least I got an idea now...


As mentioned by mordalphus, you can get a Firefox add-on to display the EXIF tags. You may want to try Exif Viewer. After installing the add-on, right click on an image and select "View Image EXIF Data".

To see the tag about camera-detected blur, you need to have the "Display Maker Note (if available)" checkbox checked (the first time you checked this checkbox, you need to click on the "Display EXIF Data" button to refresh the display). Then scroll down to the "Fujifilm Maker Note" section. You will see items like "Blur Warning", "Auto Focus Warning", and "Auto Exposure Warning".

Note that if you edit an image before posting it, depending on how you do the edit, the EXIF information may be overwritten or wiped out. For instance, trying to view the EXIF of the first image in your earlier post won't tell you much.




fleshwound said:


> Its hard to focus the camera at all, specially when your using manual settings.


What was the reason for using manual settings? 

Connecting the camera to a TV via the A/V cable and framing your shot using the TV monitor may help. Using the self-timer is another way of avoiding blur caused by camera vibration.


----------



## FlyingGiraffes

jcardona1 said:


> May be tough to find a DSLR for that price. I've seen used ones go for $300-400 though. The key to aquarium photography is light, and lots of it. Even a DSLR will take crappy pics w/o enough light. Sure, you can bump up the ISO but then the picture looks terrible.
> 
> I suggest you add lots of extra light on the tank when taking pictures. Get some cheap shop lights up there if you have to. If you have an extra T5HO fixture, even better.
> 
> With lots of light, you can use a lower ISO, faster shutter speed, and smaller aperture, all which translate into a much better and sharper image. When I take pics of my fish, I use a wireless overhead flash. The intense blast of light lets me use the settings which will give the best results, like:


Hey Jose, how do your fish react to using off camera flash? I'm afraid of stressing them or such.

p.s. what species is that blue guy?


----------

