HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bister, D. Articles by Aveling, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bister, D. Articles by Aveling, R. M.

Comparison of 10 digital SLR cameras for orthodontic photography

Department of Orthodontics, Guy’s Hospital, London, UK

Address for correspondence: D. Bister, Department of Orthodontics, 22nd Floor, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Foundation Trust, Guy’s Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK. Email: d.bister{at}doctors.org.uk

Digital photography is now widely used to document orthodontic patients. High quality intra-oral photography depends on a satisfactory ‘depth of field’ focus and good illumination. Automatic ‘through the lens’ (TTL) metering is ideal to achieve both the above aims. Ten current digital single lens reflex (SLR) cameras were tested for use in intra- and extra-oral photography as used in orthodontics. The manufacturers’ recommended macro-lens and macro-flash were used with each camera. Handling characteristics, colour-reproducibility, quality of the viewfinder and flash recharge time were investigated. No camera took acceptable images in factory default setting or ‘automatic’ mode: this mode was not present for some cameras (Nikon, Fujifilm); led to overexposure (Olympus) or poor depth of field (Canon, Konica-Minolta, Pentax), particularly for intra-oral views. Once adjusted, only Olympus cameras were able to take intra- and extra-oral photographs without the need to change settings, and were therefore the easiest to use. All other cameras needed adjustments of aperture (Canon, Konica-Minolta, Pentax), or aperture and flash (Fujifilm, Nikon), making the latter the most complex to use. However, all cameras produced high quality intra- and extra-oral images, once appropriately adjusted. The resolution of the images is more than satisfactory for all cameras. There were significant differences relating to the quality of colour reproduction, size and brightness of the viewfinders. The Nikon D100 and Fujifilm S 3 Pro consistently scored best for colour fidelity. Pentax and Konica-Minolta had the largest and brightest viewfinders.

Key words: Clinical, photography, orthodontics, digital

Refereed paper