Is this macro shot bogus?
Is this macro shot bogus?
I was talking to someone in another forum, and he said he took the following picture with his SD800:
http://www.system-32.com/files/insect.jpg
No EXIF data was saved.
Is it possible to get that kind of detail, that close, on an SD800?
http://www.system-32.com/files/insect.jpg
No EXIF data was saved.
Is it possible to get that kind of detail, that close, on an SD800?
This is from steves-digicam.com about the SD800
And take a look at ken rockwell pictures half way down this page...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/sd800.htm#perf
The camera has a very respectable macro focusing mode with coverage from 2.0 in.- 1.6 ft./5-50cm (WIDE), 1-1.6 ft./30-50cm (TELE).
And take a look at ken rockwell pictures half way down this page...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/sd800.htm#perf
Last edited by jupitersolo; Jun 22, 2007 at 04:25 PM.
I've gotten similar shots with my SD700. I don't see any reason why the SD800 should be any different. I think the macro capabilities of these cameras is actually pretty good, when you can get the focusing right. Lack of manual focusing is the only major drawback compared to SLR's, prosumers etc.
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by NumberFive
I was talking to someone in another forum, and he said he took the following picture with his SD800:
http://www.system-32.com/files/insect.jpg
No EXIF data was saved.
Is it possible to get that kind of detail, that close, on an SD800?
http://www.system-32.com/files/insect.jpg
No EXIF data was saved.
Is it possible to get that kind of detail, that close, on an SD800?
It's a close picture, but in terms of an SLR, you don't need a macro lens to take that sort of picture.
A real macro shot is where you are taking a picture of something that is not much larger than your camera's sensor. I.e. a couple of centimeters long.
Originally Posted by ChodTheWacko
That's certainly possible, and I don't consider that macro.
It's a close picture, but in terms of an SLR, you don't need a macro lens to take that sort of picture.
A real macro shot is where you are taking a picture of something that is not much larger than your camera's sensor. I.e. a couple of centimeters long.
It's a close picture, but in terms of an SLR, you don't need a macro lens to take that sort of picture.
A real macro shot is where you are taking a picture of something that is not much larger than your camera's sensor. I.e. a couple of centimeters long.
I'm usually not skeptical about people's photos, but this guy has been known to pull some fast ones in the past.
Originally Posted by NumberFive
Can any of you tell what kind of insect that is? It looks like one of those really tiny bees, that's 1-2cm long.
That would make the picture 12 cm wide, which could be done with non macro lenses.
Originally Posted by ChodTheWacko
A real macro shot is where you are taking a picture of something that is not much larger than your camera's sensor. I.e. a couple of centimeters long.
I personally don't feel there's a real hard and fast definition of "macro" but the place at which everyone seems to agree you're in macro-land is 1:1 magnification or greater. 1:1 magnification is when your optics are projecting an image on the sensor that is the same size as the real life object. For example, a dime is about 17.5mm in diameter. I'm at 1:1 if my optics are projecting a 17.5mm image of the dime onto my sensor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MrHeeltoe
1G TSX Tires, Wheels, & Suspension
20
Feb 23, 2023 01:54 PM
detailersdomain
Wash & Wax
3
Oct 9, 2015 10:13 PM
MrHeeltoe
2G TSX Tires, Wheels & Suspension
3
Sep 29, 2015 10:43 PM
MrHeeltoe
3G TL Tires, Wheels & Suspension
0
Sep 28, 2015 05:43 PM








