What cheap DSLR - mirrorless kit for plants / flowers

[kansalliskala]

Frend of mine asked she wanted to upgrade camera system. But my suggestions are at price range 700-1000 €. (any DSLR + macro lens).

Is there a cheaper alternative = under 500 €. D3200? Pen?
(I'd suggest Samsung but they are not cheap any more)

It should have macro capabilities, nice colors and maybe image stabilization?

[calvin83]

For handle walk around macro, get one of the M4/3 with in body stabilization + M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 60mm f2.8 Macro. The newer OM models with IBIS is even better.

[soikka]

Maybe the cheapest alternative:

Olympus E-PM1 (99€ new from verkkokauppa.com)
Some older macro lens around 50mm+adapter.

Easily below 200€ .

[visualopsins]

Must be dSLR? How about a mirrorless camera?

NEX-3 + Macro Lens, such as M42 Asahi S-M-C 1:4/100

@soikka: nice avatar!

[ManualFocus-G]

Entry level cameras are very well specified nowadays. Any of the following should be fine, but as always, it is recommended that the buyer tries them out first as all models have differing ergonomics:

Nikon D3200
Canon 650D
Sony a58
Pentax k500

Couple any of these with a plastic fantastic Cosina 100mm f/3.5 used macro lens and job done

[ManualFocus-G]

Should add that the Nikon wouldn't auto focus with the Cosina. Although I would suggest macro is better performed using manual focusing anyway

[cooltouch]

Sony's brand new mirrorless A3000 -- APS-C, 20mp and takes E lenses -- sells for about 400 bucks with lens. Image stabilization in the lenses. This will be a very attractive camera for folks who are ready to step up to an interchangeable lens camera. I believe this is the best deal out there right now for an ILC.

[ManualFocus-G]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I might be wrong, but the preview for the A3000 I read said it had a 230,000 dot LCD which was useless for focussing and isn't even sufficient for reviewing shots to check sharpness.

The choice of camera, I think, depends on what you are comfortable using. For instance, I have an EOS 450D which has a poor VF, small and dark, and the screen is almost useless for focusing, it's not matte enough. I bought a replacement cheap Chinese screen for it, and that is useless, it's the wrong thickness so focus is off, and it has scratched up so bad in the few months I've used it that I'm just going to put the original screen back in. By contrast, I just bought an old Nikon D50 to use for infrared and the vf is a lot bigger and brighter than the EOS and I can focus manual lenses with the standard screen. The Nikon also has a very useful digital rangefinder that illuminates a green led when you are in correct focus. An EOS will do that too, but only if you use a chipped adapter with manual lenses. In short, the older Nikon makes the younger Canon look like crap.

So my recommendation is try out the models you are interested in at a big store where they have them on display, then buy from a cheaper source online. Just to be sure the camera has a VF or EVF or screen you are happy with.

[cooltouch]

Good point on the A3000's display. Not only that, but I've just learned that the EVF is barely 200k. Well, Sony had to cut corners somewhere. My 4.5 year old Canon XS/1000D has a 230k pixel screen, which I guess I've gotten used to. I must disagree with your take on a 230k pixel screen. You most certainly can check images for sharpness. For me, it's perfectly adequate for checking to see if an image is in focus or not. So a 230k pixel screen is usuable, it just might be behind the curve a ways. I do believe though that Sony should have given the A3000 a higher rez EVF, since it isn't optical.

Your 450D is actually a slightly better model than mine, but I'm sure they share the same viewfinder and screen. I've gotten used to it. As it sits, it is very hard to use it for manual focusing, but I installed a viewfinder magnifier on mine that increases the size by a factor of 1.32. This really helps. To me, the biggest drawback to using any of these compact Canons, and that will include the more recent models, like the T1i through the T5i is, I'll bet they also use porro glass finders (= dim) and have screens that are useless for focusing lenses that are f/2.8 or faster. The screen is really the biggest issue. Only way to focus accurately is using Live View, which can sometimes be a PITA. So I wouldn't recommend any of the compact Canons for mf work. Minimum would be like a used 40D and up. I don't believe they have the same idiot finders and screens.

Yes, I am very tired of my XS - 1000D.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Good points Michael. Not my take on the A3000 screen, just what the previewer wrote, I'll wait and see what users report, but I think I'll pass on the A3000 and wait for a subsequent model with a higher res screen that's articulated, which I'm sure is coming.

I'm sick of my 450D too, if it had a better VF and focus screen it would be fine, but as it stands, it's a total PITA to use with manual lenses, so I end up just using my Nikkor 2.8/24 with it and guessing the distance to the subject. A 24mm lens stopped down has plenty of dof to cover up mistakes. The Chinese screen I bought for it is junk, I would take it out and shim it so focus was accurate if it wasn't for all the scratches on it and the really poor quality of the split-screen in the centre. When I saw how much bigger the mirror is in my 'new' D50 then looked through the VF I thought 'damn, Canon really are extracting the urine with their tiny, dark VF'. Just playing around, I can focus a manual lens on the D50 no problem, the screen is matte enough and it's nice and bright which makes a big difference.

There's only two reasons I keep the 450D - flash and the cable release, both of which are things my NEX doesn't do.

[kansalliskala]

Sony looks nice.
Can someone find closest focusing (ratio) somewhere?

[ManualFocus-G]

Guys trade your Canons in for a 30D. Still has a low res LCD but the viewfinder is much larger. A 30D can be had for peanuts now.

[kansalliskala]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I had a 10D, nice robust body, but the focus screen was useless for manual lenses, not matte so you couldn't tell what was in focus or not. Does the 30D have the same screen? It has the same body design I think. Probably you can replace the screen in a 30D, bu my bad experience of the Chinese replacements has put me off trying that again. Maybe the Katz-eyez ones are better?

I'm not Canon bashing, I don't care about brands, I just pick what works for me, regardless of who made it.

[fuzzywuzzy]

[bruzzo]

Not sure if your friend prefers DSLR or Mirrorless more, but I guess size is a big factor nowadays especially for the ladies. So I guess that would be one thing that your friend needs to make sure before making the decision.

If she decides mirrorless then others have already mentioned some great options to consider such as the Olympus PEN series, Sony NEX, Samsung NX series, Nikon 1s etc.

But if she prefers DSLRs then besides Nikon D3200 and Canon 100D that have already mentioned, I would also suggest the Pentax K-30 as well which is going pretty cheap now after the release of K-50 and K-500. I just bought one for roughly around $390 USD with the 18-55 WR kit at a local camera shop just because I think it's a good deal for a DSLR with optical viewfinder, SR stabilization, weather sealed, and a good kit lens to come with it. And I haven't had a DSLR for almost two years now after my D200 got dead pixels. I miss the optical viewfinder so much .

General public usually prefer Canons and Nikons over Pentax, well because it's not Canon or Nikon. But reasons I chose K-30 over D3200 and 100D are, D3200 has no motor and hence cannot use pre AF-S lenses, that's big for me. But for K-30 you can use Pentax lenses as old as Pentax pre M and A K mount lenses. And it has SR that the 100D doesn't. Not to mention, it's cheaper than both of them.

So if your friend wants a camera with big and bright optical viewfinder and has no brand preferences, then the K-30 is a good choice as well. If she's a manual focus maniac than perhaps the 100D or a3000 will be better but still, both do not have stabilization when using MF lenses, the a3000 does not give you an optical viewfinder and is not weather sealed, if those matter. Might not be fair to compare K-30 with 100D and a3000, but perhaps to D5200, 650D, and a65 instead but with the price cheaper than even entry levels it's pretty much a no brainer unless you already have a DSLR or you don't need/want one.

[buerokratiehasser]

For flowers unless you need a single daisy head to fill frame, also maybe consider P&S

Made fine images with WB500 and FZ4

Quality isn't technically up to film or DSLR, but with enough light (iso 100/80) it is usable, plus there is built-in DOF -

Well actually that can be a mixed blessing, since sometimes you want less DOF for artsy composition, and if the flower is big enough for the P&S the magnification is not large enough to cause the APS/FF camera problems like with 1:1 insects

[ManualFocus-G]

[cooltouch]

[SXR_Mark]

General thoughts
For close focus to macro work, auto-focus is not required. In fact manual focus is better because precise choice of the focus is critical for the best artistic impact.
For accurate MF, a good view finder (in the general sense) is essential.
Consider your personal needs:
My eyesight is not very good. Even with glasses, I find it a real strain to use the rear screen of any camera in bright light. Really precise manual focusing on a standard DSLR optical VF screen is also mostly beyond me. This is why I use the Oly OM-D with its superb built in EVF.

DSLR Focusing
DSLR has optical viewfinder and manual focus accuracy depends on size and brightness of VF and quality of VF screen. Low end DSLR are usually crap (small and dim). Some DSLR's have user changeable focusing screens, so you can change for one that makes MF easier. Others are either not changeable or need to be professionally done.
DSLR live view is on rear screen only. Gives the ability to magnify the image to get accurate focus. Usability will be limited by the quality of screen. Visibility will always be impaired in bright light (but you could use a screen shade)
DLSR Liveview is a bit clunky as mirror has to move back and forth

Mirrorless Focusing
Live view is the only option. Same comments for rear screen focusing as per DSLR, though screens on mirrorless tend to be a bit better (especially compared to low-end DSLR)
Some mirrorless have built in EVF or an add-on EVF can be purchased. This gives better visibility in bright light whilst having same advantage of being able to magnify the image. For me, EVF is the best option.

Micro Four Thirds System (my system)
Pros
Smaller sensor means a lower optical magnification is needed to fill the frame. This means a standard 50mm SLR lens with decent close focus will be very good for many flower shots.
The 4:3 aspect ratio is more natural for flowers than APS-C 3:2
(I think) all Olympus PENs have the option of adding an external EVF.
Compact cameras
Use virtually any lens
Widest range of dedicated lens of any mirrorless system
All Olympus m4/3 have in body IS
Cons
Smaller sensor means depth of field (DoF) is greater for a given lens at a given aperture, which makes subject isolation (shallow DoF) harder. However, in close focus/macro work, DoF is usually too small wide open and so this is a non-issue. In fact, it can be considered an advantage as it allows the lens to be used at bigger aperture whilst giving the required DoF, giving faster shutter speed and so reducing blur due to camera shake or movement of the flower.
Smaller sensor means smaller photo-sites for same total MP. This means lower dynamic range and worse noise performance at high ISO. However latest Olympus m4/3 are as good as Sony NEX (they share the same sensor technology). Also, high ISO performance is not relevant in this context (unlikely to use above ISO400). Lower dynamic range for the older m4/3 is an issue. It means extra care must be taken to avoid blowing highlights. This is not a major problem IMHO.
All but the latest have too slow a maximum shutter speed for shooting wide open with a fast lens shooting in bright light. You need to add a neutral density filter, which is a bit of a nuisance.

Other mirrorless systems
I cannot make specific comments. The important points to check are:
Live view magnification for precise focusing: optimum is about 5x
Max shutter speed and min ISO. Aim for ISO100 with 1/4000s (or ISO200 with 1/8000s) if you want to avoid using a ND filter in bright light with a lens at f2.
Option to add external EVF if the camera doesn't have one (and quality of add-on EVF)

DSLR
Modern low-end DSLR have poor optical VFs. Accurate MF may not be possible.
Consider an old DSLR. I have a Canon 40D and it is has a very good optical VF. The focus screen is also user changeable. I have never used it for flower work, but see no reason why it wouldn't work very well.
The 40D is 'only' 10MP. So what? 10MP is more than enough to print A4. People are obsessed by MP. There are many other factors that will outweigh MP in making a good picture (not least the person behind the camera).

Sony SLT system
I cannot make comments on this approach having no personal experience. I think comments for mirrorless are relevant

MF lenses
Pretty much any SLR 50mm lens will work well if they focus close. I like my Rollei Planar 50mm f1.8 and Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.4. The caveat is that all fast SLR lenses will "glow" wide open on digital and are best used one stop down.
For higher optical magnification, I find my Nikon Micro-Nikkor 50mm f2.8 to be superb. Sharp wide open and smooth bokeh even when stopped down.

Other thoughts
Where are you taking the pictures? In your garden or whilst out walking? In my garden, I can control the environment. I can shade the flowers if the light is too harsh. I can support the flowers if the wind is moving them. I can use a tripod and take the same shot at different apertures so I can pick the best. You can work with just a camera and lens, but i find I the ability control the environment adds an extra dimension. So, you may want to budget for tripods, umbrellas, stands etc.
Movement of the subject is probably the biggest problem with close focus and macro work. Even the slightest breeze will move a flower out of the frame or out of the depth of field. Technique will be as important as the camera you use.

[ManualFocus-G]

[scsambrook]

Not sure I can agree about the K10D screen not being any good for focusing - at least, not with longer focal lengths like 90mm upwards. The problem I've had recently is that even when the image is sharp on the screen, the resulting picture isn't sharp where it should be. I suspect it's a problem with my camera, because it wan't always like that. The difficulty began the first time I replaced the screen after cleaning it, when the error was suddeny plain to see. Then I had problems actually getting the screen back in (described in an earlier post) and now the screen is back in and - in theory - seated properly, I still get a small error. But the AF works perfectly.

I can actually hit the focus dead right most of the time with my K100D which, like Ian's Canon, has a penta-mirror/'porro-prism'set up and a 0.85x v/f. Well, I can with long lenses, not short ones.

Biased or not, i still think the Pentaxes are hard to beat for reasonably priced DSLRs.

[kds315*]

I use a Panasonix GH1 / GH2, so look at my work to see the results using various lenses - I guess they speak for themselves: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/ Small, light, adapts about any lens, very good colors, sufficient resolution, easy to use intuitively, full tilt/swing lifeview LCD screen (is very important for my work). No in body stabilization, that's a miss and no focus peak (I'm pretty good without though).

[mesinik]

you can get sony alfas with a:

moving mirror,
14MP,
in-body stabilizer
and live view

for 150 euros on ebay

the adapters for m42 are as cheap as for any other cameras