"Grant Erwin" wrote in message
...
I'm looking for precise model suggestions from actual owners...
Grant,
An inexpensive alternative is to use a basic digital camera with diopter
close-up lenses. I had good luck with this older model Agfa camera,
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec.../agfa_1280.asp, because it has a
threaded lense hood where you can screw on filters or relatively
inexpensive close-up lenses like these http://www.fwnp.com/article1010.htm.
Many of the current crop of digital cameras don't have threaded lense hoods,
but you might be able to come up with an adapter.

According to the expert at http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=macro
"Generation after generation, Nikon Coolpix digital cameras delivered the
'best in class' macro performance without add-on lenses."

I love my Canon PowerShot S2 ($500) because it will focus down to where the
target is touching the front of the lense.

For best depth of field, you need a small aperture, which means a large
f-stop number. I have a lense for an SLR that is nothing but a pin hole, no
glass. Looking through the lense it is so dark that you can't see what you
are doing, but with trial and error you can get neat effects with lighting
and exposure time. They are used for taking close up shots with great depth
of field, like these model HO trains at http://www.nmra.org/photo6.html.

An inexpensive alternative is to use a basic digital camera with diopter
close-up lenses. I had good luck with this older model Agfa camera,
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec.../agfa_1280.asp, because it has a
threaded lense hood where you can screw on filters or relatively
inexpensive close-up lenses like these http://www.fwnp.com/article1010.htm.
Many of the current crop of digital cameras don't have threaded lense hoods,
but you might be able to come up with an adapter.

Carl Joplin