I've stuck this under 'Aquarium Chat', as I feel in a Forum context, Camera's have become an Aquarium Tool.

Funkyj1313 wrote:

I will work on getting better pics and taking better pics. I used to do photography as a hobby when I was younger. After my Pentax K1000 got stolen, it kinda made me bitter because I loved that camera. The digi camera is really new to me. Not being able to have all the settings that Pentax had, its a little difficult to judge aperature, exposure, focus and such.

Maybe we need a Camera topic under Tank Chat, since they get mentioned so often, and seem to be a big part of serious Aquarium keeping these days. I know what you mean on both counts. I was very upset to lose my old Fujica (pre-electronic) SLR. And these new pocket digitals, as incredibly handy as they are, drive me nuts with their focusing, and DoF. I have a film SLR, but I don’t think I’d ever go back to film for Aquarium pictures. I’m eying off a digital SLR at the moment…

Actually while this topic is around can someone give me some tips on a decent digicam that doesn't cost the earth and will let me take pics of my fish. It doesn't matter how I try my camera is great for quick shots of the kids and stuff like that but put a tank in front of it and they come out too dark, over exposed, grainy or blurred to hell. I want to take some pictures of my fish to show the world, please help.

Be gentle as well, complete camera newb here, I know enough about computers for that part to not fuss me but one that I can press a button or 2 to take nice piccies of my fish would be great .

Check your camera for a flower icon. This is to take close up pics (not further than 2 feet). I can tell which pics I forgot to switch it to close ups, as they are blurry and grainy as you said yours were.

i am thinking of writing a book on how to take decent photographs that any1 could understand, i recon i can do it roughtly 5 easy steps.

i wont do it just now, but one comment i can make is that all cameras have limitations and part of the trick is to use the camera within these limitations.

there are some good 4-8 mega pixel cameras available from about £150. kodak do a nice SLR 6 mega pixel camera which is about £150 last time i looked.

SLR cameras allow u to look through the lens and not a view finder. the beauty of this is what u see is what u get, view finder cameras are not as easy to frame up and ur images tend to get cropped badly, missing heads etc.

funky is correct, if u r taking a close up shot u need to put ur cam to 'macro' setting if it has one, ie click it to the 'little flower' if possible.

if ur shots are under and over exposed then u probably have a set flash that can only take pics from about 5-7 feet, more or less distance from the cam and ur pics will be too light or too dark.

general tips. buy a camera that has a macro setting, so u can take close up pics. buy a camera that has an auto exposure, as this will usualy have a variable flash too and you will be able to take pics at closer or further away than a set flash camera and help u get the correct exposure, and if possible get an SLR camera too, it will help with framing and composition. plus most SLR cameras allow u to change the lenses, which means u can buy other lenses, like a telephoto or a wide angle. this allows u to take a better range of pics than a fixed lens does.

if anyone has specific questions, pls post them and i will do my best to answer them. i am wary of posting the details of my book idea here tho incase any1 steals it

Think you hit the problem bang on there with the under/over exposed problems. Will shop around for a nice cheap end SLR I think.

Its just some cheap thing I got with some computer bits just before the last baby was born, figured it was easier to take to the hospital for piccies for the family than trying to get to a chemist for a 1hr development of the old 35mm films between running round and telling the world - plus everyone has email these days. It does the job for family work just doesn't cut it on the close up stuff I want one for now. Seriously the 256Mb mem card in it cost as much as the camera lol.

sorry Peter, i kinda saw ur question but didnt, if that makes sense, i was tired when i read it. i am just about to go to bed just now, but i will mark this post as unread so i can come back to it tomorrow and answer ur question with a bit more clarity and depth (pun not intended but spotted ) than i could just now.

Well, when you wake up then!

Monkeh: I'm not real sure of your Photography / Camera knowledge, but it's worth checking out your local Newsagents. Every 6 or 12 months, there is usually a special edition of the Photography magazines. They have nothing in that edition except overviews and comparisons of the current range of Cameras.

I've seen one edition here recently on Digital SLR's. I'm sure there'd be one on the Pocket Digitals. If you find one, it'll really help you narrow down the choice, and clue you up enough, so that the Salesman doesn't give you the run-around.

And something I read in a review recently. When comparing the image quality in the Camera Shop, don't just look at the LCD on the back of the Camera. Have the Salesman plug it in to a monitor, so you can verify the image quality on the big screen.

Fishy's probably already seen this, but have a poke about at

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

. It's gotta be THE camera site. There's a wealth of detail in there.

hey guys, i've been a bit busy with other things of late hence i've not had time to catch up on the forum. it looks like i have quite a bit of catching up to do too.

anyho ...

regarding cameras and specifically macro lenses (as Kana asked) i don't think i can offer a simple easy answer but i'll try to provide a bit of help if i can.

1st thing, when i said 17mg, i meant 17 mega pixel.

macro lens choice depends on what kind of pics u want and the choice is vast.

regarding focal length, in general shorter is better but saying that if u are taking fishy pics this is not always practical as u might not be able to get too close to the tank without spooking the fish, plus the depth of tank can be out with ur shortest focal length. although u don't have to take pics at the shortest focal length as it will of course focus at further distances too.

magnification ratio 1:1, 2:1 etc again is dependant on the type of pic wanted. in taking fishy pics a mag of 2:1 might be handy in that it means u can get good close ups without having to get too close to the fish.

aperture does affect the depth of field as u indicated, the larger aperture means smaller depth of field and a smaller aperture means a larger depth of field, as u probably know. plus, obviously a larger aperture allows more light into the camera and needs smaller exposure times. there is no easy answer to this question either. again it depends partly on the type of pic ur taking and also on the money u r prepared to spend as the larger the aperture the dearer the lens in general. 'professional' lenses for example have big apertures (f1 for example) but cost a hell of a lot more money. for macro fish pics, a very large aperture would cause some of the fish to be out of focus perhaps. this can look nice but might not be desired. if u use a smaller aperture then obviously u will get more of the fish in focus but it will also mean u will have to use a longer exposure and this will mean u will have to ask ur fish nicely to sit still plus u may ofcourse get camera shake if u don't use a tripod and shutter release mechanism such as a timer, cord, or infra red remote as some better cameras have. 'anti shake' features may help with this, although i am not sure, i don't know enough about how they work and personally i'd rather use a tripod and no anti shake as i get the feeling there may be some reduction in quality due to these features.

it might be easier for me to give more specific answers to ur questions Peter/Kana if i knew what camera u had or were thinking of buying as some cameras have a better choice of lens available to them. plus an indication of the amount of money u r prepared to spend too, as this can vary massively. also it is worth noting that only the top range of digital SLR cameras have a 'full sized' photo chip (i.e. as big as a 35mm film frame), if it is smaller as many are then u will get some magnification to ur lenses due to the smaller chip. this can be as much as 1.6:1 i believe, from what i've heard.

to sum up a bit, i suppose if u can afford to spend decent money, i'd recommend getting an SLR with a full sized photochip and a resolution of 8 mega pixels or more. Nikon has a nice one in this range for about £500. then u have a great choice of lenses available. then u need to choose the lens or lenses that suit ur needs and ur budget.

i hope the above info will help a little bit.

cheers for the link btw, i have looked at that site but forgot to bookmark it, i have now.

As far as SLR's go, I have the Minolta 7000. To my understanding, this was the first of the fully automatic SLR's. Released about 1984. Mine has been everywhere, and has had the absolute snot beat out of it, but it still works a treat. And I love buttons! The 7000 was covered in them. I even bought the Programmable Back (with more buttons!). I can set the 7000 to take 5 pictures, each of 1 minute exposure, spaced at 10 minute intervals, beginning at 4:30 am. And go off to bed. Back out in the morning to grab the camera with it's star-gazing pics...

What I hated about later models (of any brand) is the merging of functions behind single buttons. So a single buttton did different things depending on what 'mode' you were in, and which menu item you were at. Not the 7000. Aperture up was always Aperture Up. Speed down was always Speed down. Great stuff! You could use it in the dark. Mine doesn't look this pretty anymore. There's a chip out above the 'M'. The 'Minolta' logo bulkhead is hanging by one screw. The rubber grips are oxidising. The left horse-shoe mount is lying in the camera bag, instead of being attached to the camera. And most of those highly polished surfaces, now look more akin to sand-blasting.



I have hoards of accessories for it, including the 4000AF flash with infra-red focusing (and flash head zoom - really neat, when you focus the lens, the flash head zooms in and out!), and two Zoom Lens, 35-70 1:4 (22) with Macro, and 75-300 1:4.5 (32) - 5.6. (plus various filters & stuff)

And these particular items are why I'm constrained to the 5D or 7D. They're the only digital SLR's currently available with which I can use my existing lens'. It's unfortunate they've wimped out with the mega-pixels. If I knew a better model was in the pipe-line, I'd be happy to wait. Perhaps I get the cheaper model to tide me over, and after a new and better model is released, pick up a used one.



So in terms of your question, and my comments above, I'd be looking at the Konica-Minolta 5D body, at about Aus $900, plus a Macro lens. They have a Macro Zoom 1x - 3x f/1.7 - 2.8, but I don't have a price on that, probaly as much as the camera I'd imagine! And a ring flash. I do have a couple of opportunities to get some Duty Free this year, so that may work out ok.

Of course Fish pictures is part of it. But I'm interested is insects as well. Insects would probaly be ok with a smaller aperture, as they don't tend to move as much as Fish. Although the 5D and 7D have 'anti-shake', I've also a selection of tripods, and remote controls. But I suppose part of the problem is that, although I've delved into these 'macro' areas, I've not really done enough to know what I really require (with the exception of the Ring Flash).

now that i have an idea of what u have Peter and what ur looking for, i can add a few more comments/advice, especialy regarding macro photography and ring flashes. unfortunately i dont have time to give u a proper reply just now, but i will sit down in the next few days and take time to answer ur post with a bit more depth.

in the meantime, happy snapping

oi fishypaw thought you was ment to reply to the above post

Yeah, come on Haggis ! And there's other Camera Topics I've written, without any reply !! (and a couple more in the pipeline...)


Monkeh: Bought that camera yet?