3

My young daughter is excited about photography, so I bought her an entry level camera for her birthday. There are two problems:

(1) She likes doing close up pictures, and the camera is a fixed focus one.

(2) I don't know how to determine what standard the threads on the camera are.

The camera is a Sereer, ASIN B08JCFDBZX.

There are some threads on this camera, and so I tried out some optics from my older digital Kodak and the radius of the fitting was different.

So my question is, how can I locate a compatible close-up lens?

Any help would be appreciated.

David Elm
  • 133
  • 5
  • Have you tried looking in the manual? Sometimes the thread diameter is written on the inside of lens caps. You can also try measuring the thread diameter. Then search for step-up rings to more conventional sizes? – xiota Jan 05 '21 at 07:18
  • 1
    will the close-up lens work properly if you have fixed-focus lens? In macrophotography, the Depth of Field is extremely small, so I can't imagine how would she take macro pics with fix-focus... – Tomas Jan 05 '21 at 18:30
  • 1
    To me, you have reached the limit of your daughter's first camera. Interest plus ambition is a reason to buy her a better camera. To spend more money (if you have it) on a tool better suited for the task. To take her interest seriously without caveat. Without "just a child." Without "only a beginner." If you have the money, invest in her ability to go further. Good luck. – Bob Macaroni McStevens Jan 06 '21 at 05:12
  • @BobMacaroniMcStevens: I agree, but I also do sympathise with the parent. To me, a good "proper" entry to macro photography would be something like a used older DSLR kit plus a set of cheap extension tubes, but you'd easily have to spend ~$200 for even that. Spending $200 on something as frivolous as a camera is something that just doesn't make economic sense for a lot of people. But maybe there is a good option in between this and adding diopters to a cheap P&S? – AkselA Jan 06 '21 at 10:12
  • @AkselA Spending a few hundred dollars on decent camera and lenses is no more frivolous than spending $800-1000 on the latest iPhone every couple years. And well selected lenses can last quite a long time. Camera bodies can be resold to subsidize the cost of the next camera. – xiota Jan 06 '21 at 12:02
  • @DavidElm That camera is a toy. Consider returning it. Take advantage of gift return policies if you have to. For less than $100, you can get a good used compact camera. But spending more for a used interchangeable-lens camera with lens would be worthwhile. It would have better image quality, and could be used during a photography course. If your daughter sticks with photography, the system can be used and expanded for decades. If she decides photography isn't for her, she can sell the camera and try something else. Toy cameras have zero resale value and are destined for landfills. – xiota Jan 06 '21 at 12:18
  • @xiota: Exactly, and spending $800 on a phone would be very hard to justify for a lot of people. – AkselA Jan 06 '21 at 12:52
  • @AkselA I see a lot of people with new iPhones everytime Apple releases a new one. – xiota Jan 06 '21 at 12:55
  • @xiota: And I see a lot of people driving brand new Teslas. – AkselA Jan 06 '21 at 12:58
  • @AkselA Seems it's not very hard for them to justify spending money frivolously. – xiota Jan 06 '21 at 12:59
  • @xiota: Indeed, but I doubt the OP drives a Tesla, is my point. – AkselA Jan 06 '21 at 13:08
  • @AkselA Personally, I don’t think it’s frivolous for the same reasons I don’t consider a non-toy musical instrument for a child frivolous. Much of my attitude is certainly cultural and rooted in my socio-economic experience. So there’s plenty of room for other views based on other experiences. I suggest camera replacement because the question is already premised on a shopping exercise. Already involves the idea of spending money to fuel the child’s interest. It’s a how should a parent spend money question. – Bob Macaroni McStevens Jan 06 '21 at 18:49

4 Answers4

8

It appears the filter diameter of that camera is 52 mm. The image of the camera at the Amazon product page says "52mmW". I don't know what the "W" indicates, but the 52mm is probably the filter thread diameter.

Additionally, one of the other product images says "52mm Screw Connection for UV Filter (not included)".

Regarding selecting an appropriate close-up filter, you have to determine how close your daughter wants to get to the subject. Close-up filters are specified in diopters, usually from +1 to +10. The diopter value is just the inverse of the close-up filter's focal length, which also happens to be maximum focus distance, in meters, when the diopter is installed. So a +1 diopter has a focal length of 1 meter; +2 diopter corresponds to 0.5 meter; +10 diopter corresponds to 0.1 meter.

Now, without getting into too much optics detail, generally speaking, close-up lenses work better with longer focal-length lenses. The focal length of your daughter's camera is either F=2.4mm or f=5.04mm (printed on the front of the camera). In either case, it's a very short focal length compared to typical diopters you'll be able to find, which only go up to about +10 for consumer gear. So while a close-up lens will allow (actually, require) her to get closer to the objects to photograph them, she probably won't see very much magnification. However, close-up lenses are fairly inexpensive to get into, so I wouldn't discourage the effort. After all, part of the experience of photography is trying things that don't work as well as you expected.

See also the related question, How can I calculate the effect of a supplementary close-up lens (a.k.a macro filter)?

scottbb
  • 32,685
  • 12
  • 104
  • 188
  • The ratio of that pair of focal lengths is 2.1, which makes me suspect the manufacturer may be using a 4/3-size sensor. – chrylis -cautiouslyoptimistic- Jan 06 '21 at 06:14
  • @chrylis-cautiouslyoptimistic- I doubt it. If you look at one of the product images (not the first one, because the lens “glass” has been photoshopped to look like it’s actually a large lens), you’ll see the actual lens element is very tiny. The “lens ring” is just cosmetic. Also, if 5mm (35mm equivalent) is ludicrously short focal length. My 8mm fisheye projects a full circle onto my 35mm full frame camera. 5mm would just be a smaller circle, taking up only 60% of the height of my sensor, i.e., wasting pixels. If it were a 4/3 sensor, the 2mm lens would be a fisheye that only covers 60% too. – scottbb Jan 06 '21 at 16:43
4

The camera-to-subject distance of a non-adjustable camera is set to what is called the “Hyperfocal” distance. Such a setting yields a zone of acceptable sharpness, likely about ¾ meter (30 inches) to infinity ∞.

Mounting a close-up lens is a good and inexpensive way to work in closer. Close-up lenses are cousins of the lenses used in store-bought reading eyeglasses. In other words, you could buy a pair of +3 reading eyeglasses, dislodge one of the lenses and mount it with masking tape over the camera lens. Such a lash-up might prove to be satisfactory for your application. Of course, a photo grade close-up is preferred. They come in a single and double element design. The double element arrangement corrects for chromatic aberration. This shows itself as a rainbow fringe at the edges of objects.

The labeling of these lenses is based on the language of the optician. This is a unit of power called the “diopter”. This unit is useful because, when combining lenses, we can simple add up the diopter powers to get the power of a combination.

Anyway, a number 3 (+3) close-up shifts the close focus 1/3 = 0.333 X 1000 = 333mm = 13 inches. You can buy a +3 reading eyeglass and hold or tape it over the lens. Likely this will work out just fine.

If you combine the two +3 lenses the result is +6. Now 1/6 = 0.167 x1000 = 167mm = 6.5 inches.

OK – this math tells us the revised point of focus, most forward-facing lens to subject distance.

Alan Marcus
  • 39,160
  • 3
  • 48
  • 91
  • 1
    @ scottbb-- Nevertheless, the close-up will begin convergence before the camera lens, The result will be a closer point of focus. – Alan Marcus Jan 05 '21 at 21:24
0

Uh, no. The previous answers are a little off.

  1. The lens on the camera you bought appears to be a "close-up" lens. See the word "MACRO" on the lens? That's the term we use for "close-up" photography. It means the lens is capable of very close minimum focal distance; very basically, the closer you can scooch the lens to the subject and still maintain focus, the more magnification you'll see in your images. If I'm not mistaken, that's what your daughter is attempting to achieve.

  2. It doesn't look like the lens is removable; ie, it's not what we call an interchangeable lens camera, like, say, a DSLR or mirrorless camera. So it's permanently attached and not swappable. But it says macro, and the minimum focal distance might produce enough magnification for her.

pro photog
  • 1
  • 4
    It doesn't look like the lens is removable: hence why the OP said the camera is a fixed focus camera. And just because a manufacturer of an inexpensive camera prints "Macro" on the front doesn't mean that the camera is actually capable of producing 1:1 magnification (the traditional meaning of "macro" in photography). Clearly, the camera is the digital equivalent of the 110 film fixed-focus pocket cameras, regardless of how the overseas manufacturer chooses to label it. – scottbb Jan 06 '21 at 00:28
0

It looks like the lens does not come off, however the product page states it IS threaded for a filter. Normally the last number on the lens proceeded by Ø is the filter size. This should allow you on the cheap to take up close "macro" shots with the camera you have. You simply unscrew the larger half of the lens and keep the smaller half on the camera. Or This set That would let you pick how much macro zoom you have. I went the first route for my DSLR and got ok results. When you decide to upgrade keep in mind most point and shoot style cameras wont accept a filter. But around 2x zoom can get you close.

billy101456
  • 1
  • 1