I am looking for a better digital camera to take photos of my layout. I would also like to use the same camera for pictures worthy of article submission to a model rr magazine. I know that for the model photos you need a good macro lens. This can be a hard one to figure out in the store. You almost have to go by trial and error. From fiddling around in the store I am leaning towards the Canon SD450, (5 megapixel, 3x optical zoom etc.) for around $300. Would this be a good choice or would somthing similar from HP or Nikon for less money do the same thing. I don't want all the bells and whistles, just a good Macro lens in a small body to get in those tight model rr spaces. What are you using for your model rr photos? Also, what are magazines looking for megapixel wise? Thanks for the help, Brian
Brian, I own a Olympus Camedia C-300ZOOM. Now about six years old! With this camera I make my pictures for the web and for prints. But for magazines it's hard. Last time a friend was at me and made pictures with his 8 Megapixel reflex camera. As much as I know magazines and book publishers want many pixels. You should not go under 8 megapixels. You need this for big side filling pictures. Happy tooot Wolfgang
Head over to Steve's Digicams site: http://www.steves-digicams.com/ You should find some good recommendations there. I have tried many brands of digitals over the years - I buy 'em and take them back if I don't like them - and I always end up with Olympus models (partly because of the macro capabilities). My first Olympus was the D-320L, then the C-3020 (which my son uses now), the C-765 UltraZoom (4 MP) which is now my "backup" camera, and primarily use the SP-500 UZ (6 MP) which you can easily find for under $350.00. The main feature of the UZ's is the 10x optical zoom. All of my Olympus cameras worked very well for macro. I tried the Canon Powershot S2, and one of the Konica Minolta Dimage cameras before I bought the Olympus SP-500 - I just like the Olympus "feel" better - plus I really think it has better image quality than most. When you get to Steve's, go to his "Best Cameras" section.
I agree with MK. Now a bit about number of pixels. The quality of the pixel counts almost as much as the number. By quality I mean its ability to record true information. A 6 Mpixel Nikon DSLR has a huge imager compared to, say, a 5 Mpixel Sony point-and-shoot. Bigger pixel means better recording, for the most part. I get away with a 6 Mpixel Nikon because many of my photos are printed digitally. Publishers have gone as large as 11 x 17--with a digital press. If a publication is not printed digitally, then you need as many pixels as you can afford. You don't gain all that much print size going from 6 to 8 Mpixels.
I use a Nikon D-50 DSLR which is 6 megapixels. Previously I used a Nikon Coolpix 4300. Stay cool and run steam...
In addition to what Peter said, larger photon sites from the bigger sensored DSLRs will yield less noisey photos. There's less "cross talk" between sites.
I believe it! Yet National Geographic will buy 4.5 megapixel shots. What can I say? Some editors get it; some don't. It's the picture that you take, not the pixels! The current crop of model railroading editors just leaves me shaking my head, again and again, and with some sadness. They won't accept my photos because I've embedded a color profile; they won't accept my photos because I haven't embedded a color profile. Duh! I guess it's my modeling that is subgrade, not the photography.
Where I work, we have used 3MP photos for years in our publications and some are very detailed and clear - generally the 3MP images publish well around 4" x 6" size. For full page (approx. 8" x 10") we have great success with 5 and 6MP shots. We have better results if we use an image that has not been edited or enhanced - that is done before publication. I guess I don't understand why some publishers have so much difficulty with smaller MP images - and most want you to submit the absolute highest quality image your camera can take (which makes sense) and use the RAW format. Maybe some publishers have better equipment and software? Our local newspaper has a photographer that is a railfan and he shoots with a four MP SLR - his pics always print very well - of course newspapers use a lesser "quality" process than a typical magazine.
I'll second what Tim Loutzenhiser said. I'm very happy with my old Olympus. Whatever brand you decide, get the 10x optical zoom - you'll find that situations where the extra zoom power will really help, because the camera won't be able to physically get close enough otherwise. While you're at it, if you don't have a tripod, plan on getting that too. For depth of field, you'll want to take time exposures with as high an F stop aperture as you can, using natural / ambient light in many cases. That may mean exposures on the order of multiple seconds at the high F stop aperature (smile). Let us know what you choose and how it works out! Just my 2 cents worth.
I wandered over to this forum looking for a thread like this. Found this by "search" from a few months back. I am considering getting a new camera around Christmas (family-cam) that I can also use for taking various shots of my HO layout. I now use a Dimage 4mp. Its done its job as far as getting some base pictures of my railroad, its great for vacations, and special family events. However, I find I am nowhere near satisfied. My Dimage is 5 years old and its time to "upgrade". There are some good, suggestive posts above that I'll look into. Anyone else w/ some digital camera and brand thoughts? Lens options for close ups? Etc?
Hi, an update from me... Since my last post, I got a Sony H2 12x optical zoom (that was a 2006 model I believe). Bottom line - *so much better* than my old 1998 Olympus 2020Z. Overall very satisfied. You've probably seen some of my recent shots - anything since about April 2007 is with the new camera. One drawback - manual focus on H2 not quite easy to use - for the Helicon multiple exposure shots, it takes a lot of work for me to keep the camera in same place because of the way that you have to press multiple buttons to move the manual focus. Maybe Helicon 4.21 (which is out now), which does much better job of 'adjusting' small variance in camera movement, will solve for me..... I would recommend checking out the ease of use of manual focus as well, as Helicon is a real powerful tool that you want to easily be able to exploit as well.
Interesting to revisit this after a year or so. The Nikon D40 or its Canon equivalent would be my choice if I was just starting out. They offer enough good-quality pixels that editors won't hestitate on that factor. I'm not just starting out, so a Nikon D300 will probably be my next purchase.
At lunch I rode up to Ritz Camera to check a few out "in the flesh". I looked at a Nikon D40 down to an Olympus E-500 w/ the two lenses. The Nikon at the store topped $1100. The same Nikon D40 at Ritz.com is $949 or something like that. The Olympus is about the same at both places. Around $600 w/ two lenses. I also looked at about 4 cameras in between those two in performance, etc. It was good to go and speak w/ someone about this. Admittedly, I know very little about camera technology and its application. Make that nothing. So this is interesting stuff I am hearing about getting a wide angle to get good depth of field and focus on model shots. (Atleast that was one thing the "store" guy was coaching me on) Hope this thread stays alive. I have much to learn, and I will, between now and the Christmas season when I plan on shelling out for the camera.
I get infinite pixels on my film camera. I have come to the conclusion that for nice shots I can do better with a film SLR that I can afford than with any DSLR in my reach, and then for my quick pics for sharing I can use a point-and-shoot digital. I am sure that prices will shift in the future enough that I may even be enticed to get a DSLR.
My problem with film cameras is that I pretty much have to scan everything, as more and more editors are wanting digital files. A really good scanner, like the Epson 4990, runs about $400. It's capable of fine resolution--and monstrous file sizes.
Well. I have pretty much narrowed this down to the NIKON D40X. I have been researching cameras, looking at cameras in stores, and I really like the features of the D40X along w/ the comfort in holding one. It is much more comfortable for my hands than the Canon or the Olympus. However, they are all good starter DSLR's. I have also researched the heck out of online places. I have learned that many of these joints are not that ... .well. Just stay away. I belong to several other non-railroad forums. I have heard good consistent things about BH Photo/video in NYC. Their pricing is good as well. I will probably either purchase from them or a local store such as Ritz, Best Buy, or Penn Camera. However, it appears the best pricing is at BH. There are some other online places such as "Beach Camera" that are much cheaper, but I have read "horror" stories about them. MY QUESTION: The kit I have thinking about is the one w/ the 18-55mm and 55-200mm (vibration reduction) lenses. It is either that kit or the kit w/ the one 18-135mm lens. I also considered a D80 at the very tip top of my price range, but I would have to start off w/ lesser lens to be able to afford. Any thoughts/comments on lenses??????????????
