Recomendation for my new camera

Started Oct 28, 2003 | Discussions thread
rapick
rapick Veteran Member • Posts: 5,328
Re: Dear CK, since it was me to tell Ping ...

... that no dsrl would equal the macro capability of his '4500, now it is my turn to duly clarify.

FIRST: no doubt you are right: a good DSRL equipped with a micro or macro (?) special lens will surclass macro capability of CP-4500 (or any other Coolpix) in terms of absolute sharpnes and maximum magnification.

SECOND: ... but there are instances where convenience can prevail over performance. Would you prefer the CP or a DSRL for shooting handheld a bee "landing" on a flower? You don't need that huge magnification, in this case - you just need as much DOF as possible while keeping high shutter speed. So you have to to the smallest possible aperture with the SRL lens (then possibly suffering from diffraction), then go to extra high ISO (OK, not a problem with a HIGH END dsrl). I still think you will get a better pic from the DSRL ... but what about the ease of framing you get from the '4500 swivel body?

THIRD: I had a look to prices: NIKON 70-180 is $ 999, 95 - CANON MP-E65mm f2.8 is $1,430 - add $ 2,500 for a mid-level DSRL body - Oh, let's add a Canon EOS Zoom Lens EF 16-35 f2.8L USM at $ 2,420 for nice landscapes.

LAST: My suggestion was directed to Ping - Would you encourage a 17 years old friend to spend $ 7,500 for his hobby?

Ching-Kuang Shene wrote:

Ping279 wrote:

I got some mixed feelings about DSLR's in here..... some people
told me that they weren't as good as the coolpix's for macros while
others said that they well surpassed them with a close up lens
added on.

Just wish to clear some doubt. Indeed, SLR/DSLR macro is much
better than the 4500 in every aspect except possibly for
convenience. The major reason is that SLR/DSLR systems are much
more versatile and the brand-named macro/micro lenses are much
sharper than every consumer level digital camera lens. I answered
a few questions regarding macro lens setup on Steve's site which
might be helpful:
http://www.stevesforums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15584

If the 5700 has a better optical quality at its longest end of its
focal length (i.e., 280mm), the 5700 may be more versatile than the
4500. This is due to the fact that its longer focal length can use
many SLR type accessories. While one may say that the 4500 has a
zoom for macro, SLR/DSLR systems also have excellent zoom macro
lenses (e.g., Nikon's 70-180 is THE example). In terms of
magnification of a single lens, no one can beat Canon's MP-E65mm
f2.6 macro lens that can deliver directly 5X magnification without
any accessory. See here
http://www.usa.canon.com/html/eflenses/lineup/macro/index.html As
you can see, a really really important factor for 4500 is
convenience rather than its macro quality. Of course, I am not
saying the 4500 macro is not good; what I meant is that compared
with a good quality SLR macro lens a SLR/DSLR has an edge.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

-- hide signature --

Rapick
PBase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick

 rapick's gear list:rapick's gear list
Samsung NX3000 Nikon Coolpix 995 Sony RX100 III Nikon D200 Nikon D700 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow