Budget Camera Recomendation

[admiralk]

Most of the time my phone takes good enough pictures, but I need to take some closeups where it does not work at all. I pulled out my old camera, a Dimage S414, and it does not power up. If you know that camera off hand, you know how often I use one these days. Spending hundreds of dollars is out of the question as it might be another 15 years before I need to use it again.

The pictures I need to take are of a PCB, roughly 2"x1". I can get the same camera on ebay for around $20 - 30, but I do not know if that camera would have been good enough to that in the first place. Is it possible to get a modern camera for < $50 that can take closeup pictures?

[tooki]

The low-end digital camera market has been utterly decimated by the rise of the smartphone, whose built-in cameras are good enough to substitute low-end cameras. (Or, indeed, often exceed them.)

Consider buying a used DSLR camera with a proper macro lens. A 10 year old DSLR is still pretty good, and you can get a great used lens for one.

Alternatively, many people have good results with macro lens attachments for their smartphones. I haven’t tried them, but this might be worth a shot.

[Electro Detective]

  Second that on the "buying a used DSLR camera with a proper macro lens. A 10 year old DSLR is still pretty good, and you can get a great used lens for one. "

Some of those 6mp to 12mp cameras can still take great photos in Manual and no brainer Auto modes,
you get quicker wysiwyg shots exactly as composed,
miles better than fumbling with a smartassphone  and or dropping the money pit pos on tiles or concrete, just when you need that money shot 

A good Pentax DSLR rig won't send you to the poor house like a Canon or Nikon might,
and there's plenty of affordable Pentax OEM lenses from Sigma and Tamron etc  that get the job done 

[engrguy42]

Most of the time my phone takes good enough pictures, but I need to take some closeups where it does not work at all. I pulled out my old camera, a Dimage S414, and it does not power up. If you know that camera off hand, you know how often I use one these days. Spending hundreds of dollars is out of the question as it might be another 15 years before I need to use it again.

The pictures I need to take are of a PCB, roughly 2"x1". I can get the same camera on ebay for around $20 - 30, but I do not know if that camera would have been good enough to that in the first place. Is it possible to get a modern camera for < $50 that can take closeup pictures?

I feel your pain. However, one of the bright spots is that some smartphone cameras produce images that are like 5k x 3k resolution. And with that kind of resolution you can take the image into Gimp or whatever and zoom in to the area of interest, even if you're not up close.

Attached is an crop of an image I took yesterday of a 1" x 1-3/4" board in a tiny meter, and I was interested in the adjustable pot. I brought it into Gimp, cropped all but the pot, and still ended up with an in-focus image with 1400 x 1000 dimensions or whatever.

The downsides, OTOH, are that you always get a 5000 x 3000 image which I rarely need or want, so I usually have to re-scale.

I guess this doesn't answer your question, but just something to consider if your phone actually does have a hi-res mode that you may not be aware of.

[Electro Detective]

Unless you live primitive for the past decade, your smartphone should have a better camera than $50 shit.
DSLRs depreciate, not the lens, at least not nearly as much.

There is NO WAY any phone can 'easily' get you the exact composed shot and pre fine tuning, and setup speed, especially with tricky close up/macro work
you can get even with a 10 year old DSLR

I don't see pro or amateur photographers sporting flash phones on the job

Lots of great quality Youtube videos and stills done with cheap DSLRs too 

OP admiralk is on a tight to non-exist budget to pull in some good user controlled pics once in a blue moon,
please consider 

[jfiresto]

The macro mode of the 8 megapixel Canon A580 will capture a 2 x 1.5 inch area. It can be hacked with CHDK, should you grow bored of PCBs. I have one I bought off my neighbor for 30 (or was it 20?) euros some years ago.  They have only gotten cheaper.

If you like, I can drag out mine and post some images of small PCBs.

EDIT: Its sister models, the Canon A630 and A640 look like the ones to get. Give a yodel if you want or need something more recent.

[engrguy42]

Unless you live primitive for the past decade, your smartphone should have a better camera than $50 shit.
DSLRs depreciate, not the lens, at least not nearly as much.

There is NO WAY any phone can 'easily' get you the exact composed shot and pre fine tuning, and setup speed, especially with tricky close up/macro work
you can get even with a 10 year old DSLR

I don't see pro or amateur photographers sporting flash phones on the job

Lots of great quality Youtube videos and stills done with cheap DSLRs too 

OP admiralk is on a tight to non-exist budget to pull in some good user controlled pics once in a blue moon,
please consider 

I think you might want to reconsider your apparently firm and unyielding and clearly biased opinion.

As I posted (just above your post), I do it all the time when I want quick hi-res closeups. Take an in-focus photo with my phone in 5000 x 3000 mode. Transfer to PC either via USB or email (since I'll invariably be using it on my PC). Right click on photo, select "Open with Gimp". Edit/crop/whatever the image as necessary to focus in on what's important.

Entire process takes maybe 5-10 minutes. And I haven't owned a DSLR in decades. I also shoot Youtube videos with my phone. It's wonderful, IMO. Drag-n-drop the pre-set HD (1920 x 1080) video into my editing software, it auto-converts format, and I'm all set.

I'm not saying DSLR's are bad. They're not. I'm just saying that I think it's very shortsighted to be absolutely convinced that everyone must have a DSLR in order to do anything useful and efficiently. That's nonsense. 

[admiralk]

@engrguy42 My phone takes lower quality pictures than my Dimage did. Here is an example:
 
I cannot find an option to even change the format to anything other than .jpg. That picture is just fine for what it is intended, but I do not think I have ever gotten a high quality picture out of it.

Unless you live primitive for the past decade, your smartphone should have a better camera than $50 shit.
DSLRs depreciate, not the lens, at least not nearly as much.

Well, I do live pretty primitively and for more than the last decade. My phone is 5mp compared to the 4mp of the much older Dimage. The A580 jfiresto suggested looks like a huge step up from either.

Thanks for all the suggestions, I at least have some place to start looking now.

[james_s]

I've been really impressed by the photos my iPhone SE takes, they are much better than what any of the point 'n shoot digital cameras I had before. It won't compare to what you get from a DSLR though, no phone camera will ever touch the flexibility offered by interchangeable lenses, manual modes and whatnot, with a large lens and sensor you can just get so much more light onto the sensor. Whether any of that matters depends on what you're trying to do.

[jogri]

I've been really impressed by the photos my iPhone SE takes, they are much better than what any of the point 'n shoot digital cameras I had before. It won't compare to what you get from a DSLR though, no phone camera will ever touch the flexibility offered by interchangeable lenses, manual modes and whatnot, with a large lens and sensor you can just get so much more light onto the sensor. Whether any of that matters depends on what you're trying to do.

Proprietary firmware/camera drivers play a big part in the picture quality of modern phones, your "point and shoot camera" might have a similar sensor but it just doesn't have this insane amount of work put into honing the software. I experienced this myself when i switched the OS of my Sony Xperia and lost access to the proprietary camera drivers from Sony: The picture quality went from "2016 flagship" to "okay for a 2014 highend" phone. Still good, but the autofocus/sharpness just weren't in the same league as before.

[olkipukki]

If your area of interest is flat and no much difference between component heights, whatever been suggested already 

<out of OP's budget>

Otherwise, if you after crisp and clear picture overall, something like DSLR + macro lens + lighting + software to cook a magic (aka search "focus stacking" ) 
Well, if you can manage to change a focus on a (i)phone gradually, might works too w/software only, but recon is a pain in ass todo it manually.

[olkipukki]

Consider buying a used DSLR camera with a proper macro lens. A 10 year old DSLR is still pretty good, and you can get a great used lens for one.

A proper macro (used) lens will cost easy OPs budget multiply on 10 

[jfiresto]

Here is an image I took with the A580 of a 1.8 x 1.3 inch board, first the full frame:



This was the smallest area I could capture with macro mode. I am not sure how the A580 reviewer managed 2 x 1.5 inches.

And here is a 1024 x 1024 pixel, full size crop:



This was a quick shot taken with the harsh, built-in flash. I could do better with side lights and a tripod.

The A640 reviewer managed a 0.87 x 0.65 inches minimum area with that camera. I would expect its macro mode could make the board fill the frame and produce sharper images. I would get an A630/A640 or something newer for photographing 2 x 1 inch boards.

[magic]

I don't like wide angle macro. Perspective is weird and depth of field razor thin, which becomes noticeable if the board is populated with components. To top it off, zoom lenses tend to suffer barrel distortion, soft corners and/or some level of chromatic aberration under such conditions. Some cameras may focus even closer than the A580, but it won't result in filling the frame with good image.

Attached pic is an even lower end Powershot A420 on the longest zoom, from about 30cm, on a tripod though with little attention to lighting Board dimensions are roughly 1.75×1". Note perfectly straight lines, reasonable focus except for the tips of pin headers and almost no chromatic aberration. And some blown highlights here and there, those old sensors have low dynamic range.

If you are to use Imaging Resource, look for cameras with good geometric/chromatic performance and short focusing distance at telephoto. Fight the ant's view macro menace

@engrguy42 My phone takes lower quality pictures than my Dimage did. Here is an example:

This is clearly shaken. There is no escaping physics. You need a larger sensor or a tripod. Optical image stabilization may help if you are lucky.

[engrguy42]

Chromatic aberration??? Optical image stabilization?? 

What are you guys taking photos for, some international tech journal ?? 

Does everything in this forum always have to be taken into the femto-amp pico-second hyper perfectly accurate?? He wants to take one closeup of a board, and then not again for another 15 years. Geez guys...

Borrow a phone from someone who has a newer model and take the photo.

[Gyro]

Every *** thread! 

[Electro Detective]

In response to engrguy42's reply: maybe I did come in a bit rugby on this one.. (as usual)    or figured OP's request was satisfied, period. 
but we are sort of on the same page, and I use both your method    but tend to stick with the DSLR as it gives me the exact photos I need/want,
and from SLR and medium format experience, I can use to my advantage lens length effects, depth of field, back light control, flash/bounce and all the other good stuff,
as well as speed in getting it done asap, and satisfying any impatience to get it done 

---------------------- 

Quality debate aside    for OP admiralk's immediate requirements the cheap DSLR and OEM macro lens to suit, is a better deal  -IMVHO-  than stuffing about with phones

Full fast control of the shots, and with manual focus activated, can move in on difficult items in amongst many of different heights,
as well as Depth Of Field options too

My phones have good cameras with 12, 15 or 20mp?  if we can believe the fudged specs  and admittedly take great point and pray shoot pics,

but for speed and versatility the DSLR boots in under a second and it's rock and roll,

pull out the SD card, transfer the pics to the PC,

= job done         ..before the phone has booted up and camera icon found     and all the rest of it..


 

[admiralk]

This is clearly shaken. There is no escaping physics. You need a larger sensor or a tripod. Optical image stabilization may help if you are lucky.

That was one of the best pictures I was ever able to take with my phone. It probably has more to do with how it is held and triggered more than anything else. I can hold a real camera much more steady, or at least I could the last time i used one.

I found an A630 easily in my budget, without going the ebay route. The one thing I do not like is it only takes .jpg pictures. I used .tiff format on the old camera when I wanted quality pictures. From what I have been able to find, DSLRs are the way to go for uncompressed formats. I have no idea how to deal with RAW though. While I can find DSLRs in my budget, they never include lenses. That opens up a whole new can of worms. I have absolutely no idea how to pick a lens.

<edit>
My budgets are often equal to the ones the US government make, they usually go over. So if I could get a DSLR and lens by doubling it, no worries.
@Electro Detective you make valid points. I am not sure I would need a macro lens though. A good close up that I can crop should work fine. That would also allow me to use it for other things.
</edit>

[DrG]

This is clearly shaken. There is no escaping physics. You need a larger sensor or a tripod. Optical image stabilization may help if you are lucky.

That was one of the best pictures I was ever able to take with my phone. It probably has more to do with how it is held and triggered more than anything else. I can hold a real camera much more steady, or at least I could the last time i used one.

I found an A630 easily in my budget, without going the ebay route. The one thing I do not like is it only takes .jpg pictures. I used .tiff format on the old camera when I wanted quality pictures. From what I have been able to find, DSLRs are the way to go for uncompressed formats. I have no idea how to deal with RAW though. While I can find DSLRs in my budget, they never include lenses. That opens up a whole new can of worms. I have absolutely no idea how to pick a lens.

I just took these with my very old Powershot A640


0.65" x 0.5"


3.0" X 0.75"


I did no post-processing other than cropping. Yes, I used a copy stand, but you should use one. I think for what you want, you can't go wrong with an old Powershot point and shoot. No investment in a macro lens and you can learn to live with .jpg - no?

[jogri]

While I can find DSLRs in my budget, they never include lenses. That opens up a whole new can of worms. I have absolutely no idea how to pick a lens.

Almost all DSLRs come with one or two standard lenses, there are a bunch of them on ebay. The included lenses are mostly 18-55mm, just search for "brand 18 55mm" on ebay. A good example would be the Canon EFS 18-55mm lens, you can get them for under 50 bucks.

Btw, the Canon lens i mentioned works fine for taking pics of pcbs (from ~25cm away), i just tested it with my dslr.

[Electro Detective]

@Electro Detective you make valid points. I am not sure I would need a macro lens though. A good close up that I can crop should work fine.

That would also allow me to use it for other things.

The 'macro' function is just an added/extra 'good enough' feature on some zoom lenses, aka cheap to score, which you can use for all your regular photography,

and TBH good enough for most close up stuff, as well as being a normal zoom lens 

I use them and if they get dropped or scratched, I buy another used one, never happened yet

I have a 28 to 80 zoom lens with 'macro' and a 18 to 200 monster with 'macro', and do most pics from small to far away, and people pops with those

Most people don't even know about the macro feature
nor the small switch on the lens and the routine to work it to activate the close up mode,
and get out of it. It's no big deal really, but worth writing down for next time to save fiddling about 


A real 'macro' lens is bigger money and gets you in close with little distortion

It's on my wish list, as well as a Shift lens and...   

[admiralk]

This Sony A300 would blow my budget out of the water, but it looks like it would give me all I need. A macro lens and a normal one. I have no idea about the reliability of the site or how it holds its sellers accountable. Come morning I am sure I will keep looking, but it does seem convenient.

I think I need to go back to my earlier searches and start over with the new information you all have provided.

[David Hess]

I like the old but still produced Canon Powershot SX series because they use a pair of standard AA cells.  The small smart phone form factor severely limits their performance compared to a camera with larger lens and sensor.

[BravoV]

For just forum and technical discussions, which is the most important aspects are sharpness & details, which I think the sweet spot is just get a point & shoot camera, especially the DOF is adequate for macros, while still convenient for normal shot. Imo, relatively they're cheap and much less hassles vs DSLR + bunch of lenses.

Few examples results from my almost 10 years Panasonic P&S, not the pro grade photos, but I believe is more than adequate.

Click each to expand.

[Muttley Snickers]

I'm a bit unstable so only use my phone to record regular stuff like a wiring configuration or perhaps a screen capture to relay to somebody else. I have to use a tripod for sharper captures or close up macros and still use either an old Canon SX-100IS or a Panasonic Lumix DMC-SZ8 which are both good enough for my basic needs. Also, I always set a two second delay for the shot just to get clear, this feature works well on the Canon as it remains enabled between shots but on the Panasonic the two second delay needs to be set for each shot which is just stupid.