One more thing, Robt. I believe that the camera has various shooting scenes, try the close up (blossom) scene first, and check your results.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
Yes, robt, that is what the 0.25 m distance means. I think you are good to go.
'Big Daddy' asked: "Does that mean a 55/f3.5 from the days of film will work on these new electronic cameras?"
Some systems do, some systems don't. I'm only familiar with Nikon. In general, the lens will have all of the features it has always had. The 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor works in aperture priority (A) mode but doesn't do autofocus. That's fine for a static set-up.
My 24-85AF works about the same on an F100 (film, autofocus) as it does on a D300 (digital, autofocus).
You also get into the issue of format. The F100 uses film that's 24x36mm. The sensor on the D300 is smaller, so the 50 delivers the viewing angle of a 75mm and the 24-85 behaves like a 36-120. But there are also Nikon digitals that have 24x36 sensors.
Some companies have altered lens mounts and all sort of things. It's a real swamp that gets deeper the farther you wade.
gmpullmanSome will, but you will lose the "communication" that the lens has with the camera body. No autofocus, no auto aperature. You would be shooting strictly in manual. https://digital-photography-school.com/old-glass-how-to-use-old-film-lenses-with-
Like the good old days. My current digital camera is a Canon, but I still have my Nikon macro and telephoto lenses. Thanks, I will defintely try one.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
BigDaddyDoes that mean a 55/f3.5 from the days of film will work on these new electronic cameras?
Some will, but you will lose the "communication" that the lens has with the camera body. No autofocus, no auto aperature. You would be shooting strictly in manual.
https://digital-photography-school.com/old-glass-how-to-use-old-film-lenses-with-new-dslr-cameras/
For lighting I sometimes set up a couple of clamp-on LED par lamps or some mini-umbrella lamps on stands.
One handy light I use is similar to this:
https://tinyurl.com/yaz2qj79
but mine is older and a slightly different style. Still, it is handy to have a light source that you can place right into the scenery when you need low-angle lighting. Best to keep the room lights off so you eliminate distractions. Just light the subject.
Regards, Ed
ROBERT PETRICKOr, do I need to get a special macro lens? The Nikon literature shows sharp crisp closeup photos of small bugs and whatnot.
I bought a couple "macro" lenses for my Canons. You have to watch the focal length here. The first one I bought is a 60mm and the field of view is very narrow for general layout photos. It is great for shooting small details but in order for me to get a decent view I had to place the camera too far away.
You can try an extention tube to attain closer focus, too, but there are drawbacks to these, sometimes. They're relatively inexpensive so they might fill in until you can narrow down your choice when you're ready to invest in a decent close-focus lens.
For layout shots, I find myself using a "prime" lens, one with a fixed focal length, because it is less bulky than a zoom lens (less glass). I like a wider field of view and I can do my cropping in the editing software.
Good luck, Ed
Graham LineThe two lenses I use most often for ''macro" shots are a 24-85/f2.8-f4 AF-Nikkor, and an old 55/f3.5 Micro-Nikkor
Does that mean a 55/f3.5 from the days of film will work on these new electronic cameras?
Yep, the tethered view is a great feature, and a lot easier on your eyes, back, and neck.
10" ought to be a workable close focusing distance for layout shots, side views of finished engines and cars and that sort of thing. The lens does .38 magnification which roughly means you can make an image roughly 1/3 lifesize. The two lenses I use most often for ''macro" shots are a 24-85/f2.8-f4 AF-Nikkor, and an old 55/f3.5 Micro-Nikkor that both focus to a 1:2 image, half life-size. I would wait until exhausting the possibilities of the 18-55 before thinking about getting another lens.
I'd be willing to bet most of John Allen's classic photos weren't made on 35mm film. Studio professionals well into the 1970s and up to digital were working with 120 rollfilm and earlier with 4x5" sheetfilm on cameras that had swings and tilts allowing a lot of creativity with depth of field. Apples and oranges.
What do you plan to do for lighting?
bearman . . . and what is the minimum focusing distance when it is set at 18 mm.
. . . and what is the minimum focusing distance when it is set at 18 mm.
Uh-oh, I didn't check this out earlier.
It says on the rim of the lens 'infinity to 0.25 m'. That works out to just under ten inches. There's a mark on the rear top of the camera body and I'm assuming that's the focal plane and the zero line for measurements. That means the front edge of the lens can get as close as about seven or eight inches to the nearest point of the subject. Is this correct? Is this suitable for my intended use? Or, do I need to get a special macro lens? The Nikon literature shows sharp crisp closeup photos of small bugs and whatnot. As small as N Scale trains are, they're a lot bigger and a lot longer than bugs. Do you suppose they set up the camera at least ten inches or so from the insects?
I don't have the camera in hand. It arrives Friday. You can be sure I'll make a few tests. And report back.
Thanks.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
ROBERT PETRICKIn the meanwhile the Nikon D5300 has emerged and is becoming the favorite. It offers complete functional remote control via laptop or smart phone and is directly supported by Helicon Remote and Helicon Focus.
One great feature of the Helicon Focus software is the 30 day trial period.
https://www.heliconsoft.com/software-downloads/
I used the program last fall and was very impressed with all its features. I wasn't quite ready to make the purchase at that time but I'll be looking into it again soon. I plugged my Canon T5i into a laptop with Helicon Remote and watched the magic begin! There's two programs, oops, sorry, I meant to say APPS. Focus is the stacking software and Remote is the camera control software.
Really neat stuff to watch the camera "do it's thing" making the multiple exposures.
You'll surely have fun. Still, a good photo editing suite will be invaluable, too. I agree about the route Adobe has taken with their "cloud-based" subscription service. Glad I got Elements 11 when I did.
Good luck and have fun, Ed
bearman Robt, if you like the D5300, by all means get it bundled with the 18 - 55 mm lens. Check on two things though, can you tilt/move the view sceen on the back to get the odd angles, and what is the minimum focusing distance when it is set at 18 mm. Add a tripod and a memory card and you are good to go.
Robt, if you like the D5300, by all means get it bundled with the 18 - 55 mm lens. Check on two things though, can you tilt/move the view sceen on the back to get the odd angles, and what is the minimum focusing distance when it is set at 18 mm. Add a tripod and a memory card and you are good to go.
Hey Bear-
Yes, I'm ordering the D5300 with an 18-55 mm lens and a 64 GB chip. And yes, the screen is articulated and swivelable for easy viewing. But, I also plan to use the camera either directly tethered via USB cable to my computer or via WiFi to my Samsung smartphone. That way I'll be able to not only control the exposures but also see the WYSIWYG image on the 17" laptop screen and not worry about scrunching my body into tight spaces despite the convenient movable viewfinder screen on the camera body.
I already have two tripods. One, a moderate duty Velbon aluminum job with four-link telescoping legs and tiltable and locking swivel head. The other, a light duty aluminum surveyor's transit tripod with bubble-leveled tribrach and silky smooth ball bearing rotation. Light duty by survey standards; heavy duty by network TV or studio standards.
I think I'm good to go. Or, at least I'm ready to go, good or not. We'll see.
gregcwonder how John Allen managed with those antiques?
Ah, but John was using film. Even average quality lenses have been resolving 200 lines/mm on film for a long time (premium lenses could do 3+ times that. On 35mm film, which is 24x36mm, that's 4,800 x 7,200 which is the equivalent of 34 megapixels.
Digital is just now catching up to the quality John had available.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
ROBERT PETRICKI'm looking for specific functionality to deal with the issues of indoor macro photography our hobby requires
wonder how John Allen managed with those antiques?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
I get good results with an ordinary point-n-shoot, Canon SX170IS. It offers an aperture priority mode that lets me set the lens opening down as for as it will go for best depth of field. This requires a long exposure time, which demands a tripod, you cannot hand hold at 1/2 sec exposures. It has a self timer that lets me trigger an exposure in 2 seconds, so my hand on the shutter button won't jiggle the camera and blur the picture. And electrons are free. I can shoot as many pictures as I like.
I have used GIMP for editing. Price is right, it's free. I have never found a decent writeup on how GIMP works, which makes the learning curve a bit steep. But it will do anything, if you can figure out how to make it do it.
Picassa will get the pictures out of the camera and onto your computer. It also does light weight editing, and builds up an photo album on your hard drive which uses ordinary Windows file folders, so you can find your photos using plain old Windows explorer.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
gregc while you may be looking for specific features of a camera, I'd hate to believe a more expensive camera takes better photos than a less expensive camera just because is costs more. sort of like expected to be better at golf because you're using a more expensive set of clubs.
while you may be looking for specific features of a camera, I'd hate to believe a more expensive camera takes better photos than a less expensive camera just because is costs more. sort of like expected to be better at golf because you're using a more expensive set of clubs.
Yes, I agree with this. Just as getting a new camera and taking better photos won't really improve the quality of my layout. Maybe just the opposite: clearer, higher detailed photos might only serve to show the flaws better.
The cameras I'm looking at all seem to fall into the slightly advanced beginner's category, feature wise and price wise. I'm looking for specific functionality to deal with the issues of indoor macro photography our hobby requires (particularly focus stacking) while still being able to use the camera for other, more traditional situations. And as such, the Nikon is looking pretty good.
I tend to approach these things with the idea of getting 'last year's model': previous versions that were once the hottest thing on wheels but have since been superceded with a newer puppy with a higher model number, but only a few (if any) iterative upgrades. These cameras can do every thing they always could, and that is quite a bit.
i'm a novice photographer, but have some comments
I see a noticable difference between the Sony DSC HL-10 and Cannon A2600 i have. I'm told the Sony was a nice camera in its day. It has a Lica lens and some sort of hand motion feature. But even using a tripod, the Sony pictures are better than the Cannon's.
i can't image not using a tripod or a well seated camera. Someone years ago said to take casual photos by holding a camera against a door frame.
my observations and those of other is lighting is key. I don't know if there can ever be too much. I can see a big difference between photos taken with sunlight pouring in thru a window and with lamps.
Maybe someone can comment on lamps?
i'm tempted to by a pair of photo lamps, but am still not sure about shadows.
as far as I know, bright light helps with depth of field.
So it seems to me while a good camera is important, it cannot overcome an unsteady base or poor lighting.
I've been checking out the Sony A6000, the Canon Rebel T6, and the Canon ELPH 330. They all have a lot of really good features, and they all fit into my price range. I'm leaning toward the Sony A6000.
The Sony A6000 is slipping in the rankings and is about to fall off the list. It has limited abilities for tethering to my computer. It has its own handheld remote control system, but the controller is minimal at best. My window air conditioner and ceiling fan have more sophisticated remotes.
In the meanwhile the Nikon D5300 has emerged and is becoming the favorite. It offers complete functional remote control via laptop or smart phone and is directly supported by Helicon Remote and Helicon Focus. Plus, it is a gateway to all those world-class lenses. And when it's late in the game and the score's tied and everyone else is tired, it's still a Nikon. How could anyone bet against it?
CombineZP is free and does a pretty decent job of stacking:
gmpullman selector These days, the CANON ELPH 3XX models have top of the line sensors for their price, Agreed. As I mentioned earlier, the big, clumsy DSLRs pretty much stay on the shelf when I want to grab some quick shots of the layout. I bought a Canon ELPH 330 for the missus a few years ago. I use it more often for layout shots than anything else. Just yesterday I made some shots from inside the turntable pit: Q2_on_TT by Edmund, on Flickr No way could I have set one of my bigger Canon models in there. I have been using Adobe Elements 11 for PP work. I bought it several years ago. Money well spent, IMHO. The latest "cloud-based" software, or is it called an app now, I'm no fan of. Here's another shot where I dropped the camera through the roof of the roundhouse: H10-shop2 by Edmund, on Flickr Try doing that with a toaster-sized camera. Another fantastic feature of digital photography is the ability to take 20- 30 or more shots at "bracketed" exposure and focal ranges and pick the best ones, then scrap the rest. Good Luck, Ed
selector These days, the CANON ELPH 3XX models have top of the line sensors for their price,
Agreed.
As I mentioned earlier, the big, clumsy DSLRs pretty much stay on the shelf when I want to grab some quick shots of the layout. I bought a Canon ELPH 330 for the missus a few years ago. I use it more often for layout shots than anything else.
Just yesterday I made some shots from inside the turntable pit:
Q2_on_TT by Edmund, on Flickr
No way could I have set one of my bigger Canon models in there.
I have been using Adobe Elements 11 for PP work. I bought it several years ago. Money well spent, IMHO. The latest "cloud-based" software, or is it called an app now, I'm no fan of.
Here's another shot where I dropped the camera through the roof of the roundhouse:
H10-shop2 by Edmund, on Flickr
Try doing that with a toaster-sized camera.
Another fantastic feature of digital photography is the ability to take 20- 30 or more shots at "bracketed" exposure and focal ranges and pick the best ones, then scrap the rest.
Good Luck, Ed
One feature I'm interested in is being able to operate the camera while tethered to my laptop. That is, to be able to take several (5 or 6 or more) shots at varying exposures from the laptop keyboard without having to physically touch the tripod-mounted camera to change settings or focus distance; not even having to use a remote shutter release. Supposedly, the stacking software can align and synchronize multiple images should there be any discrepancies caused by camera vibration or accidentally bumping the tripod setup, but I'm trying to eliminate even those small issues.
I'm also looking at Helicon Focus. Photoshop has some ability to do stacking (both focus and panorama), but I never jumped on the Ps bandwagon and now it might be too late. You can no longer buy lifetime stand-alone versions of the software, only community cloud-based versions. That whole idea gives me the uneasy feeling of getting assimilated into The Borg. No thanks. Pass.
Anyhow, good advice here. Making progress.
selectorThese days, the CANON ELPH 3XX models have top of the line sensors for their price,
Smaller is better in the field of macro where tight spaces matter. Remember, overhead shots don't do justice to the typical scale scene; you have to get the appliance and its lens down onto the surface, between trees or buildings, up tight against rock cuts, etc., ideally without having to do much to the scene to make it work (ie, lifting and removing things, displacing them, or adding much). Doing this greatly adds to the life of the layout and its artefacts. Moving stuff and building scenes is probably best on an outdoors or mobile platform, a diorama (in which case I would agree that a DSLR might be better. Might,...only...
I took all my best shots so far, all publishable once they were finished in terms of density, balance, clarity, noise, focus, etc...maybe not so much the modeling, on a small 7 MP camera. It's max f ratio was 8, and it provided 6X zoom. These days, the CANON ELPH 3XX models have top of the line sensors for their price, up to 12 X zoom, and have software and algorithms to render a darkish scene quite well, even show pleasing fireworks in a dark sky.
The ELPH set me back CDN$199 four years ago, while the 7 MP Powershot A710is was almost twice that, minus inflation, eight years earlier.
If you intend to make a living or become a 'serious' photographer (gag), perhaps a $700+ camera is the way to go, but prepare to add $XXXX.XX for lenses to match...yes, plural. If you want something affixed to your belt, or slipped into a shirt pocket, the people who bought the ELPH 330 when I did have universally raved about it. If you want something a bit more capable, larger sensor, able to take photos with less noise or higher ISO, then you have to start ponying up the cash.
Unless you are going to show your product, maybe enter competitions, then something less than USD$500 should have you in an entry level mirrorless ILC (interchangeable lens camera), entry level DSLR, or something like the Powershot SX720, another camera which has lots of very happy customers.
Here's some specific cameras worth looking at. All have a large selection of interchangable lenses and are under $600. Some even do 4K Video.
I have a Fujifilm X-M1 (no longer available) that I'm very happy with.
Sony A6000
Panasonic Lumix GX85
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II
Fujifilm X-A5
Robert,
.
I am happy to help.
I have a Canon Rebel T-6, and I love it. It is a digital SLR.
I have three lenses, all zoom. One is the standard lens the camera comes with, I think it is 45-85 focal length, and one is a 10-35 focal length wide angle lens. These are the only two suitable for Model Railroad photography. I also have a 100-300 focal length lens for outdoor photography.
This camera has an amazing full-manual mode that is great for model railroading photography. I can set the F-stop down to about F-24 and get very good depth of field. You can adjust the white balance to match the interior lighting, and it has a remote shutter release for perfect exposures.
It can produce a very good picture that meets the specifications Steven Otte sent me for producing images suitable for publication. I have been told that Bill Darnaby uses the same camera for the pictures he takes for MR articles.
Let me know what questions you have. I will do my best to help you learn from my experiences.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Then, Robt, you might be able to get away with a bridge camera for under 350$ +/-. A bridge does not have an interchangeable lens system and the heart of it is a zoom lens, which can go from 22 mm to 900 mm.. And, you can get one without a viewfinder which adds to the cost. Make sure you get one that has different shooting modes, and adjustable ISO. One of the modes should be macro. If you wait until the 2019 models come out, you may be able to score really good 2018 model at a discount.
I'm not looking to start a professional Photography Studio and I'm not looking to get a digital camera that is specifically dedicated to MRR use, but I am thinking about buying a new camera and I hope to use it to take better MRR photos.
I have a 15-year-old Sony CyberShot (5 megapixels) and a Samsung Galaxy S5 smart phone (16 megapixels). They both take pretty decent landscape and family picnic type photos, but most of the layout photos I've taken so far fall into the low- to mid-mediocre range. I'm sure there's room for improvement on my end (I followed the link to Bob Boudreau's website, thanks Ed) by brushing up on the theory and practice of modern digital photography.
The purpose of this thread (for now) is to get some advice and info on which specific camera to buy and which specific post-production software to use relating to and compatable with the aforesaid camera. I think most readers know the parameters involved with the topic at hand, and I'm aware opinions vary, so any response is very helpful.
I'm not looking to spend a ton (see Paragraph 1 above), but I am prepared to spend what it takes; within reason, of course.
Thanks everyone. This is useful.
Oh, yeah, carl, you are paying for a fast lens.
carl425Not a problem. Fast lenses are not required (and will hurt more than they help) in an environment where you are photographing objects that aren't moving and you have control of the lighting.
I look at the other end of the aperature range for model shots. A couple of my lenses will close to f22. That gives me some great depth-of-field without "stacking". Of course, the exposure time creeps up to two or three minutes
Cheers, Ed
A mirrorless camera would solve any possible camera vibration. But, before you buy mirrorless, check into the available lenses. If you can buy a refurbished or used body, you will save some money that can be used on lenses.
bearmanThe problem is that you probably cannot get a lens with an f stop bigger than 2.8, maybe 2.5.
Not a problem. Fast lenses are not required (and will hurt more than they help) in an environment where you are photographing objects that aren't moving and you have control of the lighting.
Fast lenses have huge chunks of glass in them. As a general rule, with all other factors being equal, more glass produces a lower quality image than less glass. Fast lenses are compromises for shots under low light and/or moving subjects where your only other choice is not to get the shot. That's not the case here. If you're trying to capture fine details, fast lenses are not your friend.
...and btw, they're way more expensive.