Shutterbugsailer Loc: Staten Island NY (AKA Cincinnati by the Sea)

As a long time urgent care physician and photography hobbyist for about 5 years, I can truly say that using an expensive DSLR for most medical photography is like using a $10,000. carbon fiber racing bicycle to deliver Chinese food in a neighborhood with high crime and potholed streets. It is in the medical setting that a cheaper, simpler camera just shines. In a well lit medical office, there is no need for a large sensor or high end optics. Moreover, the wide depth of field seen in smaller sensor cameras is preferable. IMHO, the best type of P&S camera is the type meant for snorkeling and other outdoor activities. No protruding lens to break or get in the way, and if blood or other body fluids splashes on it, a little wiping with an alcohol pad and no harm done. It slips easily into a jacket pocket and if left lying around, is less tempting to thieves that something that looks like a real camera I use a Nikon AW100 for this purpose which I picket up as a floor sample for $80.00. It is easy to use, even for someone who thinks an F-stop is a subway station. It's macro function can't be beat for medical use

Phreedom Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

B&H lists as "no longer available" but Fong's website/store lists them for under $20.

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

If bh photo no longer caries it. I saw it on Amazon. Just Google: Gary Fong Delta-3 Digital Point & Shoot Flash Diffuser.

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

I see that you've ridden the NYC subways. Welcome fellow New Yorker. The NYC subway is one of the things I miss, being able to be out and about all hours of the night and still have public transportation.

Baltimore, Boston, DC, Philadelphia and San Francisco all have subways but none compares to NYC's. London and Tokyo have excellent subways and regional transits comparable to NYC's.

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

If you're just taking wounds, etc, as previously stated, a pocket P&S will be fine. However if you're going to be taking pictures of items under a microscope, you'll need microscopic attachments for a DSLR which should be stored under lock and key.

Shutterbugsailer Loc: Staten Island NY (AKA Cincinnati by the Sea)

Actually, I don't ride the Subway. I will give up my car when they pry my cold dead fingers from around the steering wheel

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

However in Manhattan it is too ease to get parking tickets and have car towed.

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

I've taken hundreds of these types of photos documenting injury and domestic violence cases. Starting with a Polaroid kit that could take 1:1 shots that were life like. Yes, it was expensive but Digital camera photos were not excepted by the court at that time.
I then used my Panasonic D-snap, SV-AS10. I carried it in my shirt pocket for 10 years and people thought it was a cell phone. That's how small it is. At 2 mpg pixels it was enough resolution for 4x6 or 5x7 prints. 8X10 was pushing it but I have printed a few that size. Rather than use the built in flash I would use my maglight flashlight for additional lighting.
As with any photography, knowing the camera, how to use it and how to take that type of picture, was the most important element for getting shots that would be excepted by the court and/or an insurance company. In other words Practice!
My test was 2 pictures. One of a desk top and the other of the same desk with a quarter laying on it. Place the 2 pictures side by side and lay a quarter on the picture of the desk top. From 3 feet away you could not tell which was the real quarter and which was the picture of a quarter.

sisko67

Captain Jim, My dentist uses a Canon Rebel T2 and a ring flash. I have seen and have several of the photos he has taken in my mouth and they are very clear. I don't know if there is a p&s camera that you could attach a ring flash to. I do not know which lens he is using, but I would be more than happy to find out. If you did not want to pay a lot I would go to b&hphotovideo.com and check out a refurb camera. They have the same warranty as a new one, for less.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Someone asked: "Why did he wait?"... This developed over the course of a week. He didn't wait long at all....

Bubu Loc: Out of this solar system

You don't need a DSLR... That was the point of several posts here. A P&S (Canon or Nikon) with a macro of 1 cm will be OK

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

This was certainly a case of one photo being worth several hundreds of dollars....they didn't waste any time approving his expenses after I sent them that photo.

wingincamera Loc: Spanaway, Washington

Our doctor uses a point & shoot, but what brand I don't know. He showed us the photos of my wife's operation. One thing he did mention was that because of patient confidentiality the files are encrypt both on the camera and the laptop that he uses with the camera. He wants the photos for documentation, but is careful about patient confidentiality. How they are encrypt I don't know.

eddie1 Loc: Charlotte, NC

Does anyone have experience with using the Canon SX50 for this purpose ?

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

I do not have any experience using the SX50 for medical purposes, but I would like to present an "amateurs" point of view. The cameras that were used to take pictures of my cancer and its removal procedure had the flash VERY close to the lens, and one of the pictures of the procedure required extra light on a deep incision. The close flash was almost as good, if not better, than a ring-light would have been. There is no way I could have taken that picture with my SX1 which is about the size of the SX50. On the other hand, an incident many years ago in which I was asked to document a doctor and a paramedic clamping both sides of a partially severed femoral artery was almost too small for my SX201 with an external flash; the SX50 would have been ideal (and maybe easier to clean up than the SLR). But even then, a simple P&S would have been ideal; in that age my Minox with flash would have been better. Taking cavity pictures requires a closely adjacent light source. Oral, aural and nasal cavities are difficult to photograph. I tried to help the MICP who was my mentor with some training slides, and I failed miserably. Unless you are documenting surface anomalies, I think even the SX50 is too large. On the other hand, if you are documenting extensive procedures such as an opening of the entire thoracic cavity, perhaps the SX50 (or the Panasonic Lumix FZ70 with its slightly wider short lens) would be ideal. Either should prove beyond equal in a forensic setting.

FWIW, I have only seen one doctor use an SLR. In , I met an Oral and Maxillofacial surgeon who spent 3-4 months each year repairing the faces of children for Doctors without Borders. He used an SLR to take (very discreet) before and after pictures of his team's work for reports and fundraising events. He used a Nikon FE with a special medical lens and a "ring light" he designed and built himself. He was multi-disciplined and a fine hand surgeon who saved me the use of my left hand.