Total newbie, help choosing family camera

[branv]

I know exactly, well nothing about cameras. I have an ancient point-and-shoot and a cell phone. But since my son has come along, I'm finding myself in mourning for a million missed shots. Amazing expressions or perfect shots that were taken indoors or in natural light that came out blurry or simply would never focus. A lot of internal cussing has gone on. I know an option is to always use a flash, but my son really hates flashes, so much so that if one goes off on a camera the next half-dozen times someone points a camera at him, he flinches and covers his face. And honestly I don't really like the look of people pictures using a flash anyway.

So of the reading I've done trying to find a camera that takes natural light photos with a very fast focus, I'm accepting that what I want doesn't exist for cheap. I'm okay with that to some degree, as I'm not against learning more about photography and DH has always been interested. But for now, I want something that can bridge between clueless beginner and a little more advanced. That is less than $600 if I have to, but wish I could do under $400. Bottom line, I'll pay more to get the natural light shots I want of a child who only sits still for a moment. And Disney pics, of course those

I have read a lot of great things about the Sony A6000, but not sure if that's like needing a hamburger and buying Kobe steak. I went to a camera store today, and the guy really really really hard pushed me away from the A6000 to the Olympus EM-10. As in, he wouldn't even put the A6000 in my hand (fwiw: they were selling for the same price). I thought the Olympus was very nice and spiffy (and a little nerve wracking, lol!), but everything I keep reading online gives the nod to the Sony, especially for low light focusing.

So... help? Are these good options for us, is one better than the other? Should I consider something else?

 

[havoc315]

I know exactly, well nothing about cameras. I have an ancient point-and-shoot and a cell phone. But since my son has come along, I'm finding myself in mourning for a million missed shots. Amazing expressions or perfect shots that were taken indoors or in natural light that came out blurry or simply would never focus. A lot of internal cussing has gone on. I know an option is to always use a flash, but my son really hates flashes, so much so that if one goes off on a camera the next half-dozen times someone points a camera at him, he flinches and covers his face. And honestly I don't really like the look of people pictures using a flash anyway.

So of the reading I've done trying to find a camera that takes natural light photos with a very fast focus, I'm accepting that what I want doesn't exist for cheap. I'm okay with that to some degree, as I'm not against learning more about photography and DH has always been interested. But for now, I want something that can bridge between clueless beginner and a little more advanced. That is less than $600 if I have to, but wish I could do under $400. Bottom line, I'll pay more to get the natural light shots I want of a child who only sits still for a moment. And Disney pics, of course those

I have read a lot of great things about the Sony A6000, but not sure if that's like needing a hamburger and buying Kobe steak. I went to a camera store today, and the guy really really really hard pushed me away from the A6000 to the Olympus EM-10. As in, he wouldn't even put the A6000 in my hand (fwiw: they were selling for the same price). I thought the Olympus was very nice and spiffy (and a little nerve wracking, lol!), but everything I keep reading online gives the nod to the Sony, especially for low light focusing.

So... help? Are these good options for us, is one better than the other? Should I consider something else?

He likely was getting a better commission on the Olympus or something.

They are both excellent cameras. The Sony does have a slightly larger sensor (and therefore slightly better in low light), and a slightly faster more advanced AF system, particularly for action and high burst shooting.
Though the Olympus isn't chopped liver, it will do fine.

Neither camera is a Kobe steak --- The biggest brother of the A6000 is the $3200 A7rii -- that's the Kobe steak.

A camera like the A6000 is a very good every-day-use family camera, comparable to traditional mid-level dSLRs.

The A5100 is practically the same camera as the A6000, but cheaper. The big difference being the electronic viewfinder. The A5100 is LCD-only. It is definitely worthwhile to have a viewfinder. Makes it easier to balance the camera, much easier to shoot in bright sunlight.

If your biggest interest is indoor low light portrait photography, the kit lenses are far from ideal.

I'd skip the kit lens, and get the A6000 with the 50/1.8 lens. Add a zoom lens later on. But the 50/1.8 is particularly good for portraits and for low light. You can get the A6000 body only for $450, and the 50/1.8 lens for another $250... The total slightly over your budget. You can also look at buying used/refurbished, particularly the lens.

Anyway, here is a side by side of the A6000 versus the Olympus:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/olympus/e-m10/vs/sony/a6000/

And if you look at the cruisecritic photo forums, you can find a long thread devoted to love of the A6000.

 

[xlxo]

If not the A6000... I'd be reaching for a Nikon...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nikon-d...8-55mm-vr-lens-red/3520004.p?id=1219091822791

Without a flash, a larger sensor is desired. Olympus should be doing commercials on shrinkage...

 

[branv]

Thank you so much!

Especially good to know about lens. I'm such a rube that when I first started considering the A6000, I didn't realize the one I was looking at online was body only and would need a lens. Thank goodness DH set me straight.

 

[havoc315]

Thank you so much!

Especially good to know about lens. I'm such a rube that when I first started considering the A6000, I didn't realize the one I was looking at online was body only and would need a lens. Thank goodness DH set me straight.

You can get a pretty good price on a package that includes the kit lens and a basic telephoto zoom.... It would be a nice versatile package with good quality.
The 50/1.8 is less versatile, but far superior quality. Far better for those flash-less indoor portraits.
In the long term, you'd really want all 3 lenses, which will cover virtually all your needs for basic shooting.
But if indoor portraits are your current priority, I'd start with the 50/1.8. You'll be very impressed with the results.