Some problems I can't fix.

[NikonDude]

2 pictures of coins I took.

The 1st one looks "Washed out". Even though it took well in the preview.

The 2nd one looks like it's washed out near the bottom.

I was using auto mode with macro selected. I have 3 cool white CFL's in my ceiling lamp. No other camera before has experienced this problem.

 

[480sparky]

1/30 sec is awful slow for hand-held shots. F/2.8 doesn't give you much depth of field, either.

The proper fix would be an inexpensive flash with a reflector.

 

[KmH]

No other camera before has experienced this problem.

The problem is not the camera. You have unrealistic, naive expectations. The camera is a machine, and not a very smart machine at that. Auto mode will almost always have issues of one sort or another.

You need to have a good understanding of the technical capabilities, and limits, your camera has.

Read the camera user's manual.

Again, the photographer's knowledge and skill has more to do with image quality than the hardware.

 

[cgipson1]

Macro scene modes won't give you true macro capability... as I assume you know.

Auto sucks almost always.

You need more DOF.. smaller aperture ( as Sparky mentioned ).

Better lighting (diffused side lighting or diffused top/side lighting) will bring out more detail by producing more shadow / contrast.. without burn out.

 

[Netskimmer]

Why does he need more DOF? His subject is the surface of a coin, it doesn't get much thinner than that.

Why hold them in your hand? Why not put them on a stable, flat surface. It would eliminate movement and your background wouldn't be so distracting.

 

[analog.universe]

Shooting a flat surface with a high quality planar lens will not require any more depth of field. However, the lens on that point and shoot likely experiences field curvature, and additionally is almost certainly sharper stopped down a bit than shot wide open.

So yeah, try and put the camera and coin both on stable surfaces. Light from the side, ideally with flash. Stop down to f/5.6 or f/8...

 

[cgipson1]

Why does he need more DOF? His subject is the surface of a coin, it doesn't get much thinner than that.

Why hold them in your hand? Why not put them on a stable, flat surface. It would eliminate movement and your background wouldn't be so distracting.

Only because he missed focus on the first shot... 2.8 is adequate, if the focus is dead on but not for MACRO.... at macro distances, DOF is paper thin.

 

[480sparky]

Why does he need more DOF? His subject is the surface of a coin, it doesn't get much thinner than that.

Why hold them in your hand? Why not put them on a stable, flat surface. It would eliminate movement and your background wouldn't be so distracting.

It's very difficult to get the plane of a coin and the plane of a camera parallel on both axes when you're hold both in opposite hands.

 

[Netskimmer]

Why does he need more DOF? His subject is the surface of a coin, it doesn't get much thinner than that.

Why hold them in your hand? Why not put them on a stable, flat surface. It would eliminate movement and your background wouldn't be so distracting.

It's very difficult to get the plane of a coin and the plane of a camera parallel on both axes when you're hold both in opposite hands.

This was my thought exactly, put the camera on a stable surface (preferably a good tripod) and put the coin on a stable surface.