@msa, phreck

No one was complaining or being negative until you guys "contributed" to the thread. Thanks!

Don't feed the trolls...

i never tired super close so i'm not sure of the focus distance but trying taking it from an angle instead of directly if you haven't try it.


i think the camera on the n900 is really impressive in good lighting it can take some pretty nice picture, and photography is my hobbie also. I only wish i could afford carl zeiss in the photography world lol do you guys even know how much his lens cost? Not cheap

i'm not trolling, i'm pointing out the obvious.

do you guys even realize what you are complaining about?

Once again, wow.

it seems that there is a limit to autofocus in about 3cm distance. tip: zoom. gives bigger magnification at the cost of quality. but then you can focus correctly.

that's a really good point also, most macro shooters have lens of 100mm and longer.... But too bad the zoom on the n900 is digital zoom

and just for reference:

canon EF 50 1.4, minimal focus distance: 45cm




so the <10cm isn't so bad, is it?

what does that mean?
you cant get closer than 45 cm to take sharp pictures?

this cant be right. your camera is a semi-professional camera, isnt it?

i have a samsung wb550. the closest distance i can get to is around 4 to 5 cm. when i get closer, the camera doesnt focus and the pic will get blurry. but on around 4 to 5 cm, the pictures are still dead sharp.

Yes, that's true - shooting macro doesn't mean that the subject needs to be glued to the lens. Even dedicated macro lenses usually need 8-10 cm from the tip of the lens.

Taken from Wikipedia:
The classical definition is that the image projected on the "film plane" (i.e., film or a digital sensor) is close to the same size as the subject.

So macro has nothing to do with the distance to the subject. You can be 3 feet away and still shoot macro with the proper lens (say 300 mm).

But I digress. The minimum focus distance on the N900 is quite decent, there's nothing to worry about it.