Help! My camera can't keep up with my toddlers!

[Sandy22]

I have a 5 mp panasonic lumix, which I generally love, but it's not fast enough to take clear pictures of my active toddlers (even on sports mode). What kind of camera should I get? I want something that will capture all the moments - not just the ones when the girls are sitting still (which rarely happens!) What should I be looking for? Shutter speed?

[Kelly Grannell]

I take it you're taking the pictures indoor. If that's the case, there is nothing you can do because once you use flash, the camera shutter speed is locked to 1/60 second.

If you're outdoor, the sports mode will help because it will choose the fastest shutter speed possible.

Regardless, taking fast moving object(s) with a point and shoot is virtually impossible, especially indoors. Specially due to lower ISO speed (for indoors, action shot you'll need ISO 1600), fast flash sync (you'll need about 1/250 sec shutter speed w/ flash sync), and shutter lag (dSLR does not have any shutter lag).

[Sandy22]

Yes I'm taking mostly indoor shots but without a flash since I have a lot of natural light. So there is absolutely no shutter lag with a dSLR? Are there any with a digital screen viewfinder? (sorry I don't know the technical word for it). If I'm going to spend the money on an SLR I want to know that there will be a dramatic improvement in shutter speed, lag, and taking clear pictures when the kids are in motion. Can I still take pictures in automatic mode? Will I still be able to point and shoot?

[Kelly Grannell]

you'll definitely get a MAJOR upgrade in picture quality, zero shutter lag and faster shutter speed (due to the capability of ISO1600) from buying a dSLR.

The 1/250 flash sync only works if you use external flash.

There is no serious dSLR with LCD preview yet. Olympus evolt 330 (IIRC) have live preview) but the high ISO performance is abysmal, no better than a regular Canon point and shoot. So it's pointless to upgrade to that.

[Sandy22]

There is no serious dSLR with LCD preview yet.


Why not? Is there no market for it? My panasonic only has an LCD screen (no viewfinder) and I don't think I want to give up the screen.

[Kelly Grannell]

that what makes dSLR a dSLR.

1. That fast response (no lag time) can only be achieved if the sensor is in capture mode and the shutter does the on/off thing by swinging the shutter.
2. Serious close up, manual focus, checking depth of field, require optical viewfinder, there is no high-res preview technology that can compete with the accuracy of optical viewfinder. I tried the Olympus live-preview technology and for the life of me I can't take a single proper macro shot, can't do an accurate manual focus and...
3. Live LCD preview creates distance between you and the camera, which makes your camera handholding less steady, which in return creates shakes/wobbles while you're taking a picture.

I'm sure if the display technology have caught up with the accuracy of an optical view finder, there will be dSLR with live preview AND electronic view finder

Oh, that's another thing, there is not a single electronic view finder out there that's good enough to do any manual focusing/depth of field control work.

[left210]

I have been looking for a new camera for this same reason. I have read that the Fuji F10 is supposed to be really good for indoor shots but not sure how it will do capturing moving subjects. Also, they are coming out with the F30 in May that is supposed to be even better. I will keep watching this thread because I have high hopes that someone can lead us to the right camera.

[Kelly Grannell]

The F10 is quite good at ISO1600. The ISO1600 on a point and shoot I've ever seen so far in my life. Start up time, if I recall is still about 1 second with barely noticable shutter lag.

[boBQuincy]

Kelly is telling it like it is, for what you want to do a SLR is the answer.

Of course they do have shutter lag but it is on the order of 50-80 milliseconds, fast enough so no one but a Jedi would notice. ;)

The LCD screen is not for serious photography, it is a low resolution version of the scene, it has delay, and it places the camera away from your body which adds shake and vibration. When you look through the lens you can see all the nuances of the scene, including reflections, polarizing effects, flare, etc.
A LCD will not show those and if you can't see them you can't correct for them.


boB

[Jen S]

I had the same problem with my 18 month old. I got a Sony DSC-H1 for Christmas last year. It took decent shots outside, but everything I took of my daughter inside was horrible. Lots of blur and just all around bad pictures. I knew everyone had said the dSLRs would be better for kids, but I didn't think it would be that much better. I stopped in a camera store one day and tried out their D50 and was instantly sold. This thing has next to no shutter delay. I went back and took one of my SD cards, let my daughter out of her stroller and took some test shots of her in the store. Needless to say, the H-1 has been sold and I am forever hooked on the D50. It really is that much better of a camera. Since I got it home, it has not taken a bad picture, even inside. I have mostly used it in auto mode, but I am now starting to play around with some of the other settings, since we are heading to Disney in a couple of weeks.

If you have the opportunity, take an SD card into a store like Ritz and ask them to let you take some test shots. They had no problem with letting me play around. You will be amazed when you download the results when you get home.

Hope you find something that works for you!

Jennifer

[PaulD]

Why not? Is there no market for it? My panasonic only has an LCD screen (no viewfinder) and I don't think I want to give up the screen.

These sensor has to switch from a preview/live view (for the LCD) to the image capture mode when you press the shutter release. This takes time and is the reason that there is shutter lag. Since there is no preview with a dSLR the sensor does not have to change modes and so there is virtually no lag.

If you use flash indoors then you can get a faster shutter speed and this will help to eliminate blur. But, since there is shutter lag you have to try to anticipate what the kids are doing rather than react to the moment. It's hard to do (duh). So, I agree with everyone else here. dSLR is the best equipment for the job. But it's a tradeoff.

[luvmyfam444]

but aren't all the DSLR camera big & bulky?
I have a Canon Power shot & LOVE the size & weight - can't imagine going back to a camera so big....

Anyonelike Canon's Dslr???

[grimgrinnin]

but aren't all the DSLR camera big & bulky?


The Rebel XT isn't that big and not bulky at all. Bigger than a P&S, but not unmanagable. The benefits far outway the larger size.


Anyonelike Canon's Dslr???

Lots of people do :teeth:


grim pirate:

[boBQuincy]

A dSLR is big and bulky compared to the tiny P&S cameras but the Rebel XT with the 'kit' lens is a fairly small package. It's still larger than a P&S but the capabilities are *so* much more!
Horses for courses, ya' get what ya' pay for, etc., etc...

I still carry a P&S occasionally, even without using the LCD (which I don't) there is considerable shutter lag. Some newer P&S have gotten better but none can compare to a dSLR.


boB

[ThurlFan]

Does your point & shoot have an autofocus assist beam, and is there a way to turn it off? I turned off the redeye (although it makes no nevermind to you since you're not using flash), and the autofocus assist beam, on my Canon A75 and I never have trouble with subjects leaving the frame after I press the shutter release. I haven't ever put a timer on it obviously, but I've also not missed pictures due to noticable lag. Read through your manual and see if there are settings that you can adjust.

[Kelly Grannell]

Anyonelike Canon's Dslr???

not too many, only about 57% of world dSLR users use Canon, followed by Nikon. ;)

[handicap18]

The reason for not being able to have a preview screen on a dSLR like on p&s digitals is basically because when you look though the view finder on any SLR you are looking directly through the lens. On a p&s the view finder and preview screen are not exactly what the lens see's. This is where SLR comes from: Single Lens Reflex. There are a series of mirrors that reflect the image from the lens to the view finder. When you actually take the picture one of these mirrors flips up to expose the light to the shutter/sensor.

SLR cameras are bigger and heavier than P&S cameras. This is part of what makes them better. They are built more solid to help last longer. One way to look at it is, silverwear or plasticwear. Which would you rather cut a steak with?

With a dSLR you can turn on the camera and take a picture (maybe even 2 or 3) in less time than it takes a P&S to turn on. Most dSLR's will take 2 or 3 pictures in about the same time as most P&S cameras take 1 picture.

[Kelly Grannell]

handicap18 is absolutely correct.

During the time you power on a P&S, focus and take 1 picture, I can easily take 5 pictures on my dSLR.

[fitzperry]

Just thought I'd throw my $.02 in here. Shutter lag was among the top two or three reasons I made the jump to a dSLR, and I'll never go back. I think there have been some improvements in that area since I bought my D70 about a year and a half ago, but as others have mentioned, you still can't buy a point and shoot camera that is as fast as a dSLR.

When my 6.5yo was a baby, my fil bought one of the first digital cameras aimed at the consumer market (if I remember correctly, it was $500 or $600 and 1.5 megapixels). That thing was so slow, I don't think they got a single picture of my dd where she hadn't turned around or crawled out of the frame. :rotfl:

Having used a digital point and shoot (not that 1.5 mp one) for several years before moving up to a dSLR, I thought that I'd have a hard time using a viewfinder again, but I found that I actually prefer it--mostly for the reasons that a couple of other posters have mentioned--less camera shake and greater accuracy.

[matthew_hull]

I bought a Canon 1D DSLR a few years back specifically for the purpose of photographing the kids. If sharp good pictures are important to you, then you will be willing to suffer the weight, bulk, and cost. Or not; your mileage may vary ;-) All I can say is that I would never go back to a P&S. The difference is like night and day.

[disneyfan551]

This is a great thread, with good timing! I use my camera, solely for my 4yo's pictures, and I am in the market again! I have been looking at Costco, due to their return policy and they have a D50 and a RebelXT that I'm thinking about. But, I have NO idea about these cameras, and really even know what a DSLR is all about. I live 3 hrs away from the Costco, but am going down tomorrow to hopefully buy one (whether at Costco or Ritz??). My last main problem is that I have no time to research them online, due to current internet availability (break time only! :guilty: ). Can you guys help me out? I'm willing to pay up to $800 if need be, but was hoping for $400 range, which is what I paid for my Minolta DiMAGE Z1 that I currently own. As long as I have at least a 10x zoom, I'll be on :cloud9: !

Do any of you own the D50 or the RebelXT? What's the difference between them? I can't even tell what their zooms are on dpreview.com, all of the technical stuff really confuses me! :rotfl: PLEASE HELP!! :blush:

[Kelly Grannell]

a dSLR doesn't have zooms. They are just the bodies. You'll need to buy appropriate lens for the bodies.

As far as I know, D50 is 6MP, RebelXT is 8MP; there is no backlit LCD on the D50 -- something critical if you take pictures in low-light places. Other than that the performance between the two are almost identical. As a Canon user, however, my suggestion will be the Canon gear.

[disneyfan551]

Thanks for the info. I had NO IDEA about the zoom/lenses! So, how much would a similar type zoom/lens run for the XT? And, any recommendations on where to purchase either the lens OR the camera? There are so many options, and it's kind of scary! I'm really afraid to make the wrong decision.

I love to take pictures, but I'm definitely a p&s person! I'm wondering if it would be a total pain not having an automatic zoom on an XT or D50? Ugh, I'm so confused now! I really liked the quality of those pictures I saw on dpreview.com.... :guilty:

[Kelly Grannell]

Thanks for the info. I had NO IDEA about the zoom/lenses! So, how much would a similar type zoom/lens run for the XT? And, any recommendations on where to purchase either the lens OR the camera? There are so many options, and it's kind of scary! I'm really afraid to make the wrong decision.

I love to take pictures, but I'm definitely a p&s person! I'm wondering if it would be a total pain not having an automatic zoom on an XT or D50? Ugh, I'm so confused now! I really liked the quality of those pictures I saw on dpreview.com.... :guilty:

I bought my dSLR body only because the lens that comes with it is not good enough for me. So I bought Sigma 18-125 as my walkaround lens. It's a compromise between zoom capability and picture quality. Also available Sigma 18-200, better range but picture quality suffers (for my taste) between the 125 to 200 range).

I bought the 18-125 Sigma for around $350-ish (it was more than a year ago) at my local shop (my friend owns a store here).

Cheers,
Kelly

[PaulD]

My suggestion is to try both of them out in the store and see which one feels better to you. Both cameras are great and will produce beautiful pictures. The difference between 6mp and 8mp isn't really as big as it may sound. I've printed 8x12 with 6mp and it looks great. You'll find that there are big Nikon fans and big Canon fans. I'm personally in the Canon camp but that's just a matter of preference not function or quality.

I recommend that you buy the kit with the lens. If you are coming from a P&S then you will be quite satisfied with the quality of the included lens. Later on when you want more then buy a new lens at that time. Remember that you'll probably have this camera a lot longer than you would a P&S so upgrades (like lenses and flashes, etc) are often cheaper than buying a new camera like you would when your P&S doesn't meet your needs any more. And there isn't a P&S out there that can touch the image quality of a dSLR.

I noticed on Costco.com that the Nikon comes with two lenses, an 18-55 and a 55-200. That would really cover just about any focal length that you will ever need. Also, I'm not sure you realize how these cameras zoom. They are manual but that's certainly not a bad thing. All that this means is that you turn a ring on the barrel of the lens to zoom. It actually offers a lot more control and it's also much faster. Most people prefer this method over the zoom buttons found on P&S cameras.

Ultimately, don't buy either if you don't like how they feel and work. If you buy a camera that you won't use then it was a waste of money. If you are more comfortable with a P&S then you should stick with that. But, I hope that you like the dSLR's because they have many advantages over P&S.

[Laura]

handicap18 is absolutely correct.

During the time you power on a P&S, focus and take 1 picture, I can easily take 5 pictures on my dSLR.
Well, it does depend on the dSLR. A Canon 20D will take 5 pics versus my A620's 1 pic, but Canon's dSLRs prior to that can take about 3 secs to power up, like the original Digital Rebel--not the XT.

Not that anyone here's buying an older model dSLR, though. I'm just saying that camera technology can improve leaps and bounds over the years and in some ways a newer digi P&S can be better than an older digi SLR. Just depends on what you want out of the camera.

That said, if one is taking pics of fast-moving subjects in low light, I certainly don't suggest buying my A620.

[Kelly Grannell]

In theory it's 3 seconds but I used to own a 300D and 10D, they both start up in less than 2 seconds. After that, let it "sleep", the restart time is less than 1 second (well, very close to 1 second).

The other trick is to set the sleep timer to 10-minutes, and every now and then (within than 10 minute period) you half press any button on that camera so the camera stays awake at all time. Yes it eats more battery juice, but not by much. I still can use 1 battery only for my entire day trip to Disney using that trick.

The newer dSLR startup time is about 0.3 of a second max, Canon 30D is now at 0.15 second startup.

Besides, Canon have long discontinued the 300D.

[Kelly Grannell]

... but Canon's dSLRs prior to that can take about 3 secs to power up, like the original Digital Rebel--not the XT.



I've tested my 300D vs A620 from off-mode, startup, take pictures. Within the same time frame A620 takes 1 picture, 300D takes 3 pictures albeit the faster power-up time on the A620.

It powers on faster, but then the LCD needs to get ready (also, albeit only a fraction of a second, but it adds up), much slower focus time, plus shutter lag).

That doesn't say I never use my point and shoot anymore. I still use it as the back up of my back up camera.

[boBQuincy]

The difference between 6 MP and 8 MP is not as much as it sounds because the image area goes up with the square, thus the pixel count difference is more like the square root of 6 vs square root of 8. Iow, 2.45 vs 2.83, a difference of only about 15%.

Printing at 8x10 you probably would never notice any difference in quality.

The "kit" lens is usually about $100 extra over the body alone, that should give you some idea about the quality of the kit lens (although they are better than the $100 would indicate they are still not great). It's a good way to get started for not much $$$.

The next step up in Canon hierarchy is their middle range, with the 24-85 at about $300. I'm sure Nikon has similar ranges.

One of the biggest advantages of dSLR over P&S is the option to get RAW files. RAW is the data straight (almost) from the sensor and is thought of as a "digital negative", ready to be interpreted just as a print from a film negative would be. A RAW file can have about 16 times as much information as the JPG and although it involves more work (post processing) it really delivers the true power of the dSLR.
And with most dSLRs you can get RAW *and* JPG at the same time!


boB

[Kelly Grannell]

The next step up in Canon hierarchy is their middle range, with the 24-85 at about $300.


Unfortunately 24mm is so not wide enough for many applications. Of course this depends on your shooting style. I use 17-24 range 50% of the time, 100-200 range 40% of the time, 24-100 range only 10% of the time (and that's only because I can't move in closer or move out further.)

[PaulD]

Not that anyone here's buying an older model dSLR, though.

You can still buy the 300D ($549) and the 10D ($799) from B&H. I use both and love them. Yes, I'd love to upgrade to a newer version for some of the bells and whistles but the slightly better noise performance and slightly larger megapixel count make it hard to justify. Both of these cameras still trounce P&S image quality even though they are older. You can get a Rebel XT for not much more than the 300D but you can save about $300 on a 10D vs 20D (more vs the 30D). If you are looking at moving to dSLR and you don't have mucho cashola it's something to consider.

[Laura]

I've tested my 300D vs A620 from off-mode, startup, take pictures. Within the same time frame A620 takes 1 picture, 300D takes 3 pictures albeit the faster power-up time on the A620.

It powers on faster, but then the LCD needs to get ready (also, albeit only a fraction of a second, but it adds up), much slower focus time, plus shutter lag).

That doesn't say I never use my point and shoot anymore. I still use it as the back up of my back up camera.
Well, you certainly would know better than I, I'm simply repeating what I've read in reviews of that camera by people who have owned it. :)

[Laura]

You can still buy the 300D ($549) and the 10D ($799) from B&H. I use both and love them. Yes, I'd love to upgrade to a newer version for some of the bells and whistles but the slightly better noise performance and slightly larger megapixel count make it hard to justify. Both of these cameras still trounce P&S image quality even though they are older. You can get a Rebel XT for not much more than the 300D but you can save about $300 on a 10D vs 20D (more vs the 30D). If you are looking at moving to dSLR and you don't have mucho cashola it's something to consider.
Not everyone wants to carry such large cameras around on vacation, which is when I usually take my photos. Yeah, SLRs are unmatched in pic quality, but I think most "normal" people like me just want a smaller, easy-to-use camera for snapshots. I don't have kids, but I imagine when I do and they're doing things like ballet or karate or soccer I'll want a better camera to take nice pics of the action. I won't mind carrying around a larger camera to those kinds of events. And by then, digital SLRs will likely be even smaller and better than they are now! :teeth:

So, the OP might want an SLR, maybe not. It just depends on the consumer's preferences.

[Kelly Grannell]

Well, you certainly would know better than I, I'm simply repeating what I've read in reviews of that camera by people who have owned it. :)


What you've read is correct though. If you insert the battery, close the lid and start the camera, for some reason the startup time is about 1 sec longer than if you do it the second time around (with battery already inside the camera.)

This is true with 20D and 30D too. :confused3

[PaulD]

So, the OP might want an SLR, maybe not. It just depends on the consumer's preferences.

I completely agree. The OP (or anyone for that matter) should buy a camera that they enjoy using. I love my dSLR but I don't expect that everyone should feel the same. P&S cameras take wonderful photos that most people will be perfectly happy with. I use a P&S sometimes when I don't want to lug around my gear too.

[manning]

I agree with PaulD.

I settled on the new Panasonic TZ1. It is light and has a 10x zoom (12.5X if you drop from 5mp to 3mp). I have only taken daylight with great results. I haven't had a chance to do low light yet. I know DSLR has a lot going for it but I just didn't want to pay that much and have to lug a big camera and possibly another lense around. A camera with that much reach and lays in the palm of your hand was what sold me.

It has image stabilization and any low light noise I can take care of with neat image. As a matter of fact I have seen some night shots that aren't that bad.

I figure the camera will handle 95% of my needs.

[left210]

I settled on the new Panasonic TZ1.

Manning, please post back and let us know how the TZ1 does in low light and with moving subjects. I am really interested in this camera and have checked it out at the store but it is so hard to tell in the stores. Thanks.

[manning]

Manning, please post back and let us know how the TZ1 does in low light and with moving subjects. I am really interested in this camera and have checked it out at the store but it is so hard to tell in the stores. Thanks.

Take a look at this link to see some low light level pictures the photographer says most of the photos there have very little to no post-processing. also this takes you directly to page 6. If you want to see all of his pictures just go to page 1.

http://john-reed.smugmug.com/gallery/1357189/4/65607647

I have taken short movie clips and they are some of the best I've seen for a still digital camera. However there is an issue surfacing about long movie clips. I saw it on this link http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18184 page 45 beginning at post 444. The conversation is between Snoopy1010 and Doug Lerner. They are trying to figure out if it is an SD card falt or in the camera.

Still waiting for dpreview.com to review the camera.

Hope this helps. I'll try to take some low light shots myself.