DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> How does a cheap P&S take better macro than DSLR
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 26, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/24/2014 04:53:12 AM · #1
My partner took a couple of photos of some tiny frogs in our garden yesterday that her and the kids have been rearing from tad poles



The second photo illustrates how small this frog was and note it is the hand of a 3 year old child

Now the camera cost around £50 and is a Canon PowerShot A495

I have a Canon 50D with a 50mm 1.8 prime and a couple of zooms and a Canon S110 and could not take such close up photos with either.

So I am curious if this cheap camera just has some fantastic macro abilities and for me to match it would I require a macro lens?

[Edit to add some info I just found with regards the Macro capabilities of my various options]

The Canon Powershot A495 offers a Macro setting that allows you to focus on a subject that is just 1cm away from the camera when the lens is set to wide-angle.

And for the S110 - Macro performance is good, allowing you to focus as close as 3cms away from the subject.

EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens: It's minimum focus distance specs at 45cm (about 18 inches).

Canon 17-85 IS focuses down to 1.15' (35cm) for a MM (Maximum Magnification) of .2x.

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 05:04:19.
 06/24/2014 05:07:04 AM · #2
SC Please give my thread a title such as "How does a cheap P&S take better macro than DSLR?"
 06/24/2014 07:19:25 AM · #3
a lot of what you are experiencing has to do with the sensor size.

since the magnification is the projection onto the sensor. 1:1 the image is projected at its actual size on the sensor, 1:2 half size etc.

the 50D's APS-C is a lot larger than the sensor in the S110 so it requires the lens to project a much larger image onto the sensor.

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 07:19:57.
 06/24/2014 07:29:18 AM · #4
FWIW my Canon S3 IS has a "SuperMacro" mode which will focus to 0 cm -- it will folus on the dust on the lens if it can't find soemthing else. These herb bits were resting on the lens as I pointed the camera upwards.

06/24/2014 07:43:34 AM · #5
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:

Now the camera cost around £50 and is a Canon PowerShot A495

I have a Canon 50D with a 50mm 1.8 prime and a couple of zooms and a Canon S110 and could not take such close up photos with either.

So I am curious if this cheap camera just has some fantastic macro abilities and for me to match it would I require a macro lens?

[Edit to add some info I just found with regards the Macro capabilities of my various options]

The Canon Powershot A495 offers a Macro setting that allows you to focus on a subject that is just 1cm away from the camera when the lens is set to wide-angle.

And for the S110 - Macro performance is good, allowing you to focus as close as 3cms away from the subject.

EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens: It's minimum focus distance specs at 45cm (about 18 inches).

Canon 17-85 IS focuses down to 1.15' (35cm) for a MM (Maximum Magnification) of .2x.


I LOVED my canon powershot when I had one and I think that was the best point and shoot I have ever owned. I used that little thing till it died and couldn't be used no more.. my now point and shoot is a sony cybershot.. I find it funny that this camera also takes better macro shots than my Nikon D60 does and it also takes way better moon pictures getting close shots, and it can get closer with better detail on it as well and it focuses beautifully.

If my point and shoot could change lenses and shoot Raw, I don't think I would ever get a new camera..
I do think some of these point and shoots do a better job on a few things that DLSR can not.

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 07:43:55.
 06/24/2014 07:59:21 AM · #6
Thanks for the replies. It begs the question as to whether it is better to buy a dedicated macro lens or just find a P&S that has great macro capabailities. I was thinking about the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens until I seen these frog photos with the cheap point and shoot.

[Edited to remove IS]

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 08:06:16.
 06/24/2014 08:12:38 AM · #7
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Thanks for the replies. It begs the question as to whether it is better to buy a dedicated macro lens or just find a P&S that has great macro capabailities. I was thinking about the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens until I seen these frog photos with the cheap point and shoot.

[Edited to remove IS]


To do close focus (macro) photography you either need a dedicated macro lens or extension tubes to reduce the minimal focus length. Without it, you're not going to touch the P&S.
 06/24/2014 08:22:02 AM · #8
Thanks backdoorhippie - this question really brings home to me how terrible my technical knowledge of photography is:)
 06/24/2014 08:25:43 AM · #9
I think customers and companies are realizing the practical benefits of some of these cameras more an more. And the average person not shooting professionally would rather not be carrying a backpack with a DSLR and 5 lenses. I still miss my Sony V1. I'm not even sure why I sold that - I don't think I realized how good it was.
 06/24/2014 08:27:30 AM · #10
You could also try this:
Reverse your 50mm
It's pretty awesome - although not incredibly versatile.

Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Thanks for the replies. It begs the question as to whether it is better to buy a dedicated macro lens or just find a P&S that has great macro capabailities. I was thinking about the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens until I seen these frog photos with the cheap point and shoot.

[Edited to remove IS]


To do close focus (macro) photography you either need a dedicated macro lens or extension tubes to reduce the minimal focus length. Without it, you're not going to touch the P&S.
06/24/2014 08:31:05 AM · #11
if you get a dedicated macro lens that gives 1:1 you will exceed the quality of the P&S.
 06/24/2014 08:40:19 AM · #12
Originally posted by Mike:
if you get a dedicated macro lens that gives 1:1 you will exceed the quality of the P&S.


I damn hope so as the dedicated macro is about 8 times the price of the P&S:)
 06/24/2014 08:42:41 AM · #13
Originally posted by tate:
You could also try this:
Reverse your 50mm
It's pretty awesome - although not incredibly versatile.

Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Thanks for the replies. It begs the question as to whether it is better to buy a dedicated macro lens or just find a P&S that has great macro capabailities. I was thinking about the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens until I seen these frog photos with the cheap point and shoot.

[Edited to remove IS]


To do close focus (macro) photography you either need a dedicated macro lens or extension tubes to reduce the minimal focus length. Without it, you're not going to touch the P&S.


Thanks tate - that looks a great idea apart from the fear of dust getting in the open end of the lens:)
 06/24/2014 08:54:26 AM · #14
LOL I totally understand about carrying around cameras.. I know my bag is starting to get a bit overwhelming, but with my sony it just fits in my purse and it is my every day carry along never to miss a shot.

My DLSR only comes out when I am shooting for specific things..
What I love about my sony too it zooms out to 300mm but it gets really, really grainy the more you zoom out.. I can easily shoot a 200mm

These were the last few favorite shots I did with that camera..

Now that I have been shooting in Raw, I am not a fan of jpg anymore LOL

~~~~~
Back to Macro

The Macro trick does work but I find it very cumbersom

What about those really cheap filter macro lenses? Has anyone used them at all



Message edited by author 2014-06-24 08:56:29.
 06/24/2014 09:09:09 AM · #15
I have P&S , M43, nikon 1, and a DSLR

for a quick macro the P&S is the most practical of them all

m43 and the V1 do a decent job, with the kit lens, although it is not 1:1 macro

for a 1:1 macro with impressive quality you need to be motivated, bring out the DSLR , macro lens, tripod, maybe a flash and a modifier for the flash, I have the 150mm f2.8 sigma macro lens, it's great with awesome image quality, but to do a decent job you need a tripod, if you do a real 1:1 image the DOF is quite small, even when using small aperture, and you do not want to get to small because it's starts to get blurry after f11, so if you want a good DOF you need to do focus stacking, also, I rarely never find anything small that interests me enough to make a shot and that it is also at a convenient height, it's always is near or at the floor, sometimes surrounded by other things or insects, AF is great but for macro ... it can be frustrating, so you better crouch down and look through the viewfinder... get the picture :)


06/24/2014 09:13:15 AM · #16
Originally posted by jgirl57:

Back to Macro

The Macro trick does work but I find it very cumbersom

What about those really cheap filter macro lenses? Has anyone used them at all


They're crap. Don't bother...

The reason P&S can take macro so well is the sensor is so small and therefor very close to the lens... creates a very low min
focusing distance. But it's still a tiny, crappy P&S sensor.

Get an 90mm Tamron (older type are cheaper) and you'll get 1:1, sharp image quality on a larger sensor, and an absolutely fantastic portrait lens.
 06/24/2014 09:13:31 AM · #17
Begging the question

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 09:21:20.
 06/24/2014 09:16:09 AM · #18
Originally posted by armando_m:
I have P&S , M43, nikon 1, and a DSLR

for a quick macro the P&S is the most practical of them all

m43 and the V1 do a decent job, with the kit lens, although it is not 1:1 macro

for a 1:1 macro with impressive quality you need to be motivated, bring out the DSLR , macro lens, tripod, maybe a flash and a modifier for the flash, I have the 150mm f2.8 sigma macro lens, it's great with awesome image quality, but to do a decent job you need a tripod, if you do a real 1:1 image the DOF is quite small, even when using small aperture, and you do not want to get to small because it's starts to get blurry after f11, so if you want a good DOF you need to do focus stacking, also, I rarely never find anything small that interests me enough to make a shot and that it is also at a convenient height, it's always is near or at the floor, sometimes surrounded by other things or insects, AF is great but for macro ... it can be frustrating, so you better crouch down and look through the viewfinder... get the picture :)


Thank you!!

Your reply has been a reality check with regards my motivation to do macro. Most of my photography tends to be unplanned and just a quick shot here and there. It sounds like even with a macro lens there is still a lot of work involved in macro photography. I was hoping the purchase of a macro lens would allow me just to whip out the lens when I see a beautiful butterfly or bee and take a macro shot - not have to get out the tripod and flash etc.
 06/24/2014 09:24:15 AM · #19
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
It sounds like even with a macro lens there is still a lot of work involved in macro photography. I was hoping the purchase of a macro lens would allow me just to whip out the lens when I see a beautiful butterfly or bee and take a macro shot - not have to get out the tripod and flash etc.




No tripod. No flash.
 06/24/2014 09:36:30 AM · #20
Originally posted by ShaneBlake:
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
It sounds like even with a macro lens there is still a lot of work involved in macro photography. I was hoping the purchase of a macro lens would allow me just to whip out the lens when I see a beautiful butterfly or bee and take a macro shot - not have to get out the tripod and flash etc.




No tripod. No flash.


Oh well they look very nice - my interest in macro is returning:)
 06/24/2014 09:47:05 AM · #21
Canon 100mm macro, no tripod or flash:
06/24/2014 09:49:25 AM · #22
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Originally posted by ShaneBlake:
No tripod. No flash.


Oh well they look very nice - my interest in macro is returning:)


Thanks! I love macro...

Originally posted by scalvert:
Canon 100mm macro, no tripod or flash:


Showoff... ;)

06/24/2014 09:54:12 AM · #23
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Originally posted by armando_m:
I have P&S , M43, nikon 1, and a DSLR

for a quick macro the P&S is the most practical of them all

m43 and the V1 do a decent job, with the kit lens, although it is not 1:1 macro

for a 1:1 macro with impressive quality you need to be motivated, bring out the DSLR , macro lens, tripod, maybe a flash and a modifier for the flash, I have the 150mm f2.8 sigma macro lens, it's great with awesome image quality, but to do a decent job you need a tripod, if you do a real 1:1 image the DOF is quite small, even when using small aperture, and you do not want to get to small because it's starts to get blurry after f11, so if you want a good DOF you need to do focus stacking, also, I rarely never find anything small that interests me enough to make a shot and that it is also at a convenient height, it's always is near or at the floor, sometimes surrounded by other things or insects, AF is great but for macro ... it can be frustrating, so you better crouch down and look through the viewfinder... get the picture :)


Thank you!!

Your reply has been a reality check with regards my motivation to do macro. Most of my photography tends to be unplanned and just a quick shot here and there. It sounds like even with a macro lens there is still a lot of work involved in macro photography. I was hoping the purchase of a macro lens would allow me just to whip out the lens when I see a beautiful butterfly or bee and take a macro shot - not have to get out the tripod and flash etc.


and at f11, you need light, which adds to the expense.
 06/24/2014 10:15:27 AM · #24
Originally posted by P-A-U-L:
Originally posted by armando_m:
I have P&S , M43, nikon 1, and a DSLR

for a quick macro the P&S is the most practical of them all

m43 and the V1 do a decent job, with the kit lens, although it is not 1:1 macro

for a 1:1 macro with impressive quality you need to be motivated, bring out the DSLR , macro lens, tripod, maybe a flash and a modifier for the flash, I have the 150mm f2.8 sigma macro lens, it's great with awesome image quality, but to do a decent job you need a tripod, if you do a real 1:1 image the DOF is quite small, even when using small aperture, and you do not want to get to small because it's starts to get blurry after f11, so if you want a good DOF you need to do focus stacking, also, I rarely never find anything small that interests me enough to make a shot and that it is also at a convenient height, it's always is near or at the floor, sometimes surrounded by other things or insects, AF is great but for macro ... it can be frustrating, so you better crouch down and look through the viewfinder... get the picture :)


Thank you!!

Your reply has been a reality check with regards my motivation to do macro. Most of my photography tends to be unplanned and just a quick shot here and there. It sounds like even with a macro lens there is still a lot of work involved in macro photography. I was hoping the purchase of a macro lens would allow me just to whip out the lens when I see a beautiful butterfly or bee and take a macro shot - not have to get out the tripod and flash etc.


True 1:1 macro photography is indeed a more pedantic pursuit than you're probably into. I know there are people like Roz who can chase bugs around in her yard handheld with a properly equipped camera, but I can't get anything in focus without a tripod and time to focus, so I'm limited to things that don't move. Between the shooting and the processing, every really impressive macro shot I've done took at least an hour, probably a couple.

On the other hand, I can do close up shots with my RX100 or my iPhone that I can't do with all my professional gear. 1-2" minimum focus distance, wide angle, small sensor shots with decent DOF.

Macro modes in P&S cameras tend to work only at the widest zoom setting, so it's really a different beast than DSLR macro.

Edit: another advantage of the P&S is that with a flippy screen, you don't have to lay on the ground with whatever you're trying to shoot.

Message edited by author 2014-06-24 10:17:10.
 06/24/2014 01:09:55 PM · #25
thanks. pretty much my experience. thinking about kit forces you to think about what you really want.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 05:48:17 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 05:48:17 PM EDT.