• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Digital camera help

Thanks for all the suggestions/ideas everyone. I know she's shown interest in photography, but with kids being kids, I recall how many things I've shown interest in or my younger brother did when growing up but we never stuck with it. So I don't want to dump tons of money into cameras (because I know these things can be super expensive) to find out she doesn't enjoy it or her interest wanes. That's why I figure $700 +/- should get something good for entry level so she can start learning and we can go from there if she does want to pursue it more.

I've got some suggestions on here to look into, talk it over with the wife and see what direction we end up going.

Thanks again. If you guys have any other ideas/suggestions, keep them coming.
 
Wirko said:
I've been using auto for half of my life (Nikon DSLR and Nikon film SLR before that) and fail to understand what's wrong about it. Granted, it's semiautomatic, so I set the aperture, ISO and exposure compensation, and remember to keep an eye on shutter speed. Auto may be a shortcut to skip some important steps in the learning process - or not, depending on the person behind the camera.
Click to expand...

I dislike the auto modes on Canon (on the wheel) because they don't capcutre raw imagine format pictures. I assume it is the same on Nikon and Sony.

I think keeping the raw files is very important because the software to "develop" them into the jpegs that you want in the end constantly improves. Just think of noise reduction when you need it. You might want to revisit a nice shot that ended up with noise later when there is better NR software available.
 
Not to be off topic, but the 50MP sensor in my Samsung is just approaching what the 18MP sensor in my T1i can do, but without the actual zoom, filter capability (want to shoot at an aquarium or anywhere with reflections, need a polarized filter) or shooting a panoramic just at sunset need a big lens to gather light.

Changing lenses isn't bad, making sure you have a case, caps, q-tips, and extra batteries means a all day experience tweaking aperture, ISO, timing, and a lot will be learned in the first 20 hours of use.


20Hr =50%
200Hr = 80%
2000Hr = 95%

She should know in the first 20 hours of use if she really wants to learn more.
 
I hated my first digital 8MP Camera. It was a gift after graduating high school. 35mm film was much more enjoyable and the pictures came out better. It only when I bought a real pro DLSR did I get into digital photography.

The camera menus accessibility can be a difference for beginner learner.

Honestly spend $10 at this thrift store for a black and white film camera. Once they master that then you spend $700 on a camera otherwise just use your phone.
 
neatfeatguy said:
My daughter is very much into fancy cars, loves everything about them and knows pretty much everything about them - she even knows more than grandpa (mr fixit mechanic man) about muscle cars. So we hit up a lot of car shows in our area through out the summer and she's only got her phone to take pictures with and she's commented many times how she'd love to have a good camera to use for taking photos. Along with fancy cars she loves taking pictures of flowers, scenery, insects, stars, moon and such things. She's looking into taking photography in high school next year when the class is available to her and we'd like her to be ready.

She hasn't shown any interest in taking live action photos, if that matters.

So, any suggestions or are all the digital cameras in my price range kind of the same? Any lenses we might want to look at? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

Didn't bother reading a single other reply. No need.

Canon G6 - One of the few and certainly the last fixed lens camera to come with a pro level lens and 2.0 aperture. Largest tradeoffs even to this day is the low zoom level (and lack of shutter setting of multiple minutes/hours/days/weeks long stars and moon photos) as well as below instant write speeds (USB 1.0 era electronics mean burst mode is low). Beyond that you get RAW/jpeg saved to CF, full/partial auto/automatic controls a rotating flip out view screen, manageable file sizes that allow easily saving thousands of uncompressed RAW, and a build quality far exceeding most cameras including the pro level shutter count rating. All of this equates to photos with an unmistakable magic and color without a large spend on processing software and plugins.

A good example can be had + multiple new batteries/charger + IR remote + tripod + good quality CF card and USB reader + camera bag and all camera related accessories for well under half your budget.

th
th
 
Those entry level cameras are a complete waste of money. Either go pro (detachable lense) or just use a phone.

The lenses and sensors on those mini cameras are awful. They are truly ment for click and shoot, but has been completely replaced by phones now.
 
ir_cow said:
Those entry level cameras are a complete waste of money. Either go pro (detachable lense) or just use a phone.

The lenses and sensors on those mini cameras are awful. They are truly ment for click and shoot, but has been completely replaced by phones now.
Click to expand...

Please re-read the billet and follow up by OP.
Dad is no doubt testing the waters while investigating what the school camera class will require (Hint Hint @neatfeatguy )

Even if you disagree with, choose to remain oblivious to, my statements. There is no reason to be openly dismissive of any option suitable for a young woman to learn photography with. Buy your own kids pro level gear if you feel so strongly.
 
ir_cow said:
I currently use the Sony AR7 III (40MP). Its a bit older now, but still a worthy camera. A little over your price range even used.

https://m.dpreview.com/ is a great site for camera reviews. The deep dives and image comparisons are unmatched to any other site.

Like I said, RAW format will take you a looong ways. But having the ability to swap lenses is great too.

Edit: I know I'm no help here. My primary 35mm lense is $400, which is quite cheap for a good one.
Click to expand...
I used to have 35mm too :)

1696468213327.jpeg


Back in the day I was looking at the Sony RX100 (I think version 1) since it was one of the best compact / point and shoot cameras you could buy. Wow seems they are up to ver 7, but wow that price tag for a compact point and shoot!??!

Good things I hear about Canon from photo people is the availability/price etc. of parts/lens, etc.

All personal preference I guess. Personally, if I was going to get a camera for close up/stills/day pics it would be a compact point and shoot or phone.

If it was for long distance, long exposure, night shots, more dynamic shots then I would probably go to the big clunky DSLRs type.
 
nomdeplume said:
Even if you disagree with, choose to remain oblivious to, my statements. There is no reason to be openly dismissive of any option suitable for a young woman to learn photography with. Buy your own kids pro level gear if you feel so strongly.
Click to expand...
Just trying to save the OP money. You can buy a Mark 2 and good lense for under the $700... But I still would have them learn on a cheap 35mm like the Olympus or Cannon from the 80s. They are practically free at thrift stores.

Those click and shoot digital cameras will teach you nothing about photography. Your phone has aperture and shutter speed settings already. Just can't shoot RAW format. But to be honest, until you master the fundamentals of photography, shooting raw is more of a bandaid for poor photography skills.

Knowing that shutter will freeze a hummingbird is 101. What exposure for a sunlight versus dusk or indoor. All of that you will learn quickly with film.

If she just wants to snap some pretty photos. Put your phone on HDR mode and have at it.
 
Getting a film camera now for learning how to photo is not a bad idea, but it's going the hard route i think :)
And it cost a lot to get the photo in real paper :/
Having a screen to control the picture is, to me, a good way to improve on the go.
 

Barring need to reply directly to OP. I will leave by way of suggesting $60 shipped on ebay (light wear in original box with all accessories unopened and unused) and a here you go kid - try not to break it - today might be the suggestible exploratory and preparatory route. Slip into the local camera franchise for a simple USB CF reader and see how things look by Christmas. After taking in numerous Fall Run car shows and living with it. This class sounds to be a year to year and a half away depending on when it is taught. Resale value has not dipped in a decade if this turns out to be a phase.

I purposely recommended a camera straddling consumer ease and Professional credibility being infused with an ability to intuit the wealth of directions around the limitations even intelligent programming of settings incurs. Or, spring for an even more classic rangefinder Leica, just not a digital one!!!!! Both are endowed with a formula known to be engaging at any skill level. Something that gives pictures an inner life without relying on effects or the symptoms of daily encounters destroying distinction. We unavoidably encounter vastly more blotting of subject with IG filters than studied forms of serious photographic art today.
 
Last edited:
The wife still has her old 35mm camera - she got it for high school photography (this was right before the time digital just started to become more main stream and 35mm was still the norm and that's what the class required) in the late 90s. I think it's a Kodak and on it is a LCD view screen that shows you what your picture looks like that you just took. However, my main concern going this route is the cost over time for buying the film and developing it.

Film cost I find is anywhere from $8-15 a roll
Cost to develop from what I find is about $0.75 a picture. 24 picture roll = $18 on average.
You're looking to pay at least $25 for a roll of film and then to develop it.
10 rolls, you're at $250.
20 rolls, $500.
40 rolls, $1000.

No thanks. I have no tendency to bleed money over time. Even if we went this route and she loved it and wanted a digital camera, now my budget is lower because we threw a bunch of money into 35mm film. I'd rather put it towards something somewhat decent at the entry level for digital and even if this photography thing goes nowhere after this or just becomes an occasional hobby, she still has a halfway decent digital camera to use when she needs it.

I've seen some good ideas/suggestions here on what to look for and we're going to weigh the pros/cons to see what direction we go.
 
Main thing is - as long as it's enjoyable. The kit is less important.
 
I'm going to make a liar of myself by reentering.


Looking only at digital purchases that could be deemed viable in a teaching environment. There are but a few impactful differences in order of actual importance during selection

1. Tasking a beginner with advanced professional tools that will confuse. Ir alternately enchain their progression to every micro detent through unsophisticated, unsatisfying, choices.
2. Avoiding removal any critical elements of composition and use of light by algorithmic and mechanical aids. Read aggressive anti-shake and numerous other inaccessible in-camera processing routines. Realizing how many models return you to step 1 is 99% of understanding what options have livable tradeoffs.
3. User and camera are not physically fighting each other through a mismatch creating barriers to usage.
 
unwind-protect said:
I dislike the auto modes on Canon (on the wheel) because they don't capcutre raw imagine format pictures. I assume it is the same on Nikon and Sony.
Click to expand...
Whether it makes sense or not, Nikon (my old D90) lets me shoot raw images even in "foolprof auto" mode (green symbol on the wheel), with auto ISO on top of that.
unwind-protect said:
I think keeping the raw files is very important because the software to "develop" them into the jpegs that you want in the end constantly improves. Just think of noise reduction when you need it. You might want to revisit a nice shot that ended up with noise later when there is better NR software available.
Click to expand...
Noise removal should amount to some simple statistical processing, I'm sure it has been perfected since long ago. I'd be wary of new forms of noise removal in 2023 because they make use of you know what. Artificial "intelligence".
 
Last edited:
After a week of harassing the wife about sending me the Christmas wish list from our daughter - because I was told she has a camera that she wants - I finally got the list and on it the daughter listed a:

Sony A6400

Apparently this is the only camera she wants and no other one will work. My wife told me that she said not to bother with any other camera. Best Buy has it listed at $900 for just the camera or $1k with a 16-50mm lens. I can find the camera cheaper through a third party off Walmart, but I'm not keen on buying through third party vendors, even if it were to save me $200. Most likely I'd purchase it off B&H photo if it comes down to it - priced the same as Best Buy, but you can get a free camera case and 64GB memory card going B&H.

I really don't want to spend that much on a camera - holy hell. It's a bit over budget, that's for sure, but it was the top thing on her list. With that in mind, what do you camera fanatics think? Anyone use this model or one similar and do you think it's worth it or not?
 
neatfeatguy said:
I really don't want to spend that much on a camera - holy hell. It's a bit over budget, that's for sure, but it was the top thing on her list. With that in mind, what do you camera fanatics think? Anyone use this model or one similar and do you think it's worth it or not?
Click to expand...

In a couple years she will crash your car. Enjoy the times while they are cheap :D
 
neatfeatguy said:
Apparently this is the only camera she wants and no other one will work. My wife told me that she said not to bother with any other camera.
Click to expand...

My gut reaction would be to buy her a disposable camera and be done with it. Or pay part of it and have her pay the rest.
 
Here's a review:

www.dpreview.com

Sony a6400 review

Sony's a6400 is a near-universally capable camera, with a market-leading autofocus implementation at a surprisingly modest price. Find out all the details on how the a6400 performs in our full review.
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com

It will be a good camera. The 16-50mm lens will act like a 24-75mm lens due to the APS-C sensor crop factor. If it's all she wants (i.e. - nothing else will do), and you're willing to buy it for her, it'll perform as well as she can expect.
 
It's probably the safest bet as far as either buying into a system and also for resale value should she lose interest. They hold their value well on the 2nd hand market.

A fast prime in the 'normal' focal range might be on the radar for a second lens later on.


Also, something in the telephoto range can also help when starting out so that she can learn where she 'sees' most photographs. I personally would be fine without anything under 50mm on APS-C for how I like to shoot.

 
If she is anything like me, don't choose for her.
 
That a6400 looks pretty sweet. Interchangeable lens too. The crop sensor cameras from Sony is quite good.
 
Does this tippity top of the wishlist item satisfy the requirements of school camera class?
 
Figured one last update here. Again, I appreciate all the suggestions, but once I learned she actually had a camera in mind that kind of changed my direction of things.

It was a bit more than I was hoping to spend, but it being $150 off for "Black Friday" I figured it was a good buy, plus a $30 rebate. Here's hoping she like it. It also came with a camera bag and 64GB SD card (not included in the picture).

20231109_180140.jpg



Any other items or accessories she might want for it, she's on her own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top