Best Camera To Photograph Fish

[Anasfire]

Ok so I'm looking to buy a digital SLR camera soon and wanted to know which is the best to use for taking photo's of our fishy friends. Obviously that's not all I'll be using the camera for but I want to make sure I get one that is capable of taking really decent up close shots of them.

At the moment I'm looking at the Canon EOS 1000D twin kit with a 18mm-55mm & 75mm-300mm lenses and I also like the look of the Pentax K200 with 18-55mm lens. I've looked at a few others as well, many twin kits with additional lenses, which in the long run seems smarter to get seeing as most SLR lenses are upwards of $600 alone..so I'd be getting the body plus 2 lenses for like $800 which seems a bargain to me.

Others I've looked at

Olympus E-420 twin kit with 14mm-42mm & 40mm-150mm lenses

Canon Powershot SX10IS which is a compact digital ( did I mention I don't like Compacts? Prefer SLR's, but according to Brett B'azzi uses one and his pics always rock!)

If there are any camera savvy people out there who know a bit about the technical stuff ( Am thinking off the top of my head, sunnylass & someone) I'd appreciate your input, don't really trust the people at the store who are trying to make a sale..they'll try to sell me anything no doubt.

[Bettarazzi]

Yep, I use a Canon Powershot S5 IS which is a compact. My interest in photography is only limited to getting good pics of my fish and even then I find the exercise completely dreary. So I couldn't justify the cost of a DSLR. I've seen some fantastic photos taken with DSLRs eg. fish jumping out of water to feed from someone's hand, or fast moving fish captured with zero blurring. I'm not sure if my camera can do that. But I'm not really interested in that kind of photography.

I think setting up properly and getting enough light on the fish is actually much more important. And lots and lots of patience. I usually take about 100 shots for each fish. Now that I'm a bit more experienced with taking photos I reckon I could get significantly better pics on my super compact Pentax Optio than I used to be able to. The reason I'm not doing that experiment is that I will be extremely upset to discover that I had a perfectly good camera (for the purpose of taking betta pics) and didn't have to spend all that money. And that it was all just a matter of practice and a bit of extra knowledge.

[sunnylass]

Hi fighters,

if you are looking at buying a DSLR, and want to take decent close up shots you will need a good macro lens. The 18-55mm is fine for standard portrait, landscape etc, and the 75-300mm will give you the option to zoom in and blur out the background and in good strong outdoor lighting, you would be able to zoom in and take some nice pics of your fish but you will still only be able to do so much with that lens.

I managed to take really decent shots of fish with a P&S (Compact), and as long as the camera has a decent shutter speed, ie 500 and up, and good lighting, perhaps even a tripod or something to rest the camera on, there is nothing stopping you from taking some nice pics of your fish.

Hope this helps :D

[Peta]

One of the biggest things I would recomend is a/knowing how to use the camera firstly (you'd be surprised at how many people think that putting a dslr on auto will give them the good shoots - better then 'standard' camers on auto settings.... - they won't. ) and b/ LIGHIT. This is the biggest thing also. Having a good well lit set up will mean that ... 1. you can focuse clearly 2.have a good Depth of feild (fstop) and 3. shutter speed.

Lighting - be it with a compact or digital - you have to have good lighting. (hence I try to take all mine outside) I might dust off my Canon P&S and try to take some photos, to see if I can get just as good a shoots with it as I can with my canon dslr for you (but then that might make me cry also... although I didn't buy my dslr for fishie photos lol)

The macro lenses you can get for dslr's are wonderful - but also do cost a bit (for the good ones)... Mine cost currently at my fav photo store - $720 and - that is a THRID PARTY lens. (a tamron 90mm) - there is nothing wrong with third party lenses though - they are just as good (if not better in some cases) then the 'canon' lens ... but yeah I would strongly suggest checking out prices on the lenses for each type of camera you are looking at.

I also like oylmpus cameras - that's what I started on. But then you their lenses are just as x'y as others to. BUT one big plus for an Oylmpus could be that - if it has in built image stabilisation with in the camera vs the lens. Canon you only get this in your lenses. I know that the IS in body with the Oylmpus vs canon's IS in Lenses (wich isn't in all lenses - you have to buy the lenses that have IS versions and pay more for that perk most of the time) ... is one of the reasons why my boyfriend is sticking with his Oylmpus vs upgrading.

Maybe check out a few photography sites/forums and see what kind of advice you can pick up from there as well

[Anasfire]

Thanks geaps guys, I took photography in high school for 3 years but that was before the Digital age, I left school I think like 2 years before they got digital cameras in so I learnt all the old school techniques of light metering, manual focusing etc and not to forget developing my own film and photo's in a dark room! I can't say I remember all that much about the technical stuff but I confident it'll all come back to me when I have the SLR in my hands.. that and I can just set it to manual mode while I remember everything then switch to Auto and learn that.

I think I've finally decided on the Olympus E-420 Twin lens kit with the 14-42mm & 40-150mm lenses. It's got a nice ISO range too 100-1600 but it takes a CF or XD card so I'm not impressed about that ( I have like a dozen SD cards laying around) so I'm also looking at the Pentax K200D twin kit also as it takes an SD card, has the same ISO range

Below are the links in case anyone wants to check them out and be kind enough to give me a more in depth comparison between them

http://www.teds.com.au/www/6/1001102/displ...ct/2189542.html

http://www.teds.com.au/www/6/1001102/displ...ct/2164767.html

I also LOVE the Canon one...but to me it seems very similar to the two above only difference is the price, it's like $200 more than the Olympus

http://www.teds.com.au/www/6/1001102/displ...ct/2188115.html

[Sara_01]

Just last week I bought my first ever DLSR, I got a K100D I have a lot of learning to do

I didn't want to spend too much on my first DLSR but some general research told me it's a decent begginners model. I also got some macro lenses. I've never used a DSLR before this (I wanted to learn photography in my art class but there weren;t enough cameras to go around) so it's gonna be quite an adventure.

[sunnylass]

Good site to go to is www.dpreview.com you can pick two cameras and compare them side by side etc.

[Anasfire]

Yeah I've looked on there, I'm still trying to get my head around all the technical specs etc so I know what to look for. I think I've finally worked out that what I need to look for is a camera with a lens that has a small number in it...eg a 14-42mm lens is going to give me better up close or "macro' focus ability than one that's say a 70-300mm which is more for long distance photography.....am I learning or do I have it totally wrong? Oh and yes I probably will drive many people nuts with this over the next month until I get it so I ask for patience! It's a lot of money to be spending on a camera... I want to get it right! I'm thinking I should see if I've still got my old photography assignments coz they taught us all bout f settings and ISO etc...if I read over them and my answers it might jog my memory