ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

pirchryn · 5 April 2009, 05:51 AM

I just tried to take pics of my sub and they all came out horrible...any suggestions on the type of camera to use? I have a 8mp camera already

Rockrolex · 5 April 2009, 06:09 AM

Any decent digital camera with a macro setting should do. Unless you are outside, you'll want to use a tripod to prevent shaking.

Bebot · 5 April 2009, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

Any decent digital camera with a macro setting should do. Unless you are outside, you'll want to use a tripod to prevent shaking.

Yeah and if you don't have a Macro lens, then you might have to sell that watch for the lens. They are very expensive.

davidm · 5 April 2009, 11:27 AM

Hi pirchryn. I'm gonna go ahead and assume you are using a point and shoot camera. Not a thing in the world wrong with them. I'll also assume you're aware that you can spend as much money as you would like on photo gear.
I used a PandS for years, but wanted to up grade my gear, so I did a lot of research on the subject. First of all, you don't need a lot of pixels, however, you do need high quality pixels. The easiest way to obtain good pixels, is to obtain a DSLR. Doesn't have to be a 6000 dollar monster, just a decent one.
Second thing, buy good glass. For the best watch pics, you need a good quality macro lens, 50MM up to 105MM. As fellow members also noted, a tripod is a must, along with a remote. Good lighting is also a must......if you step outside, it's free. Now, lets talk money.
How much would you like to spend? Me? I'd rather spend my dough on watches, and I'm sure you would too. I looked at a lot of cameras, and decided, after using it extensively, was a Nikon D70. This camera was discontinued a couple of years ago, so I bought mine used. Scooped it off the Bay, for 250 bucks.
Now, how about a lens? As bebot said, they ain't cheep. But, what I did was to take my camera, body only, to a few camera shops, and try what they had in stock. The first lens I chose was a Nikkor Micro 105MM. At over a grand, it was pricey. So, back to the Bay. Snagged one for 340 clams.
The 105 is great, but it won't let you get any closer than about 12 inches. Lets cut the focal length in half. Back to the camera shops. Next choice, 60MM Nikkor Micro. UH-OH..1100 bills. Back to the Bay, 2 Franklins and change.
This camera is only 6.1 megapixels, but I'm gonna show you a few pics, so you you can decide how many you really need. One more thing, a DSLR is also a P and S in the auto mode. As a matter of fact, it's the ultimate P and S at 6 frames per second. Good luck, and have a look at a few pics.......David

kyle L · 5 April 2009, 11:32 AM

I suggest a G9. Wonderful camera and not pricey. Heres a pic that has not been edited in anyway.

bodybump · 5 April 2009, 12:24 PM

get a camera with macro shot and a megapixel of 10 up..you get better pix...

JohnEaton · 5 April 2009, 12:32 PM

A little point and shoot Canon A650IS...

Just use a tripod, macro setting and a 2 second shutter delay

Oh and use manual focus

firefly4423 · 5 April 2009, 12:36 PM

the Nikon D40's are getting cheaper and make great cameras. Especially for close shots like you would a watch.

Yume-sama · 5 April 2009, 12:43 PM

As Kyle suggested the G9 is good, or its successor the G10 (which I just purchased). All of my photos are with the Canon 5D Mark II, though:

Obviously I wouldn't suggest buying a professional camera just to take watch pictures, but if you have photography as a hobby / business

A cheaper DSLR might also be a good investment, but different lenses can be annoying if you just want something quick and "good enough".

The G10 has a good mix of options for a smaller "point and shoot" camera that can help you get the best image quality.

kyle L · 5 April 2009, 01:00 PM

I agree with Yume-Sama, go with the Canon. One of my favorite pictures. If this 14 year old can take some ok pictures, so can you!

The GMT Kid · 5 April 2009, 05:08 PM

I use a Canon 5D Mark II. I shot this hand held on Friday night at ISO 1600 illuminated from my florescent desk lamp and ceiling lamp.

Don't try this at home kids. Always use a tripod and sensible lighting and always shoot RAW.

padi56 · 5 April 2009, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pirchryn

I just tried to take pics of my sub and they all came out horrible...any suggestions on the type of camera to use? I have a 8mp camera already

Well even a modern day cell phone today can take fantastic pictures,but like Ed said a tripod and good lighting is recommend.Its not the camera its the person using the camera, with the composition lighting etc thats what makes good pictures, the camera only helps a bit.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ght=sony+k800i

pirchryn · 5 April 2009, 11:14 PM

Thanks for all the help...Off to the bay to start scoping out camera's

kyle L · 5 April 2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pirchryn

Thanks for all the help...Off to the bay to start scoping out camera's

5 April 2009, 05:51 AM	#1
pirchryn "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: New Jersey Watch: Sub SS Posts: 110	Camera to take watch PICS... I just tried to take pics of my sub and they all came out horrible...any suggestions on the type of camera to use? I have a 8mp camera already

5 April 2009, 06:09 AM	#2
Rockrolex TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: God Location: Washington, D.C. Watch: What do you think? Posts: 37,940	Any decent digital camera with a macro setting should do. Unless you are outside, you'll want to use a tripod to prevent shaking. __________________ Despite the high cost of living, it's still very popular. *Tosser Cabinet Member* Official Member: 'Perpetual 30' Vegas International GTG 2016 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2017 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2018 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2019

5 April 2009, 12:24 PM	#6
bodybump ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 2024 SubLV41 Sponsor & Boutique Seller Join Date: Sep 2008 Real Name: Oscar Location: Florida Watch: Me!!! Posts: 23,233	get a camera with macro shot and a megapixel of 10 up..you get better pix... __________________

5 April 2009, 12:32 PM	#7
JohnEaton "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: John Eaton Location: Nome Alaska USA Watch: Red1680 metres 1st Posts: 1,869	A little point and shoot Canon A650IS... Just use a tripod, macro setting and a 2 second shutter delay Oh and use manual focus __________________ Perfection lies not in the organic whole but in the isolated fragment

5 April 2009, 11:27 AM	#4
davidm Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Real Name: David Moose Location: North Augusta S.C Watch: IWC Posts: 64	Hi pirchryn. I'm gonna go ahead and assume you are using a point and shoot camera. Not a thing in the world wrong with them. I'll also assume you're aware that you can spend as much money as you would like on photo gear. I used a PandS for years, but wanted to up grade my gear, so I did a lot of research on the subject. First of all, you don't need a lot of pixels, however, you do need high quality pixels. The easiest way to obtain good pixels, is to obtain a DSLR. Doesn't have to be a 6000 dollar monster, just a decent one. Second thing, buy good glass. For the best watch pics, you need a good quality macro lens, 50MM up to 105MM. As fellow members also noted, a tripod is a must, along with a remote. Good lighting is also a must......if you step outside, it's free. Now, lets talk money. How much would you like to spend? Me? I'd rather spend my dough on watches, and I'm sure you would too. I looked at a lot of cameras, and decided, after using it extensively, was a Nikon D70. This camera was discontinued a couple of years ago, so I bought mine used. Scooped it off the Bay, for 250 bucks. Now, how about a lens? As bebot said, they ain't cheep. But, what I did was to take my camera, body only, to a few camera shops, and try what they had in stock. The first lens I chose was a Nikkor Micro 105MM. At over a grand, it was pricey. So, back to the Bay. Snagged one for 340 clams. The 105 is great, but it won't let you get any closer than about 12 inches. Lets cut the focal length in half. Back to the camera shops. Next choice, 60MM Nikkor Micro. UH-OH..1100 bills. Back to the Bay, 2 Franklins and change. This camera is only 6.1 megapixels, but I'm gonna show you a few pics, so you you can decide how many you really need. One more thing, a DSLR is also a P and S in the auto mode. As a matter of fact, it's the ultimate P and S at 6 frames per second. Good luck, and have a look at a few pics.......David

5 April 2009, 11:32 AM	#5
kyle L "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: USA Watch: Rolex Explorer I Posts: 10,278	I suggest a G9. Wonderful camera and not pricey. Heres a pic that has not been edited in anyway.

5 April 2009, 12:36 PM	#8
firefly4423 Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: VA Posts: 35	the Nikon D40's are getting cheaper and make great cameras. Especially for close shots like you would a watch.

5 April 2009, 12:43 PM	#9
Yume-sama "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: CAN / SIN Watch: Plat. Masterpiece Posts: 1,959	As Kyle suggested the G9 is good, or its successor the G10 (which I just purchased). All of my photos are with the Canon 5D Mark II, though: Obviously I wouldn't suggest buying a professional camera just to take watch pictures, but if you have photography as a hobby / business A cheaper DSLR might also be a good investment, but different lenses can be annoying if you just want something quick and "good enough". The G10 has a good mix of options for a smaller "point and shoot" camera that can help you get the best image quality.

5 April 2009, 01:00 PM	#10
kyle L "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: USA Watch: Rolex Explorer I Posts: 10,278	I agree with Yume-Sama, go with the Canon. One of my favorite pictures. If this 14 year old can take some ok pictures, so can you!

5 April 2009, 11:14 PM	#13
pirchryn "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: New Jersey Watch: Sub SS Posts: 110	Thanks for all the help...Off to the bay to start scoping out camera's

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)