good camera for photographing artwork (paintings/drawings, etc.)

sligoface

i'm a visual artist who works in painting and drawing, etc. it's very important for me to have high quality pics of my work for my own website, submitting to exhibitions, and also in case i want to make some prints of my work. while photographing artwork is an art in and of itself (which i'm still working on), in the meantime i'd like some advice what camera to use for under 500 euro and preferably around the 400 mark to take snaps of my work.

i've taken some pics myself with a friends DSLR, i think it was a nikon d60. i didn't have any proper lights so they were taken outside. they were fine for the most purposes and okay for someone who has at best, very basic photography skills. the website is a work in progress, i put it up on this free hosting server for now, just to see what the pics look likehttp://www.stephenbrown.netii.net/paintgallery.html

browsing around online i see there are lots of other options for high spec cameras, compact system, bridge, etc. considering i will be using it mostly for photographing pictures on a wall or easel, would any of these be a good option? What's most important is getting a clear picture with accurate colors and clarity of detail.

Do I need an SLR or could I go for a compact system one, as I would like something portable so it's easy to take to exhibitions, etc. when I need to take pics of my work in situ in a gallery installation? I was thinking of going for this one http://bit.ly/WN0Z6R
I know it's not a canon or nikon, but have an older Olympus digital camera and it still takes good pics, better than other digital cameras of similar specs. And it says it works well in low light without flash which would be good for indoor gallery shots. And it's only 300 quid. Is the Live MOS sensor and Truepic VI processor good for my needs?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

cnocbui

For images that are to appear on a website, a compact or even good cameraphone might do, if the lighting is done well. However, for more critical uses like printing, I think you might want to be looking more for a lens, than a camera, with low distortion, vignetting and chromatic aberration probably being desirable.

You might also want to look at the sensor resolution in pixels to determine the size of prints you might want to be making. The E-Pl1 has a sensor with dimensions of 4032 x 3024 pixels, indicating you could print to 13.5 x 10" given the usual criteria of printing at 300 dpi for a print intended to be viewed close up. Obviously you could print much larger for anything that was to be wall mounted and mostly viewed from a distance.

The E-Pl1 would probably serve you well for your purposes. The kit lens it comes with also seems fairly good according to this review:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-m-zuiko-digital-14-42mm-f-3-5-5-6-mkii-lens-review-16914

It might meet all your requirements. However, if superior performance was desirable, given the ability to swap lenses, you would be able to get a better lens. The Olympus Zuiko 45mm f1.8 would be well worth looking at as it delivers superb performance for the price and is universally hailed: http://www.lenstip.com/316.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_45_mm_f_1.8_Introduction.html

This lens has far better control of distortions that can negatively impact photographing square, rectangular objects, such as barrel and pincushion distortion. Lenses with a wide field of view tend to bend/distort linear elements more. The kit lens seems to be at it's best at the wider angle end of it's range. Although software can and does correct for lens aberrations a lot, it is better for a lens to control these distortions through optical excellence. The 45mm f1.8 also is a much faster lens and would be better for taking photos in less than ideal lighting conditions, such as indoors, as it would allow for faster shutter speeds, reducing the effects of any blur caused by hand movement.