# Recommend a good camera



## Cmaster03 (Oct 15, 2006)

I was *this* close to getting a Cannon Rebel a while back, but didn't pull the trigger. I don't need professional grade, just something for watch shots for forums, etc. 

Is there a consensus on the 'go-to' for this? Thanks.


----------



## Harry869 (Mar 6, 2018)

Hi, what is range of your budget? or you are something like more into Canon brand only or maybe you do not care as long as it produces great image


----------



## Rivarama (Mar 31, 2016)

If you are posting things on the internet then I would recommend a M4/3 camera from Olympus or Panasonic. The lenses are cheap and the cameras are easy to use.


----------



## Foch (Apr 19, 2015)

Nikon, all post lenses fit. DSLR entry level D3400 under $500. It will be a LONG time b4 you outgrow it...IMHO


----------



## spclEd (Aug 18, 2015)

You probably need to be more specific than 'watch shots for forums' to receive a decent answer/suggestion. A smartphone is good enough for a forums shot.

Try doing some research on dpreview. There are some good suggestions for cameras broken down to budget, application, etc.


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

I got an Olympus EM10 III for that purpose. 
Here's a shot


----------



## mharris660 (Jan 1, 2015)

Olympus OMD micro 4/3 system. Really good for travel and they have really nice lenses. Here's the shots from my latest trip using Olympus above and below the water in the Galapagos Islands: Galapagos - PalousePhoto


----------



## date417 (Nov 15, 2017)

I'd love for you to check the Canon EOS 5D Mark III DSLR Camera.


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

*LOL* he wants a simple camera. The 5D III isn't new enough to cutting edge, old enough to be cheap.


----------



## luxury554 (Mar 30, 2018)

there are several nice cameras, it all depends on your budget, but go for a canon


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

If you want watch shots for forums your money needs to go on a macro lens. 

That canon will do the job the job but lens will be more expensive


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

date417 said:


> I'd love for you to check the Canon EOS 5D Mark III DSLR Camera.


Funnily enough I have this and an EOS100D (rebel) one for doing piper work one to throw in a bag for when I'm hiking. Problem with the little one is I still use the decent lenses on it so there's bigger all weight savings, the space saving is good though


----------



## Panthere (Jan 15, 2018)

I've just moved from Canon to Sony (full frame) and regret I didn't do it earlier. However, that said, your lens is probably more important than your camera when it comes to macro photography.


----------



## aria230 (Feb 16, 2015)

Any modern DSLR will provide good shots in the right hands. Personally I try to avoid mirrorless systems


----------



## richnyc (Feb 21, 2013)

Gunnar_917 said:


> If you want watch shots for forums your money needs to go on a macro lens.
> 
> That canon will do the job the job but lens will be more expensive


What he said ^^^

Any decent DSLR, even entry level one, will take great pics... What makes a difference is a good macro lens and lighting

As for myself, I decided, after years of dragging DSLRs, to switch to an iPhone X, and I'm pretty happy camper... Any of these will get you there:

https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/


----------



## Foch (Apr 19, 2015)

Nikon Nikon Nikon...no regrets, standard in the industry


----------



## willing86 (Dec 7, 2014)

any recommendations for a <$500 compact point and shoot camera that will take great macro as well as wrist shots? Thanks!


----------



## McCarthy (Aug 30, 2014)

willing86 said:


> any recommendations for a <$500 compact point and shoot camera that will take great macro as well as wrist shots? Thanks!


Yes. The Sony DSC-RX100. The new version costs $1,000. The first generation is now down to $399. This cam basically stole the majority of the market when it came out.

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX100-Sensor-Digital-Camera/dp/B00889ST2G/


----------



## mightyomighty (Jun 6, 2017)

I have Olympus E-M10 with 12-40mm 2.8. 
My go to set up and it'll cost you less than $800 if you buy is refurbished.


----------



## chriscentro (Nov 11, 2012)

Another vote for the Olympus EM10. A lot of my watch photos are just shot with the EM10 and a 25mm f1.8 lens.

The 25mm lens is my do all lens; for watch photos and general photography.


----------



## issey.miyake (Mar 8, 2011)

Not sure if OP got a camera already but so many variables.

Start with a budget then what you want to use the camera for.

As others have mentioned invest in the glass and an entry level DSLR will take great photos.

Then the next step is just to practice practice practice!


----------



## briang583 (Mar 25, 2014)

I guess this will have as many different recommendations as "recommend me a 5 watch collection under 458K USD." I love photography and am by no means a pro in this area, but I guess reading oabout photography will have the largest effect and just about every decent camera with either a macro function or macro lens will do a great job. I saw a documentary about a guy who did a travel book with the Sony cell phone a few years ago and the results were outstanding. 

Since you asked for a recommendation though I would say the Fuji x e2 with 60mm macro.


----------



## ConfusedOne (Sep 29, 2015)

If you are after great image quality then go for a Olympus OMD EM10 II or a Sony a6000 depending on what is on sale.
I wanted a camera myself and was planning on getting the Olympus, but the Sony had a better deal when I was looking for a camera.
A DSLR will perform just as well, but they are bulkier and it is clear that mirrorless cameras are the future.

A point and shoot will also do well, but it won't have the same image sensor size as the Sony or even the Olympus.
It will be smaller than a mirrorless camera so if you don't want to buy into a lens system then a Sony RX100 or a Panasonic LX10 would work too.


----------



## McCarthy (Aug 30, 2014)

Quite frankly you will not get a decent body and PROPER glass for $800, let alone $500. All those cheap kit or plastic lenses suck ass.

Just one Sony RX100 IV Sample Image (https://www.bikehugger.com/posts/rx100-v-hands-review-samples/)


----------



## dwabbit (Apr 24, 2018)

If the goal is macro watch photography, it's probably a better idea to look for a good quality macro lens (used) first, and then get a compatible body used as well. 

You can get away with a older body, since the types of macro shots you'd be taking will be indoors in conditions you can control in terms of lighting etc. The sensors in older bodies might have less dynamic range, focus points, focus speed and low light performance, but none of those are problems when you can fully control the lighting situation and are shooting a stationary subject. Likewise, the lower megapixel count of old sensors won't make a difference if you're posting the images online, and not printing them on 48" X 36" canvas to hang on your wall.

If you go down the used route, I'd imagine Canon, Nikon, and M4/3 would have the largest supply of used lenses and bodies. M4/3 would probably be the least costly camera system to get into.


----------



## Rocket1991 (Mar 15, 2018)

No reply from OP yet?


----------



## McCarthy (Aug 30, 2014)

Rocket1991 said:


> No reply from OP yet?


He was on today... no feedback.. no thanks.. waste of time.


----------

