DSLR or mirrorless with a zoom lens. You don’t need to swap lenses in the field unless you are moving from shooting birds at a distance, to shooting macro shots of insects. You can do both, for doc shots, with something that zooms to 200-300mm. Also why would you assume you need to manually focus with a DSLR? Set up backbutton focus and you can move from Auto to manual quickly if you need to. I see some pretty good suggestions on affordable DSLR/lens combos in the comments. You shouldn’t have a problem coming up with something that will work for you. Good luck with the upgrade.
I have the same Canon point and shoot as you. I’ve gotten some good close up shots if I stand farther away from the subject (typically flowers) and zoom in on it from there since it won’t focus from close up. LOL
ohhhhh
I’ve been using the Nikon P950 bridge camera for a few weeks now and have been pretty impressed with it. For my nature photos, I set it to the bird mode, and it is very easy to use. 83x zoom and pictures look quite nice in my opinion. It is also quite portable. I can do a couple miles of trail without feeling like carrying it is to much of a hassle.
For close-up and macro I just whip out my phone. I got a 15x macro clip on lens for it that can really get in on the smaller insects.
2 Likes
I also use an iPhone11 with much success but for close-ups on the small critters, not so good. I purchased a x12 macro clip-on lens for the tiny stuff. Sure, it is tedious to clip-on, clip-off but for $25, it suits me fine…as long as subject has not already fled!
4 Likes
I second @egordon88’s and @markkjames’ suggestion regarding a smartphone, especially when looking at workflow: No need to transfer files to computer, sync GPS location, crop photos, organize them, and upload to website, that’s all built into the iNat App (I use Android on Pixel 4a).
Cons of this approach:
- 2-3x more photos needed when autofocus isn’t focusing on the right subject
- Smartphone cameras do poorly with moving objects like birds or insects
- Not enough resolution for large prints
Examples of good and bad photos I’ve taken:
- Black Nightshade (Solanum nigrum) - Very happy with focus, color, background
- Smallseed Sandmat (Euphorbia polycarpa) - Couldn’t get it to focus on the stem in any of the shots
I look at cameras a bit like compact cars vs. pickup trucks where both are used 95% of the time to get a person to and from work on normal roads… yet people buy the pickup truck for that 5% of the time where the truck is used for something else, like hauling or towing (US perspective).
If you’ve explored the existing features of your camera to the point that advanced options make enough sense and it feels like you’re starting to need that 5% functionality, upgrade! If you’re on the fence and are okay with missing out on some observations, maybe the one you have now is good enough.
Lastly, macro photography is hard because it pushes the equipment to less-than-ideal operating conditions: By zooming in, less light is focused on the sensor so image quality suffers. One trick I’ve seen people use is to shine a bright flashlight onto the subject when doing macro photography, maybe worth trying?
The Olympus Tough TG-6 should be your go-to
Compact. Rugged. GPS. Great features.
It is standard issue for wildlife support staff at my current place of work. Shame I had to return it because I am a 1-camera-at-a-time photographer. Presently married to a 5yo Nikon D750 and a 4K capable smartphone. Needless to say that I also own a DSLR macro lens which is gathering dust.
Here’s a little secret - my best lepidoptera/macro shots were taken on a series of compact cameras - Sony Cybershot.
3 Likes
I use a Canon EOS 20 D probably not the best camera to be using but I get some pretty good photos. And yup some of my best macro/not macro shots were taken on compacts.
Just my personal taste, but I do not like compacts (Probably got sick of them).
I think compacts can come in handy when you don’t want to lug around a big camera. I mean this photo I got from a old compact.
2 Likes
The Cybershot H300 is my current knock-around camera. Much as I like it, it does have some shortcomings; under certain circumstances, it will argue wth me about what I’m really trying to photograph – usually in macro, or when the batteries are getting low. At that point, I start talking to the silly thing, and filling in its responses.
Me, trying to snap a damselfly: “Focus on the bug, not the plant.”
Camera: “Awww, c’mon; isn’t that the most amazing Chenopodium you’ve ever seen?”
That being said, it’s been a great camera for years, and I’ve gotten lots of fantastic shots out of it. Totally not the camera’s fault that I’m looking at some of the newer superzooms wth lust in my heart. Honestly, I’d probably go with a DSLR or mirrorless body if I could use all of the lenses that I inherited along with my uncle’s 60s Pentax SLR. Film is almost impossible to source (and the camera itself weighs a ton), but I’ve taken detailed lunar eclipse shots with the telephoto lens.
1 Like
Don’t the lenses fit current Pentax DSLRs?
So far as I can tell, they don’t. Screw mount versus bayonet mount. Also, the sensors in digital cameras have glass in front of them, but film didn’t. This changes the path of light to the sensor, and leads to image degradation. That’s is one of the main reasons that I’ve stuck with bridge cameras all this time; I don’t have to change lenses, and I don’t have to buy lenses.
Testament to “it’s not the camera, it’s the photographer”
Welcome!
Hilarious. Good review for Sony Cybershot.
I’m looking to own a Sony Alpha A6600, if not A7III or IV.
I think A6600 provides decent balance between portability and quality work.
You might be surprised how desired those older lenses are. I’m aiming to get a Pentax 55mm f/1.8 in the M42 mount, and just use an adapter to my R5. Just haven’t decided if I want to chance the radioactive one or the models just before or after.
I thought I would add some of my (albeit, limited) iNat photo experience (FWIW).
I started out with tripod, zoom, closeup lens, DSLR (Alpha 6000) and lugged all that about the trails for the first few weeks.
What I soon discovered (other than the fact that I’m out of shape) is that very few things will actually wait while you set up a tripod, and/or change a lens (or adjust a flash) and I was missing a lot of shots. And nervous whenever it looked like rain.
Then I came to the forum and started to read about everyone else’s approach and the Olympus TG line kept popping up. Shortly after, I was able to pick up a used one for 150 and in a week I was absolutely hooked.
No, it may not have the photographic ‘control’ of a DSLR, or the full resolution, or the zoom of even a good bridge camera but by gum – it’s portable! And the fact that it did stack processing for macro work and was able to achieve usable ID shots down to a 1mm range made a world of difference to shot opportunities. Not to mention my back, legs, and weather concerns.
The other big thing about the TG? ISO range. I don’t use a flash (yet) with the TG and because I can crank it to 10000 ISO I can still shoot at high enough shutter speed as to minimize shots shaken to blur for extreme closeups, in the shade. What does that mean if the high ISO is full of grain? That’s another thing that sold the camera to me – it’s supported by DxO’s PureRaw RAW image cleaner-upper, and I already owned PureRaw which I use with my Sony.
And the number of times I have scored a hit by reaching in through a bunch of branches without getting a flash or flash diffuser snagged, or lens scaring things away – it just works really well for quick and easy opportunities. And it’s so small, I now take it with me, virtually everywhere. The fact that it looks like a little automatic that most thieves wouldn’t even bother glancing at is also a bonus.
The biggest con (besides the f-stop con) for me is the problem of the ‘purple blob’ which happens when the zoom is used under certain lighting conditions. But I’m learning to get around that – most of the time.
BUT, wouldn’t it be nice to have just ONE camera that you could use for super macros AND also use for decent telephoto zooms when that bird or butterfly lands near?
Hmm. So, recently I decided to look into the Raynox clip-on macro lens and plopped down 90 bucks for a model 250. Which I then tried out on a whole bunch of cameras I have kicking about.
I was very impressed and just the other day, I set out with my ancient Nikon Coolpix L820 (30x zoom), with an adapter over the lens to clip the Raynox on, and headed for a trail.
The trail I chose was mostly meadow and I knew that the grasshoppers and butterflies would be about. I was not disappointed. Without the Raynox on, it was strictly a bird and butterfly zoom machine, which I had used for such before. But, when I could get closer, on goes the Raynox and in not much more time than the TG took to focus, I was landing a whole bunch of nice shots.
So if I had to narrow it down to one lightweight, camera/lens combo to use for both zooms and macro – I’d go with the bridge camera/Raynox combo. I bought the Coolpix last year for 50. The extension adapter cost another 10. The Raynox, another 90. So for $150, I got a lot of flexible nature photo power.
Now as I still probably take 80% of my walks for macro subjects only, I’m very happy to keep ‘lugging’ the little TG along. It’s so little fuss, and it delivers.
I have also tried an extension tube on my Sony A6000 with just the standard kit lens (16-50mm) and that probably produces the best detail and gives me the most control of all my macro options. And even much higher ISOs to play with. And still fairly light. But if I want to travel light and keep a zoom on hand… I would prefer to have the Coolpix/Raynox combo rather than lug my Sony zoom lens with me.
I realize that a lot of my choices were built around a dependence on having a good high ISO-denoiser app to keep things flash-free. But again, so often it comes down to quick decisions and a short setup. And the software can be used for lots of camera bodies and by making the camera’s high ISO range actually work much better, it’s like upgrading all your lens a stop or two. Worth it, IMO.
Unlimited funds? I think I would go for a Laowa 60 or 100 macro and loose a lot of sleep about dropping it or getting rained on.
I like not having to overworry about things like wet, ruined, expensive cameras. And I want to spend as much as my time searching for shots as possible. Heck, the number of ‘ones that got away’ fishing stories pale in comparison to the frequency such things happen with naturalist safaris.
Anyhow, for my skill level and budget, I’m very pleased with this setup.
1 Like
If you want to use DSLR, you can’t just change lenses in the field ten times a day, it will get you matrix covered in dust. So, if you think about only using it for close-ups, that’s better, macro lens is better than TG or phone, but you can’t always have it with you, so having a smartphone or TG in a regular life settings and DSLR for special occasians would give you the best results in quality and number of pics you can make.
But honestly I don’t know why you really need that when you have PowerShot, ten years ago with Canon PowerShot SX30 IS I didn’t have big problems with close shots, as yours should be even better, TG won’t be a huge upgrade.
2 Likes
I think what sometimes happens is there’s not a lot hard definition of ‘macro’, either in users or manufacturers. The mag ‘X’ number is probably the most useful, but even then-- what’s the focus range or f-stop range? Also, where does ‘macro’ become ‘super-macro’.
A lot of people starting into this see shots that are taken with expensive dedicated macro lenses and focus racks, with all the details in the world created by focus stacking and say to themselves, “Yeah, that’s what I want. Macro detail like that!”
For iNat work, you often have to leave the super detail obsession behind and focus on getting the ID features, which are definitely doable with almost any PowerShot or other good bridge cam with a decent macro lens. One camera, 90% of your shots. You want more, save up for a Raynox adapter maybe.
You want weatherproof? TG line. Or, what about buying some decent but old bridge cam for a fraction of the price and if it gets ruined by a water drop of downpour-- just get another?
There’s some great old used stuff if you look around. Not as high rez or speedy or featured maybe, but hey, I still love my $50 Coolpix L820 for a light, one cam solution.
1 Like
Technically speaking I think close-up is 1:>1, macro is 1:1 and ultra macro is >1:1.
2 Likes