Why didn't the Canon Pro1 make your shortlist? You may have your reasons, but I'm very happy shooting macro with the Pro1. See my other post in this forum. The picture quality is outstanding and the super macro mode will do you fine for small insects.

The Sony is perfectly good at shooting Macro with a diopter, just like any other compact digital camera.  No visible distortion at all.

jacques,

I own an 828 and a diopter, and the images are distortion free.  Do you own one and a diopter, or are you talking about the built-in macro mode?

Hi Lucy,

In years past, the old Nikon CP series were untouched for macro capabilities, but in recent years things have changed a great deal in the design of digicams with a move toward faster and larger lenses with much more zoom than in years past.

Truthfully, for doing what you have in mind, none of the new digicams are really ideal unless you use accessory lenses. With the new longer zoom lenses, macro shots of tiny insects have become a much more specialized field.

Nearly any of the three cameras you mentioned plus the Canon Pro 1 all are capable of taking excellent macro shots with the right macro adapter lens. But more important than the small differences which reviewers found in such things as distortion levels and edge sharpness is the ability to actually get the shot in a poorly lit environment. Both subject movement and camera movement play into the scenario strongly. Of the cameras you mentioned, the Minolta A2 has the "cure" for one of these issues which is camera movement. With the stabilized lens, you will be able to get ambient light shots with a slower shutter speed meaning that half of the problem issue (camera movement/subject movement) is pretty well covered.

Either way, you will most likely want to invest in a ring flash for your camera. The ring flash will help greatly with shutter speed but even more importantly with being able to shoot at small apertures. You really need to shoot at F8 with any of these cameras to get the depth of field necessary for tight in shots of tiny insects.

Were I embarking on the journey you have chosen, my personal pick of the three for detailed close-up macro work would be the Minolta A2 because of the image stabilization.

One of the finest macro photographers frequenting the forums today is a nice chap from New Zealand who goes by the handle of NZMacro. Danny has a unique ability to wrest the absolute maximum from any camera he uses for close-up detailed work, and his present tool of choice is the little Panasonic FZ10 with which he gets fantastic macros. You may want to go over to Phil Askey's forum and put out a query and get some advice from Danny. Not so much from the standpoint of which camera to buy, but more from the "how to improve" one's chances for successfully shooting the little critters.

Best regards,

Lin

Hi Lucy

I also use the F828 with a close-up lens, and it works great:



This guy is tiny - must be close to your 2mm size. Perhaps you can tell me what it's called, lol.

Mike

Hi, I am deciding to purchase Coolpix 8700, Sony DSC-F828 or Minolta A2.
But except standard photography, I am gonna do a lot of macro pictures. I am an entomologist and I would like to take many pics of small (10 mm) insects - even in forest environment (with flesh). Could sb. recommend me which of those cameras is best for this purpose. Thank you for help
Lucy

I think the Telephoto Macro of the A2 will probably help - it allows you to take macros at a longer distance from your subject. These macros are very sharp, and show little to no distortion. You can add a good close up lens onto the A2 and get very good macros. (I have a +8 close up lens for my Dimage 7i, which uses the same lens, and can fill the frame with a dime or small postage stamp and make out small details in the corners of the frame.)

The Nikon covers a smaller area at its best macro, but has more distortion and/or softness near the edge of the frame.

The Sony has VERY bad barrel distortion at its best macro, so it is probably not a good choice for this.

These are the words of a man who has never shot macro with said camera.

The 828 has unbearable distorion when shot in the macro ranges.  This is even more profound than the PF and noise issues.  This comes from shooting far too many frames through one.

I would look into the Olympus 8080.  That camera seems able to produce a quality image.  I've regretted the money I spent on my Sony 828 almost since day one;  don't make the same mistake I'm living with.

Hi Jacques,

Matthew probably shoots more frames with the F828 in a week than you have in your entire life :-)

Seriously, don't give bad advice. If you don't like the F828, then simply say so but please don't shroud your contempt for the instrument with thinly veiled objectivism.

Here's a typical macro shot with my F828 which I find very suitable for professional prints - no noise, no distortion no problems with PF. Follow the link if you wish to the full sized image and examine it with a fine toothed comb - it stands the scrutiny and makes a beautiful 16x20 print.

Lin


http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/bigturtle.jpg

Hi Lin

What a super pic of the turtle. How did you light it? With a ring flash?

Simon

Hi Simon,

Just the built-in-flash on low power in a dark environment with a small parabolic reflector.

Best regards,

Lin