Good camera for shooting closeups

[memory]

I am looking for a point and shoot camera that takes really clear closeup pics. I want to be able to shoot it a couple inches away or less. I am looking to spend between $100 and $150. I don't mind buying used. I don't have a brand preference.

I am currently using a Kodak c340 and it does not a good job at all.

How well would a Canon Powershot a630 do? I found a used one online for $98 on ebay. Are they still making these cameras? I can not find too many online.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

I would go with something like a Canon ELPH 100HS. It retails for like $150-$170, but it is on sale pretty often for $125 or so at the major retailers (Target, Staples, etc.). I think I have even seen it as low as $109. It has a minimum focus distance of 3cm (a little over an inch) in macro mode. I have a similar older model (Canon SD780IS) and I have been pleased with how close it can focus.

Here is a sample close-up photo taken with the 100HS:

Canon ELPH 100 HS / IXUS 115 HS sample image by Cameralabs, on Flickr

Now one problem with getting really close is the lighting. The camera's built-in flash usually cannot illuminate the subject properly when the camera is so close to the subject. So you have to provide some outside lighting unless you are in a brightly lit area. Desk lamps with flexible necks are usually a good solution if you are doing a lot of close-up work. You usually want to try to get the light in from at least 2 sides of the subject for even illumination.

I just looked up the specs for your Kodak c340. What a horrible, horrible camera. Even for 2005 it was a pretty poor performer. Pretty much any modern P&S will be heads and shoulders above that one. Note: Please don't buy another Kodak. In the P&S realm, I prefer Canon and Panasonic, then Nikon.

Canon Powershot A630 was released in 2008. Pretty old in camera terms. I would definitely look for a new digicam. Go to Target and play with them. Take a couple of sample photos at the distances you're looking at. The Canon ELPH 100HS will be there. I think there's a Nikon in the same price range, the Coolpix 4100 or something. It should be pretty similar in performance overall, although I see from its spec sheet that it only focuses as close as 10cm (4 inches) in macro mode.

 

[jszklany]

I would go with Canon's "G" series. If you look through some of the older models you can get a feel for what they are capable of. Ebay has this G7 for example. If you scroll down and look at the Lens system, you'll see

Focal Length Range 7mm - 44mm
Macro Focus Range 1-50cm

that says that in macro mode the minimum focus range is only 1cm. Lots of cameras have a macro setting, you may want to check out yours before you buy anything else. slashbinslashbash was right about the lighting as well. make sure that you have plenty of it.

 

[memory]

I would go with Canon's "G" series. If you look through some of the older models you can get a feel for what they are capable of. Ebay has this G7 for example. If you scroll down and look at the Lens system, you'll see

Focal Length Range 7mm - 44mm
Macro Focus Range 1-50cm

that says that in macro mode the minimum focus range is only 1cm. Lots of cameras have a macro setting, you may want to check out yours before you buy anything else. slashbinslashbash was right about the lighting as well. make sure that you have plenty of it.

I will look into the G series by Canon.

The camera I have now does have a macro mode but I was unable to get a clear pic of what I wanted. Honestly I am not a photographer by any means so it could have been bad lighting or who knows what else.

I do not take pics as a hobby. I just use a camera for vacations and stuff around the house like farm equipment and whatever else I need to take a pic of.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Hey I found someone on the forums selling a camera that's right up your alley for $46 shipped. It is a Canon Powershot SD-700 (which is not the one that I own; sorry, I mis-remembered the model number in my earlier post; what I have is an SD-760, and before that we had an SD-600). The SD line changed into the ELPH line about a year ago.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2214960

It is as good or better than the A630 you mentioned earlier. The A630 would be fine too, but not for $98. If you're spending that much, you may as well buy new and not take the crapshoot of somebody mistreating their older camera. You can find plenty of new cameras for around $100. Going the used route, you can find some great stuff for under $50 such as the one linked. This page has an example macro photo from the SD700:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD700/SD700A4.HTM

The Canon G series, recommended by jszklany is a great line of cameras, and if you can find one in good shape that meets your budget, you can't go wrong there either. But they are generally pricier to begin with, so you should find the prices are higher, even used.

 

[memory]

I am considering the Canon Powershot SD-700.

Since I am not a professional photographer and do not use the camera that much, do you think I would be better off buying a expensive used camera like the one above or buying a new $100 to $150 camera? I do not need professional results.

How does the Canon Powershot SD-700 and the Canon ELPH 100HS compare? Out of the two, which has better in closeups? I can get a Canon ELPH on ebay for $134 and that comes with an 8gb card, battery, usb card reader, case, tripod, and cleaning cloth.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

It really is a toss-up. The SD700 is 6 megapixel and the newer ELPH 100 is 12 megapixel. That sounds like a big difference, but for most purposes, the difference between the two is minimal. The lenses are about the same, although the ELPH 100 will be able to zoom out to a wider angle than the SD700, which would be useful for general day-to-day photography. But they occupy pretty much the same product category... one is just a few years newer. Image sensor and image processing improvements have continually gotten better during that time, so overall I would expect better results from the newer camera; however, for your needs, I don't know if there would be much of a difference. It really comes down to how much you want to spend. For under $50, the SD700 is a great buy. If you want to spend $125 or so, the ELPH 100 will produce great photos -- definitely better photos than the SD700 -- but maybe not enough difference for you to really tell, or for it to be worth paying 2.5x the SD700.

That being said, $125 is still pretty cheap, and the ELPH 100 has a nice solid feel, and it is appreciably smaller than the SD700. It is smaller than, say, an iPhone, or most mens' wallets. The SD700 is in the "small" category too, but it is definitely a bit chunkier. I think the SD700 would be thicker than an iPhone, while the ELPH 100 is about the same thickness or thinner.

The G7 would be substantially larger than either. Most G-series cameras will fit in a larger pocket like a jacket pocket, but they will never slide into a front jeans pocket like the SD/ELPH lineup.

Any of these (whether an older, more expensive one, or a newer, cheaper one) will not be "professional" per se but they will be leagues above the camera that you have now. They will all be about the same in terms of ease of use, etc. The G7 might give you a little better photos, but at the expense of some size and weight.

I really would recommend that you go to Target, Walmart, Staples, Office Depot, Sam's Club, what have you... they all carry the ELPH 100. Hold it in your hands, take a couple of photos with it, put it into macro mode and see if it focuses close enough for your needs. The SD700 would be pretty much the same, only a little bigger, and not quite as capable when it comes to the photos.

It actually looks like the SD700 can focus closer: Canon states 0.79 inches close focus distance. That is pretty remarkable. The ELPH 100 is 1.2 inches. So you can get close-up photos about 1/2 inch closer with the SD700 than with the ELPH 100.

 

[memory]

I went ahead and bought the Canon ELPH 100HS for $134 on ebay. It comes with an 8gb card, usb card reader, tripod, cleaning kit, case, and battery.

I went to Best Buy to check them out and I think I will be happy with my purchase. I looked at the cameras under $100 and I could not get a clear closeup pic no matter which brand I tried.

What is the average lifespan of a camera if it is well taken care of?

 

[slashbinslashbash]

No reason why it shouldn't last indefinitely. There are mechanical bits, and there are computer bits. The computer bits are just like all computers. Maybe the LCD could be broken, or the backlight could go out. The image sensor itself is a silicon chip fabricated like a CPU. The mechanical bits all have to do with the lens, zooming and focusing. Also the various buttons and other controls. The mechanical parts are obviously more prone to failure than the computer parts.

I have had 2 Canon SDs... (predecessor to the ELPH line) an SD-600 and an SD-780. The SD-600 was dropped a few too many times, so now the slider switch on the back that turns it from view mode to photo mode will not go to photo mode (although it will go to video mode). Other than that, it works. It lasted about 3 years before I bought the 780 to replace it. The SD-780 was also dropped a few too many times, so its exterior casing is visibly splitting along the bottom, and the zoom control on top is kind of sticky and hard to get precise. Other than that, it works. So they can last a while even if they are not taken very good care of.

I still have a digicam (Nikon Coolpix 3500) that's 8 years old.... it needs a replacement battery, but AFAIK it still works fine. I actually bought it used on eBay sometime in 2005 or 2006. It's in a drawer somewhere.