Reading mode: Light Dark

Camera for Jewelry Photography

Go to last post
E

EsoEmp

New member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Houston, TX, US
Hi, I was hoping for some advice on what kind of camera to buy for taking pictures of my jewelry. I am mostly a silversmith, but I need a camera that can capture all the color in gemstones. Have an Olympus D490 2.1 megapixel but she's just not cutting it anymore, even with me tweaking the ISO and WB settings and using a lightbox with good lighting.

Considering a Nikon Coolpix 8700, but I worry I'll be getting more camera than I need. The main thing is that I need this for work, but I will be using it for play (love taking pictures of every kind of thing--paintings, people, the outdoors, nightshots, etc.), and I want it to be a good investment. As in, I don't want to buy another camera for at least another 5 years.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
 
Among several cameras, I have good luck with macro photos from my Pentax Optio 555 as well as from my Nikon CoolPix 5700, but the best shots of all are using my Nikon D70 with a 60mm 2.8 Nikkor Micro Lens. The cheapest of these is the Pentax and it will focus within about 1 inch in Super Macro mode and the colors see well saturated. I am not sure which Pentax took the place of the 555 as I have not kept up with the Pentax, but at the time the 555 was their best non-DSLR camera.
EsoEmp said:
Hi, I was hoping for some advice on what kind of camera to buy for
taking pictures of my jewelry. I am mostly a silversmith, but I
need a camera that can capture all the color in gemstones. Have an
Olympus D490 2.1 megapixel but she's just not cutting it anymore,
even with me tweaking the ISO and WB settings and using a lightbox
with good lighting.

Considering a Nikon Coolpix 8700, but I worry I'll be getting more
camera than I need. The main thing is that I need this for work,
but I will be using it for play (love taking pictures of every kind
of thing--paintings, people, the outdoors, nightshots, etc.), and I
want it to be a good investment. As in, I don't want to buy
another camera for at least another 5 years.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
Click to expand...
--
Scott Weierich
Derby, Kansas
 
oooh, I like the idea of having that Nikon D70 but I'm afraid it's out of my price range right now. I bet it takes amazing pics though!

As for the other two cameras you mentioned, I did a little more research and I was actually thinking about getting the Nikon 5700 instead of the 8700 since the main thing is the macro setting and not the megapixels, though that is admittedly very nice to have more of. I am a little confused though-- is it true that the 5700 has CYGM instead of RGB for the color filter array? A friend of mine told me CYGM was only for really expensive cameras and that it must actually have RGB.

Also, do you ever wish you could have a 50 ISO setting or a higher resolution on your 5700? (I'm so used to my Olympus camera that I am not sure how much difference it would make for me since I have to keep my pictures on the website at 72 pixels/inch and no larger than 4x5" in closeup view for the best download time.)

Thank you so much for the help!

--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
 
EsoEmp said:
oooh, I like the idea of having that Nikon D70 but I'm afraid it's
out of my price range right now. I bet it takes amazing pics
though!

As for the other two cameras you mentioned, I did a little more
research and I was actually thinking about getting the Nikon 5700
instead of the 8700 since the main thing is the macro setting and
not the megapixels, though that is admittedly very nice to have
more of. I am a little confused though-- is it true that the 5700
has CYGM instead of RGB for the color filter array? A friend of
mine told me CYGM was only for really expensive cameras and that it
must actually have RGB.
Click to expand...
Either camera would work fine for your purpose. The 8700 will focus closer to the subject when shooting macro's, but even that shouldn't make too much difference since it's likely you may just run into more difficult with lighting at very close working distances and with jewelry, the lighting will always make a much bigger difference than any particular camera model.

The 5700 does use a CYGM mask on it's sensor. This in itself shouldn't have much influence on your decision. In JPEG mode, both cameras will output images in the SRGB color space. When shooting RAW files, you can choose whatever color space you wish.
EsoEmp said:
Also, do you ever wish you could have a 50 ISO setting or a higher
resolution on your 5700? (I'm so used to my Olympus camera that I
am not sure how much difference it would make for me since I have
to keep my pictures on the website at 72 pixels/inch and no larger
than 4x5" in closeup view for the best download time.)
Click to expand...
The higher pixel density of the 8700 (8mp vs 5mp) is what accounts for the 8700's lower ISO capability. There are times when being able to drop the ISO down to 50 on the 5700 would be nice, but conversely noise at higher ISO's won't be as much of a problem with that camera. Adding a one stop neutral density filter in front of the lens is one way of compensating for the difference when lower ISO capability is needed.

When sizing images for web display, don't worry about the Pixels per Inch (PPI) value, it's only relative for sizing prints. Monitors don't have adjustable pixel densities and the PPI value will only be ignored.

Simply "downsize" the image file to a given number of pixels in either dimension depending on how large you want the image to be displayed within the page, and then reduce the JPEG quality setting until you find an acceptable match between quality and file size. Typically you should be able to get the file size down to roughly 120-140k for an 800x600 image without severely impacting the appearance of your images.

--
Tom Young
http://www.pbase.com/tyoung/
 
Hmm.. regarding the CYGM on the 5700--like a dork I should have just checked more thoroughly in the threads and online before asking that.

I am still curious about the ISO settings being different in the two cameras, and whether the extra megapixels and resolution quality in the 8700 is worth the price difference. I read in one of the posts that the 5700 is better for taking higher ISO photos while the 8700 is better for closely cropped images, so I may already have my answer. I know in my heart I really want that 8700 because I want to play with it in my off work time too, but I'm trying to stay within the realm of reason. Thanks again!

--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
 
Ok, that makes sense.

It sounds like (all off work play and extra scene modes in the 8700 aside) I should probably be investing in the 5700 since it is likely to do what I need it to do for the business. When I took some photos with my friend's 8800 we actually used the ISO 100 setting, and that seemed to do just fine. The colors were what I noticed the most, and I wasn't sure if the pixel difference would matter b/t the 5700 and the 8700. I can't focus too close on the jewelry because the natural scratches in silver which are almost invisible to the naked eye become highly noticeable and can make the piece look unattractive.

As for the price difference it seems like I would probably be paying around a hundred dollars more for the 8700 (assuming I don't have to buy a lense for the 5700 later) given the current prices on the market. Having the scene modes and the little extras may be worth it to me, but I'll have to see them both in person in the store to really decide.

I also really appreciate your input on the website picture issue. I'm going to have to check on that when I'm cropping my photos in PhotoShop. Thanks again for the advice!
--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
 
Remembering from earlier reviews of the 8700 (when it first came out), reviewers felt the 5700 actually produced better photos and that the 8700 was much more likely to have purple fringing in high contrast areas of pictures than the 5700. This is evidently a side effect of not increasing the size of the CCD chip and crowding more pixels into the same size sensor. I have been VERY happy with my 5700, but now that I have my D70, I very seldom use the 5700 anymore. Let me know if you would be interested in my 5700 set-up off-line. Email me for details.
EsoEmp said:
Hmm.. regarding the CYGM on the 5700--like a dork I should have
just checked more thoroughly in the threads and online before
asking that.

I am still curious about the ISO settings being different in the
two cameras, and whether the extra megapixels and resolution
quality in the 8700 is worth the price difference. I read in one
of the posts that the 5700 is better for taking higher ISO photos
while the 8700 is better for closely cropped images, so I may
already have my answer. I know in my heart I really want that 8700
because I want to play with it in my off work time too, but I'm
trying to stay within the realm of reason. Thanks again!

--
Sarah Grant
Jewelry Designer
Click to expand...
--
Scott Weierich
Derby, Kansas
 
id say a 5MP prosumer with good close range focus would do it..minolta A200 maybe
--
'Beware of the oldman with one gun\camera..He knows how to use it'
 
The Canon A410 on Super Macro Mode.

Hands-down closestt camera focussing I'm seen on any compact camera. As an example, I've been able to take a key hole and actually focus on the inner area actually inside the lock.

it's a hidden gem.

EOSPhotoguy
 
My Pentax Optio 555 also has a phenominal Super Macro mode that kicks butt and takes names...love to use it and always get great comments on the shots.
EOSPhotoGuy said:
The Canon A410 on Super Macro Mode.

Hands-down closestt camera focussing I'm seen on any compact
camera. As an example, I've been able to take a key hole and
actually focus on the inner area actually inside the lock.

it's a hidden gem.

EOSPhotoguy
Click to expand...
--
Scott Weierich
Derby, Kansas
 
Hi Sarah,

you'd proably be surprised how much life is still left in your camera.

I can give you some usefull advice on this topic but I would really like to see a recent sample of one of your photographs.

Keep well.

Ashley Groome.
 
...is the lighting setup you have to shoot your jewelry. Even the most expensive SLR camera won't take good pictures in poor lighting.

I don't know what you're usign right now, but you can make your own light tent for very cheap ( http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber/light_box_light_tent ), and after that, all you have to do is learn how to place lights to make the jewelry look nice. I've never done jewelry photography, but I'm betting a combination of soft lighting with a bright spot light used as a key light (to make the jewelry shine) would work well.

I'd recommend asking around in the lighting forum about setting up a light tent for jewelry photography. Ask how large a tent you need, what kind of lighting you need, and for suggestions on backdrops and props that can hold jewelry.

After you get a nice lighting setup, you might find that even your old camera is plenty for your photography. That's not to say a newer camera might not be an upgrade, but look at the pictures on the link above; they were taken with a 2MPixel Olympus.

If/when you do upgrade your camera, if you use a lighting rig to shoot, a LOT of the features of the camera you buy aren't important, because you'll have excellent lighting right off the bat. Don't worry about ISO noise, or autofocus speed/accuracy. Most cameras take great shots in good lighting. Just get a camera that can set manual white balance (to avoid yellow color casts), has a tripod screw (so you can shoot slow exposures without getting blurry shots, and preferably has a movable LCD screen (so you can see what you're shooting without bending over to see the LCD).

My fiancee uses her Canon A80, a tripod, and a light tent for her eBay pictures, and it works wonderfully. She sets white balance manually, and uses exposure compensation to make sure the shots come out nicely.

--
Equipment in profile
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top