35mm compact for macro / close up work?

[robgunby]

Does anyone have any suggestions or recommendations for such a camera?

1:1 macro magnification is not crucial, just the ability to focus (AF ideally) at very close range - 30cm or less, let's say.

I have big cameras I can do great macro work with - but they are really big, clumsy, heavy and slow to use (a medium format TLR, a large format plate camera, and of course reversing rings and extension tubes for my 35mm SLRs). But I could do with something pocketable and quick to use, so I can throw it in my bag when hiking and not worry about the weight / slowing down my walking party.

Been googling this for ages, and nothing seems to come up other than suggestions about reversing rings / ext tubes, or d*****l cameras

 

[AgX]

Goko Macromax models

 

[AgX]

Aside of this, you can mount a close-up lens on a AF camera that also got a setting for a certain distance. The rest would be to somehow fix the close-up lens, built a finder frame (or just measure distance) and to do your math.

 

[robgunby]

Thanks AgX. I’ll check out this goko camera. Never even come across the brand before. There is one (a different model but still labelled macromax) on flea bay for £25 at the moment. Might be worth a punt once ive done my research.
I’m not keen on the idea of a close up lens on an existing camera. The idea is to have something quick and compact, as opposed to the big, lumbering macro-capable cameras / lenses I currently have

 

[AgX]

Goko was a major manufacturer. Global leader to own saying.
However I admit I only few years ago learned about them as camera manufacturer, but their Super-8 viewers should be known to most of us (though they too had been rebranded).

 

[narsuitus]

My smallest auto focus 35mm film camera is a Nikon N70. However, I do not have an auto focus macro lens and even if I did, it would not be small enough to be pocketable.

 

[Chan Tran]

Digital perhaps you can use a compact camera but with 35mm film a 35mm SLR is best.

 

[Paul Howell]

Are you talking about a compact point and shoot as AgX referenced or a compact SLR?

 

[grain elevator]

At that range, parallax issues in framing and AF make point & shoots hit & miss. I'd use an SLR, some are not much bigger and heavier.

 

[AgX]

At that range, parallax issues in framing and AF make point & shoots hit & miss.

Not if you focus manually and use a wire-frame at focal plane.

 

[grain elevator]

Not if you focus manually and use a wire-frame at focal plane.

True dat, but a wire frame comes with issues of its own. It is certainly very useful for scientific work where you need a fixed magnification.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Try one of the plastic-fantastic compact 35mm slr's. A Nikon N-75 with the kit lens will focus to less than a foot (film-plane to subject). Its not pocketable but it weighs very, very little. On the downside I don't think there is a right-angle finder available.

A Rollei 35 with a close-up lens might work. You will need a framing gadget as the viewfinder will be useless.

Another choice is an Olympus 1/2 frame SLR, but I have no idea of the availability of close-up accessories.

 

[film_man]

For macro work a Canon EOS 300 with a 50/2.5 or a Nikon FM with the 55/3.5 will get you to 1:2 for not a lot of size nor money

 

[KenS]

Does anyone have any suggestions or recommendations for such a camera?

1:1 macro magnification is not crucial, just the ability to focus (AF ideally) at very close range - 30cm or less, let's say.

I have big cameras I can do great macro work with - but they are really big, clumsy, heavy and slow to use (a medium format TLR, a large format plate camera, and of course reversing rings and extension tubes for my 35mm SLRs). But I could do with something pocketable and quick to use, so I can throw it in my bag when hiking and not worry about the weight / slowing down my walking party.

Been googling this for ages, and nothing seems to come up other than suggestions about reversing rings / ext tubes, or d*****l cameras

If 35mm is your film choice look to getting hold of a Pentax 35mm and their 100mm macro lens. Great 'flat field' images. I used it when I first started as a 'Pro' in Biological photography those many years ago.

Ken




Ken

 

[Don_ih]

A Fuji Silvi 21mm point-and-shoot 35mm camera was the best such camera I've ever had. It took exceptional pictures and could focus very close. I sold it, though, before it broke. I always assume such things will break very quickly.

It may have been 24mm.... It was a few years ago.

 

[AgX]

If 35mm is your film choice look to getting hold of a Pentax 35mm and their 100mm macro lens. Great 'flat field' images. I used it when I first started as a 'Pro' in Biological photography those many years ago.

I assume that someone explicetely interested in compact-cameras for macro use has no set-up in mind that requires flat field optics.

 

[AgX]

As the OP mentioned 30cm object distance, nearly all Meyer and Zeiss standard lenses for M42 yielded about 30cm min focusing distance which means an image scale of up to twice that of competitors' lenses. Thus "macro" ability in a standard SLR kit without any accessories.
This is not anything compact, but could bridge the gap between a standard kit and a macro-kit.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

EOS 300 with 90 2.8 Tamron AF macro lens. Both are plastic, light but durable.

 

[MattKing]

There were some special edition cameras made for dentist offices. Try adding "dental" to any searches you do.

 

[Paul Howell]

Not compact, came with macro lens and ring flash, most common was the Yashica Dental Eye.

 

[Chan Tran]

Not if you focus manually and use a wire-frame at focal plane.

But if you use wire frame the camera is no longer compact.

 

[AgX]

Yes, but there is hardly a AF alternative.