Looking to get a camera, but not sure what

[Skorch]

Hi, I've been thinking of getting a new/used camera in the next couple of months, possibly a dslr. But there are so many options that I don't know where to start. I will be using this mainly for toy photography as a hobby and likely a mix of indoor and outdoor use. For a budget, I'm thinking about $300-$400 CAD.

I was reading around on here and saw some people mention the nikon d3100 and d3200 are good entry models, and are within my price range. But I'm not sure if they would really suit my needs.

So I'm wondering what would I need to do to get a depth of field like in these photos? The figures are pretty small at just under 4 inches tall.
Photo 1
Photo 2
Photo 3

 

[photo1x1.com]

Hi and welcome to the forums.
In regard to the linked images: what you need is a macro lens. Usually with these close up shots the depth of field is really narrow and you usually increase it by closing the aperture (choosing a higher aperture number) because it is too narrow.
The shots in the link are very nice, but I don´t think they look like that out of camera. They seem to be processed. I can´t really tell what it is - maybe a technique of so called focus stacking, or a special photoshop technique that draws some detail in like a drawing.
Consider asking the creator about focal lengths used - I found him/her on instagram: ↬ Chibi ✽ MaCo ❣ (@chibi.maco) • Instagram photos and videos

and the other one seems to be this one: Alix Real

 

[Skorch]

Thank you. I will ask the creators how they did that. And I take it macro lenses are expensive?

 

[photo1x1.com]

Thank you. I will ask the creators how they did that. And I take it macro lenses are expensive?

Well yes, and no .
Try to find a used macro lens. However, you could also start with the lens you buy with your camera and see where that gets you. You can always crop the image to get more macro feeling. Depending on where you want to publish your shots, a width of 800px could be enough - a lot of room for cropping and getting an understanding of photography before considering new lenses.

 

[photo1x1.com]

Oh yes, and if you decide on getting a macro lens before you buy the camera, check out what lenses for what prices are easily available. Other manufacturers might have cheaper lenses than nikon. I once owned a canon 50mm f2.5 macro. While it only has a magnification of 1:2 (meaning that a subject 1cm in size can only be projected 1/2 the size - so 0,5cm on the sensor), it had exceptional quality for the price.

 

[goodguy]

Get the Nikon D3300, its 449$ (CAD) at the moment in best buy.

 

[Skorch]

I contacted all 3 people and have heard back from 2 of them so far, plus one other I asked. And it sounds like a macro lens may not be necessary right away. Maybe a telephoto lens would be a good start?

I'll post the replies I got under spoilers.

Spoiler

Photo 1
Hi! The aperture on that photo was f/5.6 and the focal distance 105mm. I often use these settings, I hope it helps. The rest was just the distance between all stuff. No macro lens.

Photo 2
I used f/5.0, zoom digital, ISO100. I usually set low f-number to produce a very shallow depth of field. No macro lens.

And another person I asked.
Photo 4
I'm using a 90mm lens with f/4 aperture. It's a macro lens. Enough to get the depth of field while maintaining the creamy bokeh. Background is about 3m away. I'm about 0.5m away from the subject.

 

[Overread]

Photo 2 - sounds like the person is using a point and shoot or bridge camera. They are correct, a smaller f number (bigger aperture) does mean a smaller depth of field; but on bridge/point and shoot type cameras (which tend to have features such as digital zoom) the depth of field, even at small f numbers, tends to be very big as a result of the smaller sensors that they have.

Thus a DSLR is the right choice for this kind of work. Furthermore any DSLR will do this kind of photography, even entry level DSLRs. The lens and the lighting are more critical than the camera behind it all (that's not to say teh camera isn't important, just that in this kind of work its at the lower end of the scale).


A macro lens can be easier to use for this kind of work, though, guessing the size of the models, you could easily get away with a regular lens as well. Indeed a telephoto lens would do this kind of work if positioned correctly. So you might not need a macro lens - plus a telephoto shooting from further away might well make lighting the scene easier.

So you might well want to start simply with a basic setup.
1) DSLR with standard kit lens
2) A custom made light box/tent (google it you can find loads of guides - at its simplest a box with the sides cut away and replaced with white paper - then shine two lights - one either side - through the paper - with your scene set within).

That will give you a start, from there you can start to see if you need a macro; if you need flashes or more light modifications and control etc...