Re: OT: camera for small work
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:27:12 -0400
"Douglas A. Tutty" <dtutty@porchlight.ca> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:52:24PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
>
> > not sure about macro work, but consumer digital cameras have a
> > rediculous depth of field due to the tiny ccd. Thats one of their big
> > issues in proper portrait work.
> >
> > anyway, not sure if there is a linux driver or anything more then an
> > api but I know that the canon a740 (not very cheep but a very nice
> > camera if you also want to use it later) has the possibility of
> > working as a webcam. I don't think that earlier ones have the
> > interface. I can try to ask what interface exists (have seen it done
> > on windows)
> >
> > At least the older nikons don't have that ability either.
> >
> > As said before though, what about a good magnifying glass, or is this
> > an excuse to also spring for a digi cam
>
> A bit of an excuse. Also a bit of safety. I'll be using 1.5 mm chisels
> on buffalo horn in a work field 3 cm x 1 cm x .5 cm deep. A loupe has a
> focal lenght of under a couple of inches. Do I really want my eye ball
> within a couple of inches of the tool and the work? A really good large
> magnifying glass is about the same price as a medium grade digital
> camera.
>
> I know that my Nikon film SLR and macro lense works. I would think that
> there is no inherent reason why any digital camera with an LCD real-time
> viewer couldn't be capable of this. Whether they actually put that
> capability into the camera is a different story best answered at the
> camera shop. The only question then will be if there is a driver in the
> linux kernel that will work for the camera.
>
> The Nikon Digital SLR is, I think, an 18 MP camera with good depth of
forgot to say, compact digitals have a very small sensor, i think 1/2.5" or so
which gives you a much bigger depth of field, for better and worse
> field; don't know if it can hook up with a USB as a webcam. The
> Panasonic 8 MP cameras with a macro funcition built-in have an adequate
> depth-of-field; ditto.
>
> Doug.
>
>
Reply to: