First Camera

[Bellanota]

I posted this on the Disney World Tip page cause i didnt even know this board was here till now I was told there maybe people here could help me more

"With a Disney trip upcoming and my DD starting kindergarden I have figured its time to break down and buy a camera instead of just using my phone. Problem is I dont know where to start. I know I want something that can also take short videos, but is under $400. all the numbers and stats just confuse me.... please help.... Whats the best camera for money thats easy to use for someone who is use to taking iphone pictures."


Thanks Bunches for anyhelp

 

[photo_chick]

Go to dpreview.com and read some of their articles on recommended cameras. It's a good place to get an idea of what is rating the best in each class. Also be aware that iPhone cameras aren't horrible. The later models are actually pretty good and some yield better images than a run of the mill point and shoot.

 

[havoc315]

What Photo Chick said is correct -- new smartphones are often as good as basic p&s cameras, often including features lacking in many p&s cameras. (Since the camera is basically already connected to a pretty powerful compact computer).

Still, for around $400, thee are options far superior to a smart phone.

The amount of choices can be intimidating: dslrs, mirrorless, bridge cameras, super zooms, enthusiast compacts.
Each camera brings compromises, and you need to decide on your priorities.
Almost all of them can take good videos, and they all include simple-to-use auto modes. (But higher level cameras give you the option of more manual controls, while cheaper cameras tend to be all or nothing).

Some considerations---
Size -- fit in a pocket? Purse? Small camera bag? Or willing to lug around a large camera bag as a way to get a more capable camera system?
Low light? Will you always be using the camera in bright outdoor daylight, and willing to rely on a flash at all other times, or want a camera that can handle all types of light? (Typical p&s cameras are useless indoors without a flash, but there are exceptions).
A large zoom range is often overrated, but it is genuinely important to some people. Are you taking landscapes? People shots? Do you need to be able to zoom in on wildlife from far far away.
Do you have an interest in a camera that can be expanded later on-- adding lenses as your hobby grows.

These are some of the main factors to consider.

Based on the little I do know about your interest, I'd suggest the Sony rx100-- the original is now about $400.
A larger sensor than most p&s cameras, it gives far superior low light performance. Still can't match a real dSLR, but a good compromise for a camera that can fit in your pocket.
What you're trading, is a somewhat limited zoom range. This isn't the camera you would use to zoom in on the bird far away.

 

[Bellanota]

Some considerations---
Size -- fit in a pocket? Purse? Small camera bag? Or willing to lug around a large camera bag as a way to get a more capable camera system?
Low light? Will you always be using the camera in bright outdoor daylight, and willing to rely on a flash at all other times, or want a camera that can handle all types of light? (Typical p&s cameras are useless indoors without a flash, but there are exceptions).
A large zoom range is often overrated, but it is genuinely important to some people. Are you taking landscapes? People shots? Do you need to be able to zoom in on wildlife from far far away.
Do you have an interest in a camera that can be expanded later on-- adding lenses as your hobby grows.

These are some of the main factors to consider.

Based on the little I do know about your interest, I'd suggest the Sony rx100-- the original is now about $400.
A larger sensor than most p&s cameras, it gives far superior low light performance. Still can't match a real dSLR, but a good compromise for a camera that can fit in your pocket.
What you're trading, is a somewhat limited zoom range. This isn't the camera you would use to zoom in on the bird far away.

Wow so many questions I didnt even know I needed to think about. Here is what I can share to help:

I am carrying a backpack so as long as it fits in there its ok. I dont need it to be pocket sized.

Planning on using it all over the park inside and out to capture my DD's first trip and then once we get back it will get its workout mainly indoors I believe. So not having to use the flash would be helpful.

Not sure if this will turn into a full on hobby or not going to depend on how well i do with this camera. I just know I am tired of iphone for a camera. It may take good shots but i want something sturdier and i dont know more camera like. I will look into the site mentioned and the camera mentioned. Thanks

 

[Phoenixrising]

I went through this same issue when my good poor man's Sony DSLR died in Jan. You have the choice between optical and digital zoom. The digital zoom cameras are far more compact, and the picture quality is really good. However if you are a major photo geek like me, I ended up with a bulkier optical zoom camera, simply because I use my zoom alot and the picture quality when using the zoom is alot clearer and better quality. I'm a really good photographer and because of this the optical zoom camera works better for me even though I grumble over the bulkiness of it. Any camera will take good pics. Canon, Sony, Nikon and a variety of other camera makers produce really good cameras. Decide what features you want in a camera, and then narrow down your choices from there. I lean towards Sony, and my previous Sony camera lasted over 5+ years until the internal hard drive died. I spent 3 months researching cameras before ending up with the camera I now have, a Sony optical zoom with 26+ zoom.

 

[Bellanota]

so after reading here and reading alot on line i think i am going to look at the Sony HX300... its looks kinda like what i had in mind... thanks guys

 

[havoc315]

so after reading here and reading alot on line i think i am going to look at the Sony HX300... its looks kinda like what i had in mind... thanks guys

Good luck with your purchase.

Just be careful with "looks" like what you had in mind -- Looks can be deceiving.
the HX300 is a bridge camera -- It's made to look like a dSLR body, which sometimes leads to perception that it's a higher level camera. The reality is, it's a smart-phone quality camera with a massively huge zoom. It's a poor performer in low light, a mediocre performance in terms of quick auto focus, etc.
It is a great camera for people who prize a massive zoom range, don't need indoor/low light performance, and are happy with smart phone image quality.

 

[tink15823]

Hi we are also looking for a different camera for our Dec trip. So I used have used old school cannon and film for years. Changed to P&S and can never found one I really loved . We are looking at a Cannon t3 rebel and Cannon sx50 sh . Any input would be helpful . I should also point out Dh will be using the camera and has no experience but I want him to use the camera without frustration. TIA

 

[havoc315]

Hi we are also looking for a different camera for our Dec trip. So I used have used old school cannon and film for years. Changed to P&S and can never found one I really loved . We are looking at a Cannon t3 rebel and Cannon sx50 sh . Any input would be helpful . I should also point out Dh will be using the camera and has no experience but I want him to use the camera without frustration. TIA

Auto modes allow all cameras to be used with similar ease.

The t3 is a dSLR with an aps-c sensor. It can give very good image quality including good low light performance, though it will partially depend on what lens you attach.

The sx50 is a point and shoot with a huge zoom lens. (It may look like something more than a point and shoot as the body looks more like a dSLR, but it's just a point and shoot in a dSLR looking shell). It will give mediocre image quality and poor low light performance but the convenience of a huge zoom range with no need to ever add/change lenses.

 

[Shazzasmd]

The sx50 is a point and shoot with a huge zoom lens. (It may look like something more than a point and shoot as the body looks more like a dSLR, but it's just a point and shoot in a dSLR looking shell). It will give mediocre image quality and poor low light performance but the convenience of a huge zoom range with no need to ever add/change lenses.

The Canon SX50 is capable of producing better than mediocre images and the low light performance is better than you might think, but agree it still isn't great That said, it's a niche camera and not one I would recommend for everyday use. The Panasonic FZ200 is probably a better choice for most people.

The Canon SX 280 is a good choice for a reasonably priced P&S that still has a useful zoom.

(There are so many options for cameras now, I can see where it can be overwhelming).

 

[havoc315]

The Canon SX50 is capable of producing better than mediocre images and the low light performance is better than you might think, but agree it still isn't great That said, it's a niche camera and not one I would recommend for everyday use. The Panasonic FZ200 is probably a better choice for most people.

The Canon SX 280 is a good choice for a reasonably priced P&S that still has a useful zoom.

(There are so many options for cameras now, I can see where it can be overwhelming).

Dxomark scores the sx50 high ISO at around 176--- meaning noise reaches unacceptable levels at anything less than bright daylight.

The t3 scores just under 800--- giving you more than an extra 2 stops of latitude.
The fz200 has a better lens, but also very very poor ISO performance.

It's a simple matter of sensor size -- p&s cameras like the sx50, fz200, etc, can be convenient devices that can capture good images if you have excellent light.
But they aren't going to compete in terms of image quality with a larger sensor.
The larger sensor p&s cameras are the Panasonic fz1000, the Sony rx10, and rx100.
Then of course, dslrs and mirrorless cameras have larger sensors--ranging between micro 4/3 to aps-c to full frame.

 

[Shazzasmd]

Havoc315 - I don't mean to be argumentative - I respect all the help you provide here. I just wanted to make a point that you can capture decent images with the SX50. I had one - I found it was acceptable for some applications (e.g. Birds at a distance that were basically stationary). I gave it to a friend and she is very happy with it. I absolutely wouldn't recommend it for dark ride photos or the like, and apologies if it sounded that way, but it would work to shoot fish & chips at Rose & Crown.

I will be trying out the Panasonic FZ1000 next week. My main camera is a 5DMIII, but I am still looking for a good Bridge Camera for those times I just don't want to carry the DSLR.

I do stand by the recommendation of the Canon SX280 for a decent P&S - this is just one of many, obviously. The Sony cameras with larger sensors are good choices, but then we begin to run into budget issues.

 

[havoc315]

Havoc315 - I don't mean to be argumentative - I respect all the help you provide here. I just wanted to make a point that you can capture decent images with the SX50. I had one - I found it was acceptable for some applications (e.g. Birds at a distance that were basically stationary). I gave it to a friend and she is very happy with it. I absolutely wouldn't recommend it for dark ride photos or the like, and apologies if it sounded that way, but it would work to shoot fish & chips at Rose & Crown.

I will be trying out the Panasonic FZ1000 next week. My main camera is a 5DMIII, but I am still looking for a good Bridge Camera for those times I just don't want to carry the DSLR.

I do stand by the recommendation of the Canon SX280 for a decent P&S - this is just one of many, obviously. The Sony cameras with larger sensors are good choices, but then we begin to run into budget issues.

My apologies-- I wasn't intending to turn it into an argument. I may have misread your post to suggest that low light performance of a bridge camera is close to an APS-c dSLR. I think there is a misconception among novices -- that since bridge cameras look similar to dSLRs, they are in fact similar to dSLRs.
The fact is -- most bridge cameras (except really the rx10 and fz1000), are basically just p&s cameras.

I do agree that the sx280 (I have used an earlier model) is a decnt camera and can get some very nice images in good light.

But again... Comparing a bridge camera to a dSLR -- it's like comparing a scooter to an automobile. They are both vehicles, and there may even be plenty of times you would take the scooter over the automobile, but it's not an apples to apples comparison.