Budget Camera Recomendation

[magic]

Does everything in this forum always have to be taken into the femto-amp pico-second hyper perfectly accurate??

Chill out, we are only talking how to optimize a $20 budget
No one even mentioned buying color calibration charts yet

I found an A630 easily in my budget, without going the ebay route.

But watch out for dust ingress in the lens, sometimes it makes its way deep enough to cast visible shadows on the sensor. Set to Av mode, select f/8 and take a defocused picture of some uniform background. You will immediately see if there are problems.

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.

Gaypeg is not as bad as some zealots say. RAW is much more effort to process. I think some DSLRs still support saving TIFF if you must. But really, before wasting time, take any images you want, compress them with JPG at >95% quality factor and see if there is any difference. The A6xx cams produce about 2~4MB images at their full resolution and highest quality option.

By the way, CHDK is easy enough to install on an SD card and will give you raw support on Powershots if you feel masochistic enough to use it. It can also do (wired) remote triggering and automatic bad pixel removal. You may expect a few stuck pixels on any old sensor.

I just took these with my very old Powershot A640

Use longer zoom

[DrG]

I just took these with my very old Powershot A640

Use longer zoom

Yeah, I got a longer zoom for ya right here pal 

[DrG]

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.   

https://www.marttree.com/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gx7-remote-shutter-control.html

[admiralk]

I think I am going to go with a Rebel XTi. $100 for all the fixings including a bag seems like a reasonable price. Twice what I wanted to spend, but hopefully it will be more useful in the future.

Thanks for all the suggestions.

[DrG]

I think I am going to go with a Rebel XTi. $100 for all the fixings including a bag seems like a reasonable price. Twice what I wanted to spend, but hopefully it will be more useful in the future.

Thanks for all the suggestions.

That is a very good choice. It was my first DSLR and I replaced it with an SL2 about a year or so ago. I had used the XTi with an EF-S 60mm macro lens. I use the lens now with the SL2 and I am still happy with it.

What are you going to get in terms of a macro lens?

[admiralk]

I am hoping I will be fine with the standard lens. I do not need super high detail, but it does need to be clear. In this case it is for a construction manual for a kit I am working on. It is probably going to take me a while to understand what all the numbers mean.

Once things open back up, it would be nice to get some good pictures of concerts I record audio at. My phone is totally useless for that.

[DrG]

I am hoping I will be fine with the standard lens. I do not need super high detail, but it does need to be clear. In this case it is for a construction manual for a kit I am working on. It is probably going to take me a while to understand what all the numbers mean.

Once things open back up, it would be nice to get some good pictures of concerts I record audio at. My phone is totally useless for that.

Well, I am not sure what you mean by the standard lens. The Canon EF-S 18–55mm was offered in a lot of kits (in contrast to just buying the body, for example). I had not realized this myself until recently, but there were/are NINE iterations of the lens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_18%E2%80%9355mm_lens

Basically it is a cheapish lens but I noticed that the most recent version has image stabilization. I think you will use it and like it but inevitably be faced with getting a macro lens and a telephoto lens...but either will be well over the $100 price tag and that is the rub. On the other hand if it is in good shape a $100 investment is not terribly risky. I used my XTi (10MP) with the 18-55mm, 60mm macro and a 55-250mm zoom (w/IS). I still use all three lens' with the SL-2 (24MP).

I hope it works out and be sure to post a few shots along with your impressions.

[admiralk]

yes, it is the 18-55mm lens. It is coming from a college A/V classroom and there are several, compared to just the one pictures were taken of. There are at least 3 different bags it could come with, for example. The one pictured does not look like the IS ones in your link though. I am sure I will end up getting different lenses, as I learn more. A big part of my decision to go the DSLR route instead of point and shoot is the expandability, as opposed  to complete replacement. That theory has served me well in my audio recording and let me develop a high end rig from very humble beginnings. 

[vk6zgo]

I have had two inexpensive digital cameras.

The first one was quite basic, but was really good for taking screenshots of analog 'scopes, & reasonable for everyday use.
I would have been happy with it, but it disappeared.

The replacement had "delusions of grandeur", in that it was a very basic DSLR, but without an interchangeable lens system.
That worked pretty well, but it disappeared, too!

I'm fairly sure that if I tear the house apart I will eventually find both, complete with nice corroded batteries.

Meanwhile, my old Minolta SRT101 film camera sits exactly where I left it years ago.
I am sorely tempted when I need a camera, to drag the old beast out, buy some film (it's still available), then get the resulting image converted to digital by a lab.
At least the Minolta has real optics!

My phone is a "dumb" one, it has a "sort of" camera, & the camera on the iPad is horrible & clunky.

[helius]

I used the XTi for years and years (however, at around 1 year it developed an electrical fault and needed to be repaired. I expect any unit you buy today will be outside the "infant mortality" period but it should be kept in mind that these are complex machines that are hard to service.)
Recently I've "side-graded" to a Nikon D90s, which being F-mount can use hundreds of old manual focus lenses without adapters. That's great for artistic stuff but I don't think it helps much for documentation purposes like you mentioned.

Oh, one point. If you do need to document very small objects you can do it easily with the Nikon system, by using a reverse-L39 adapter to attach an enlarging lens. That is far better and cheaper than using a macro lens.

[steve30]

admiralk: The XTi (aka EOS 400D) sounds like a decent choice. I have the newer 500D which I use on a regular basis. When I bought it some years back, I got it because of its video capabilities. If I hadn't wanted video, I'd have probably just got an older model.

The bog standard EF-S 18-55mm lens is pretty good, and they can be bought very cheap. Another cheap option might be the older EF 28-90mm kit lens which Canon used to bundle with film cameras. Its cheaply made, but works OK. Its a bit soft at wide apertures, but its fine if you stop it down to f/8.

[jfiresto]

Another possibility would be a used, mirrorless, micro four thirds system camera. Because of its short flange focal distance, it can accept a crazy variety of lenses using inexpensive thread adapters. It would not surprise me that, for a similar cost, it would give even better results than an older DSLR camera.

I have been picking up used, Olympus m4/3rds bodies for cheap (roughly 50 euros / 55 dollars, delivered, with accessories and a one-year camera store guarantee) to see how they work as microscope cameras. They work very well. From the camera's perspective, the microscope is just a manual focus, f7 lens. The 12 megapixel models I bought have an effective anti-shock option for astronomy and microscopy.

[paulca]

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/buying-guides/best-add-on-lenses-for-iphone-and-android-phones

Just as an option.

[Electro Detective]

It looks like it's going to be a 'Battle Of The Budget Cameras' post and even cheap practical DSLRs may not be the go,

so I've got a Canon PowerShot A2000 IS camera kicking around somewhere   

I'll see if it can zoom and focus real close, without too much barrel distortion

as I have no intention to stuff about correcting in a photo editing program = too much unpaid work   

fwiw the cool lil Canon was another 'almost' casualty for leaking rechargeable batteries 

[jfiresto]

It looks like it's going to be a 'Battle Of The Budget Cameras' post and even cheap practical DSLRs may not be the go....

I have just been offering suggestions. Unlike most – and my brother has been giving me a hard time about this – I have no lenses (none) for any of my system camera bodies. i am trying to change that.

[DrG]

yes, it is the 18-55mm lens. It is coming from a college A/V classroom and there are several, compared to just the one pictures were taken of. There are at least 3 different bags it could come with, for example. The one pictured does not look like the IS ones in your link though. I am sure I will end up getting different lenses, as I learn more. A big part of my decision to go the DSLR route instead of point and shoot is the expandability, as opposed  to complete replacement. That theory has served me well in my audio recording and let me develop a high end rig from very humble beginnings.

I here you and it makes some sense....but

Canon DSLR lens are expensive...all of them...expensive as compared to your original investment. You might not believe me now, but (and I think it was stated earlier) the lens' are the real investment at "our" level.

Say you get the XTi with a bag and the 18-55. You use it, learn about it, like it, take a couple thousand pictures and then decide that you need a macro lens for close up work and zoom or telephoto lens for concerts and the like. Now you have ~ $500 or more in lenses...and you are still using the 10MP camera. So, you start thinking...hmmm a 24MP canon with a *much* better view screen (touch), movie capability... the Canon interface that you already know.... and a *ton* of other features, is less than your lenses....and on and on 

I'm for your decision because you are putting a foot in the shallow end first and I know, from having one, that the XTi is a good camera.

If you only needed a camera for this one documentation project, IMO, a used Powershot P&S is definitely the cheaper and easier way to go - again from experience. The A640, which I have, and posted a couple of pics from earlier, has excellent macro capabilities and it's 10MP. A few bucks for a copy stand and some lights and you can go to town.

Even if you were to change your mind and get one, I bet you will soon start lusting after a DSLR after a while.

Finally, be a little concerned about getting one from the AV lab as I would expect students to have beaten them pretty bad. I personally have not had any problems with all three Canons that I have had and that is over many years of use (for the first two).

The XTi did get a speck of dust in the viewfinder (not on the mirror) but after looking into what it takes to remove that, I decided living with it is the way to go. Sometimes I have to clean the contacts on the macro lens. That's it..that's the only issues I have had. I take a lot of nature shots and indoor close-ups and I do religiously take care with their use.

[admiralk]

Say you get the XTi with a bag and the 18-55. You use it, learn about it, like it, take a couple thousand pictures and then decide that you need a macro lens for close up work and zoom or telephoto lens for concerts and the like. Now you have ~ $500 or more in lenses...and you are still using the 10MP camera. So, you start thinking...hmmm a 24MP canon with a *much* better view screen (touch), movie capability... the Canon interface that you already know.... and a *ton* of other features, is less than your lenses....and on and on 

That is pretty much it. Also, if one component breaks I only need to replace that component. At this point that is only about 1/2 the price; for the body or lens, compared to the complete replacement.

Even if you were to change your mind and get one, I bet you will soon start lusting after a DSLR after a while.

I have pretty much always wanted one, so this was a good excuse. At least that is what I am telling myself. 

Finally, be a little concerned about getting one from the AV lab as I would expect students to have beaten them pretty bad.

I have had good luck buying gear from schools. The scope I took the previous image from came from a school and it is in very good shape. Of course physics students might be more careful than A/V students? If the pictures are representative, and not just the best of the bunch, I think it will be OK.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-Rebel-XTi-10-1MP-DSLR-Camera-w-18-55mm-Lens-Case-Filter-Batt-Mem-QTY-AVAIL/264666344829?hash=item3d9f57ed7d:g:a1QAAOSwaZVebBn8
I will find out next week.

Oh, one point. If you do need to document very small objects you can do it easily with the Nikon system, by using a reverse-L39 adapter to attach an enlarging lens. That is far better and cheaper than using a macro lens.

I have no idea what that means, but I look it up.

[helius]

Enlarging lenses are made for, you guessed it, enlargers. They have fixed focus, which is terrible for ordinary photography, but fine for microphotography where you move the camera to achieve focus. You mount the lens backwards by attaching its front filter ring to the adapter (thus making it a... unlarging lens?) They are stupid cheap and incredibly sharp.

[admiralk]

Thanks, I found a video explaining it. It sounded like any old lens would work, just need to find the right ring.

[DrG]

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413542-REG/fotodiox_macro_tube_eos_macro_extension_tube_set.html/quick-compare?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI_8e7pN766AIVE4nICh206guUEAQYAiABEgKv3_D_BwE

If you get something like this, I would be interested to hear your impressions...or from anyone, especially if they have a macro lens as well. Also, I am not saying these are what @helius is talking about. I don't have either.

[Electro Detective]

I didn't want to get into the reverse ring and lens thing, or close up lenses, tubes,
bellows and adapter size to size, lighting and vignetting issues

I assumed OP wants a fast cheap fix for reasonable close ups and standard photography, which is what I use as previously commented,

and I leave the 'better methods' for when necessity arises and set up time permits

[admiralk]

This is the Video I watched.


He uses that same barrel in one shot. If I need to pick up a few doo-dads, which I most likely will, I will probably throw in a ring to give it a try. I think for now a good clear closeup is all I will need.

[magic]

By the way, I forgot to mention the following regarding output formats:

JPGs from cameras are maybe 3x to 4x smaller than raw files. Not much loss of information.
Uncompressed TIFFs are 2x to 3x larger than raw files. Definitely waste of storage space

[paulca]

By the way, I forgot to mention the following regarding output formats:

JPGs from cameras are maybe 3x to 4x smaller than raw files. Not much loss of information.
Uncompressed TIFFs are 2x to 3x larger than raw files. Definitely waste of storage space

Depends if you need the extra channels or not.  A camera can save each colour channel separately for example.  TIFF does also support compression. 

It's more common in post-processing allowing you to save multiple channels/layers and processing information with the file so that changes can be undone later.

[admiralk]

My theory is that you can always make it smaller, but you cannot make it bigger. For example, I record audio at 24/48 into separate channels. After mastering, I render it to 16/44.1 stereo for playback. I am going to have to process an image anyway; crop, resize, whatever, so why not start with more than I need.