The Best Camera for Photographing Skin lesions is?????
Started by IzzyMD09
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
You mean Macro setting. 🙂
Actually you don't necessarily need Macro for a good photograph. The best things to have are good lighting -- fluorescent full-spectrum 13-18watts, or daylight is perfect. www.ottlite.com is my mentor's light of choice for photography.
You also need a standard background for all photos -- that is, dark cloth for contrast. Use the same setup for each photo.
I am an amateur photographer and I prefer the Canon EOS 5D with a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens zoom for amazingly clear images with true-to-life color saturation and perfect contrast. The lens' autofocus is one of the fastest on the market, allowing you to take crystal clear photos of really squirmy (ie, pediatric) patients. The wide aperture also ensures that the lesion and anatomic markers are the only things in focus.
For quick photos on consults, any point-and-click on macro setting will do, honestly. If you are going to publish, it would be best to borrow some sort of digital SLR camera.
Actually you don't necessarily need Macro for a good photograph. The best things to have are good lighting -- fluorescent full-spectrum 13-18watts, or daylight is perfect. www.ottlite.com is my mentor's light of choice for photography.
You also need a standard background for all photos -- that is, dark cloth for contrast. Use the same setup for each photo.
I am an amateur photographer and I prefer the Canon EOS 5D with a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens zoom for amazingly clear images with true-to-life color saturation and perfect contrast. The lens' autofocus is one of the fastest on the market, allowing you to take crystal clear photos of really squirmy (ie, pediatric) patients. The wide aperture also ensures that the lesion and anatomic markers are the only things in focus.
For quick photos on consults, any point-and-click on macro setting will do, honestly. If you are going to publish, it would be best to borrow some sort of digital SLR camera.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I was being genuinely helpful.
Your thin skin will not serve you well on the interview trail.
👎
look banana you talk down to medical students and give advice about issues when none is asked of you, I had a question about camera's not about being a medical student applying for interviews
your interjections were unecessary and condescending
I understand you were trying to help, but you shouldnt be behooved to add your two cents when it is not requested, I am not worried about my interviews and what i like to call "the social skills" I am more worried about getting interviews
thanks anyways
your interjections were unecessary and condescending
I understand you were trying to help, but you shouldnt be behooved to add your two cents when it is not requested, I am not worried about my interviews and what i like to call "the social skills" I am more worried about getting interviews
thanks anyways
I don't see what the big deal is. You were a medical student. Asking about a camera for photographing skin lesions. If a resident helps out and says, "Don't bring a camera as a student", I'd be inclined to thank and not snap at said resident.
The post had nothing to do with residency interviews or applications
This the reply by banana served no purpose except to assume and thusly condescend
I am not bothered by the response but I did feel inclined to retort and point out that the op was not an invitation or request for any of the aforementioned advice
If you can't contribute to the conversation or if you don't understand the question then create a new threAd addressing how medical students on electives shouldnt bring huge cameras
Thank you
This the reply by banana served no purpose except to assume and thusly condescend
I am not bothered by the response but I did feel inclined to retort and point out that the op was not an invitation or request for any of the aforementioned advice
If you can't contribute to the conversation or if you don't understand the question then create a new threAd addressing how medical students on electives shouldnt bring huge cameras
Thank you
It's true what they say: there's no headcase like a derm applicant.
It seemed to me that one doesn't actually need to purchase a camera for this ... most depts have cameras for this use..unless you want your own personal cam..but you always risk getting it stolen or broken by some *****.
Lots of people use pocket Canons. Understand that clinic is hella busy and whipping out your digital fancy pantsy SLR is not that easy if it doesn't fit into your pocket.
I got a larger Canon S-series and regretted it--way too clunky. I'm in the market for a pocket camera when I get more $.
I got a larger Canon S-series and regretted it--way too clunky. I'm in the market for a pocket camera when I get more $.
again, this is a camera for the department for taking pictures of our patients enrolled in clinical trials
I have heard that those large fantsy pantsy canons really dont make that big of a difference for skin lesions
and on a side by side comparison of pictures of the same lesions a group of residents really couldnt tell the difference between a small digital camera vs the fancy canon 3200 whatever that is
i guess the small digital cams are just as good
anyone know which brands are better than the others or does cannon rule the school
I have heard that those large fantsy pantsy canons really dont make that big of a difference for skin lesions
and on a side by side comparison of pictures of the same lesions a group of residents really couldnt tell the difference between a small digital camera vs the fancy canon 3200 whatever that is
i guess the small digital cams are just as good
anyone know which brands are better than the others or does cannon rule the school
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
.
Last edited:
bananamed is not a derm resident...first year intern perhaps? 😉
Anyway, a Canon digital SLR is one of the best cameras for publication purposes. Several derms I've worked with actually own their Canons dSLRs (instead of having the school pay for it), and I've had the honor of taking photographs in clinic and for publications. Good thing I know how all those little buttons work. BTW, this skill raises eyebrows in a GOOD way -- especially in derm. And especially if you're a student.
On derm rotations, I noticed that almost all residents carry small digital cams ("point-and-clicks") in their pockets for clinic and consult. These tend to be really slim wallet-sized ones with a big memory card (at least 2GB for high quality photos). I actually haven't purchased a point-and-click yet, but I plan to get a Sony Cybershot ultra-slim when I start derm residency.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...0551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=16201
Anyway, a Canon digital SLR is one of the best cameras for publication purposes. Several derms I've worked with actually own their Canons dSLRs (instead of having the school pay for it), and I've had the honor of taking photographs in clinic and for publications. Good thing I know how all those little buttons work. BTW, this skill raises eyebrows in a GOOD way -- especially in derm. And especially if you're a student.
On derm rotations, I noticed that almost all residents carry small digital cams ("point-and-clicks") in their pockets for clinic and consult. These tend to be really slim wallet-sized ones with a big memory card (at least 2GB for high quality photos). I actually haven't purchased a point-and-click yet, but I plan to get a Sony Cybershot ultra-slim when I start derm residency.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...0551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=16201
Wow. Just wow. Your Step 1 score + your attitude are going to go over real well. Bananamed hit it right on the head.
should I dignify your failure to take what you dish out (almost verbatim) with a response....
I think not!
This is what I had used at times during my Dermatology rotations. Works very well imo.
yeah a lot of people like that camera, I see it a lot, however, I also notice a lot of physicians using the camera that attaches to the dermatoscope, does this Canon have that capability,
I dont need a dermatoscope for the research, I just figured in the future it may come in handy
how much did you find that camera for if you dont mind me asking
I dont need a dermatoscope for the research, I just figured in the future it may come in handy
how much did you find that camera for if you dont mind me asking
This is what I had used at times during my Dermatology rotations. Works very well imo.
Hey I have the same camera, works great for all my kodakgallery, myspace and facebook needs. As a med student I didn't have the need to take any pics, as a resident we have a service that takes all our pics for us.
I'm not sure if it's still this way, but I remember having a Nikon digital pocket camera a few years back. It was UNBEATABLE for its macro capabilities. I was actually able to use it by taking out a dissecting scope eyepiece and taking photographs in macro mode through the microscope eyepiece.
I'm not sure if the quality in Macro/close up capability was just that model, or Nikon in general, but a colleague had a diff. (but similar) model of Nikon that was just as stellar in that regard. I also don't know if Nikons still persist in this great capability.
I'm not sure if the quality in Macro/close up capability was just that model, or Nikon in general, but a colleague had a diff. (but similar) model of Nikon that was just as stellar in that regard. I also don't know if Nikons still persist in this great capability.
I don't recall the exact price on it. But I chose this model specifically because of the macro setting being so hot!
The camera was very helpful during one of my rotation inservice rounds. Again, the macro feature is VERY good.
Well I know you already bought the camera but I figure for reference I'd throw in some suggestions. Optimally you want a camera that could take photos in indoor-lit situations without requiring the flash, and that'll get the white balance right so the colors aren't all out of whack.
I don't think a particularly spectacular Macro is quite as important either since most cameras now have so many megapixels that even if the Macro mode requires the camera to be a foot away it'll still be more than detailed enough for any use i can think of. But it might be nice to have anyway.
The Panasonic LX3 is a pretty good contender I think, it's not quite as compact as the compacts people normally get, but it basically delivers SLR levels of light sensitivity and image quality. Plus it's macro goes to 1cm, and I can't imagine ever needing to take a photo closer than a centimeter.
Unfortunately it's white balance is pretty terrible, so you'd have to manually set it for the lighting in the building. But if you always see patients in the same building the colors should be accurate once you've customized the white balance. Also it's still pretty bulky.
The new Fuji F200EXR is the other contender. It's macro mode isn't quite as good as the crazy 1cm, and it's lens is less good in low-light situations, but the sensor can run in a special 6 megapixel super-sensitive mode that works great for taking photos indoors without using the flash and messing up the colors and dynamic range of the photo. It's not out yet although you can order it at amazon and it should be here in a month or so. I'm mostly mentioning it since this post is for future reference anyway so the camera should be out by then.
It's also way more compact since it doesn't have a super-hardcore lens, and the white balance is supposed to be better than the Panasonic's (although this is mostly because the Panasonic has awful automatic white balance and presets).
So if you're shopping for the super mega best camera to bring along to take photos with (after April 2009 anyway) I'd probably go with the F200EXR, with it set to the special 6 megapixel mode. Should yield photos without the flash firing and killing details.
I don't think a particularly spectacular Macro is quite as important either since most cameras now have so many megapixels that even if the Macro mode requires the camera to be a foot away it'll still be more than detailed enough for any use i can think of. But it might be nice to have anyway.
The Panasonic LX3 is a pretty good contender I think, it's not quite as compact as the compacts people normally get, but it basically delivers SLR levels of light sensitivity and image quality. Plus it's macro goes to 1cm, and I can't imagine ever needing to take a photo closer than a centimeter.
Unfortunately it's white balance is pretty terrible, so you'd have to manually set it for the lighting in the building. But if you always see patients in the same building the colors should be accurate once you've customized the white balance. Also it's still pretty bulky.
The new Fuji F200EXR is the other contender. It's macro mode isn't quite as good as the crazy 1cm, and it's lens is less good in low-light situations, but the sensor can run in a special 6 megapixel super-sensitive mode that works great for taking photos indoors without using the flash and messing up the colors and dynamic range of the photo. It's not out yet although you can order it at amazon and it should be here in a month or so. I'm mostly mentioning it since this post is for future reference anyway so the camera should be out by then.
It's also way more compact since it doesn't have a super-hardcore lens, and the white balance is supposed to be better than the Panasonic's (although this is mostly because the Panasonic has awful automatic white balance and presets).
So if you're shopping for the super mega best camera to bring along to take photos with (after April 2009 anyway) I'd probably go with the F200EXR, with it set to the special 6 megapixel mode. Should yield photos without the flash firing and killing details.
thanks for all the advice, the camera i was buying was for research and not for me, so all the advice I get beyond that is for me
which is still appreciated
so thanks, I played around with the white balance on my sony 7.2 megapixel from aut 5, and it worked well on light skin, what about dark skin though
what kind of settings do you use to get better definition on dark skin
which is still appreciated
so thanks, I played around with the white balance on my sony 7.2 megapixel from aut 5, and it worked well on light skin, what about dark skin though
what kind of settings do you use to get better definition on dark skin
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Similar threads
