Macro Photography Setup Recommendation?

[Barrelcactusaddict]

Good afternoon, I'm a new member here, and I was hoping to get some advice on what I should use for a macro setup on a budget. 

 

I'm a huge enthusiast of fossil amber, however I have no decent way of photographing inclusions; I have tons of specimens (many with fauna & flora inclusions) from all over the world, including New Jersey and Wyoming, and am eager to share images of them. I'm on a tight budget, and anything over $750 USD is right out; I have tried a few digital microscopes in the past, (most recently, the Hayear HY-1080 34MP), but none seem to give me suitable resolution and image quality. I have thought of trying the Olympus Tough TG-6, but I am reluctant to invest in anything more that could prove unreliable for this specific application.

 

Please, is there anyone that photographs amber inclusions that can recommend a reliable setup that isn't too expensive? I only have a Mac OS, so most USB microscopes are out of the question; hopefully there's something simple that saves images to a microSD card.

 

Thank you so much!!

 

-Kaegen

Edited November 7, 2020 by Barrelcactusaddict
Grammar

[Bob Saunders]

From my many years as a camera club member working with 35 mm slide film. Back then I used and still have interchangeable lenses that have a push button to go into macro mode. Many digital camera bodies will use them depending on the maker. For micro it meant attaching a bellows with a reversing ring to hold a fixed 50 mm lens, plus dual strobes. To find a microscope under thousands of dollars new that will do what you want is not likely unless found used or in an estate. What you usually see in great digital photos of gems and minerals is most often done by taking like 500 images at different depths and using image stacking soft ware. The learning curve is beyond me. I'm sure others will be along to share their experiences. 

[Yoda]

@holdinghistory might be able to advise 

[Barrelcactusaddict]

Thank you Bob, Yoda, I appreciate it.

 

Yeah, I'm not really looking to get anything like a Zeiss SteREO Discovery!  I read that the Olympus Tough TG-6 has the image stacking feature built into it, as well as a "Microscope" function/mode. Maybe a Nikon D7500 if I could find a used one for under $750, I don't know. Helicon Focus looks like an easy image stacking program, though.

 

I know virtually nothing about professional photography, but it seems like there isn't a decent digital microscope out there under $1k, so a camera may be the only route. If only there was a bare-bones camera out there specifically made for macro photography.

 

 

[Fossildude19]

@vermiculosis

[Steveosaurus]

For photographing anything at macro, I've always used the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 lens and always got great images from it. Some people think the 100mm macro is king, but I like the 60mm for not only its macro but also for portraits. You don't need a gazillion dollar camera, either...it's the lens that matters.

[Barrelcactusaddict]

4 hours ago, Steveosaurus said:

For photographing anything at macro, I've always used the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 lens and always got great images from it. Some people think the 100mm macro is king, but I like the 60mm for not only its macro but also for portraits. You don't need a gazillion dollar camera, either...it's the lens that matters.

 The more I look at DSLR cameras, the more I think it's too complicated for me to handle, not to mention expensive. I had no idea DSLR shutters would eventually need to be replaced, which is several hundred dollars, too. I'm really grateful for your's and everyone's recommendations for these types of cameras, but I don't think I or my wallet could handle it.

 

I do have a Samsung WB350f, and although I like compact digital cameras, this one's worthless for photographing inclusions. I did a search for macro photography digital compact cameras, and the Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS70 came up, but I don't know if this would work.

 

Man, it just seems hopeless; why can't there be an affordable digital microscope with a large image sensor? 

[Steveosaurus]

10 hours ago, Barrelcactusaddict said:

 The more I look at DSLR cameras, the more I think it's too complicated for me to handle, not to mention expensive. I had no idea DSLR shutters would eventually need to be replaced, which is several hundred dollars, too. I'm really grateful for your's and everyone's recommendations for these types of cameras, but I don't think I or my wallet could handle it.

 

I do have a Samsung WB350f, and although I like compact digital cameras, this one's worthless for photographing inclusions. I did a search for macro photography digital compact cameras, and the Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS70 came up, but I don't know if this would work.

 

Man, it just seems hopeless; why can't there be an affordable digital microscope with a large image sensor? 

 

My camera's shutter has 95,000 clicks left on it, and the lens is basically brand new. Photography is an expensive hobby if you really get into it. I'm not into it anymore...I used to really be into macro photography and that's why I bought this camera and lens, to sort of stoke that fire again, just to learn I no longer have the passion for it.

[Barrelcactusaddict]

8 hours ago, Steveosaurus said:

 

My camera's shutter has 95,000 clicks left on it, and the lens is basically brand new. Photography is an expensive hobby if you really get into it. I'm not into it anymore...I used to really be into macro photography and that's why I bought this camera and lens, to sort of stoke that fire again, just to learn I no longer have the passion for it.

 

I think a trinocular microscope w/ a USB camera may be the simplest option I could handle, but I doubt image quality would even come close to your camera & lens. I'm sorry I'm being difficult; I'm just very confused as to what options I'd be competent enough to handle and afford. I really appreciate everyone's help and advice they've given me.

[JohnJ]

(Members please remember that mention of personal sales listings are not allowed...posts have been edited.  Thanks for future assistance.)

 

@Barrelcactusaddict 

 

@Steveosaurus has good advice.  Invest in a good macro lens as a priority.  Then, pick up a quality, used DSLR.  Consider it all an opportunity to teach yourself a new skill.  

[Barrelcactusaddict]

Everyone, thank you for your advice and help! You've convinced me.

Getting a DSLR camera sounds right; I've been looking and comparing trinocular/simul-focal microscopes w/ USB cameras on AmScope's site for at least 5 hours, and it seems like the best I can possibly stretch to (a little over $1k) is a 3.5x-180x with a camera sensor that's 6.18 x 4.66 mm in size: that's terrible compared to a Canon Rebel T1i. There's so much more to compare, but I think the sensor size means the most to me.

I'd be more comfortable with a microscope, but it looks like I'm just going to have to learn how to use a DSLR (maybe someday I'll get an adapter and a microscope to go under it, as well). Eventually, when I can make this investment happen, I'll be sure to share any good photos I can manage to turn out! 

 

-Kaegen