Canon G VS Nikon CoolPix

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by oceaneyes, Sep 20, 2007.

  1. oceaneyes

    oceaneyes TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Hi everyone, I posted recently on the beginners board about my interest in getting into DSLR photography, however, I have not been able to find a set up that would be within my budget and still suit my needs.

    I have acquired an interest in macrophotography and macro lenses tend to run more than I am willing to pay right now (when you consider the base cost of a camera and all the "necessary" accessors). So, I have begun researching advanced point and shoot. However, I am taking a trip to Yosemite tomorrow and I would like to be able to make my decision by the end of this afternoon. So far, I am looking at the Canon PowerShot G9 (possibly the G7, but it doesn't support RAW and I would prefer that any camera I get take pictures in RAW incase I do get into manual post-processing). I am also looking into the Nikon Coolpix series (probably the newest, 5100). I would just go with the Canon at this point because it suits my needs, has a macro mode, has decent zoom capabilities, and all that...but, I read online somewhere that the Nikon Coolpix series are well-known as being the best for macro photography and, all other things being equal, this would definitely be the deciding factor for me.

    My question is...are all other things equal? Does anyone have any strong fact-based opinions regarding the G9 vs. Coolpix 5100? I would do most of this research myself, but at this point considering that I have much to do to prepare for my trip, I think I am justified in requesting some help :). Mainly, I'm just looking for opinions w/ experience rather than basing my decision on something I read in a review of the Nikon and the tech specs I've discovered online. for instance, the Canon is listed as having a 1 cm minimum macro focal length on dpreview.com and the Nikon is listed as having 4 cm minimum focal length...but who's to say having a shorter focal length is what matters? not me.

    I am also open to other suggestions for macro-capable point-and-shoot cameras. I'm sure there are some that have evaded my research thus far.

    Any help will be greatly appreciated :).
     
  2. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,822
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Check your wording...I may be wrong, I think that when you say
    you may be referring to the minimum macro focus distance...rather than the minimum focal length. This may make a difference in macro shooting...because the closer you can get to the subject, while still being able to focus, the more magnified the subject will be.

    That being said, 4cm is pretty darn close, as it is...and 1cm may be so close that the lens is blocking any light from hitting the subject.
     
  3. oceaneyes

    oceaneyes TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    ha, I thought I was maybe getting that mixed up thanks for point it out...I need to get my photography terms down.
     

Share This Page