Digital Cameras

[classicman]

Son is looking for a digital camera that can utilize multiple lenses.
Not just a point and shoot. Looking for one that he can use for actual photography on an amateur scale.

Price range for initial purchase of body and first lens is about $300 max.

Thanks,

[BigV]

The kind of camera you're describing is a DSLR, and you're gonna have to go to craigslist or the local pawnshop to git'er done for under $300.

The other technology is EVIL, see discussion in the Photography 101 thread.

As for manufacturer, I'm a Canon man, but Nikon is the other titan in this field. All the other top tier makers have superlative equipment too, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, etc. You're gonna have a hard time keeping it in that price range. I suggest you look for a Canon EOS Rebel.

[glatt]

gonna have to compromise on one of those requirements. Or buy used.

There are a handful of good cameras for under $300 that you can use for more serious photography, but they don't have the interchangeable lenses or the larger sensor (we're talking physical size, not pixel size.)

[Gravdigr]

According to last Sunday's sale papers, he'll need at least another $300, to go new. And some time to shop.

[zippyt]

Sams club around here has had Cannon and Minolta packages with Digi cam SLR body 2 lenses , flash (?) bag and chargers etc... for around $500 ish , More than you want to spend but a Pretty good deal for all those goodys

[classicman]

thanks guys ... after 4 stores and more searching ... Nothing remotely close to what he wanted anywhere in our price range.
I think we are getting a shotgun instead - lol! Ahhh to be young.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Good move, with a shotgun he can steal a camera.

[classicman]

more vacillating... a putter has now been entered into the foray...
Still leaning towards the camera as of this post...

He made an interesting point that we hadn't considered yesterday. Buying a cheaper point & shoot camera makes virtually no sense when his phone has an 8 megapix camera included.

Thoughts?

[Undertoad]

Megapixels are now a useless measurement of the quality a camera will produce. There is not so much difference between say 6MP and 8MP. It's more about the lens, what decisions the camera allows you to make, and how well the camera makes decisions that you don't make.

For web work in the last few months, I have been looking at output from an iphone4 (5MP) versus a higher-level 5-year-old Panasonic Lumix (also 5MP), and the Lumix wins every single time. This particular Lumix, the FZ7, does not have interchangeable lenses, and is sorta halfway between a compact and DSLR. It's considered "prosumer" and older models are under $100 on eBay.

Also, real cams have things like serious optical zoom (Lumix FZ models have either 12x or 18x), image stabilization, a usable flash with red-eye reduction etc. etc.

[Pico and ME]

Look into the FujiFilm FinePix S-series cameras. They're pretty good for the money. I really liked my s5200.

[Bullitt]

What UT said. MP doesn't mean jack when you consider just as or more important factors such as image sensor size, lens quality, image stabilization, focal range, and aperture range. All of these things are what makes a DSLR heads above some camera phone, even if the DSLR is 6mp and the camera phone is 8mp. Cramming all those pixels onto a tiny image sensor results in noisy images with a lot of detail lost. I have an FZ35, the newer edition of the FZ7 so same concept of superzoom "prosumer", it takes great images. I would take UT's advice and look for an FZ7. Its compact, great zoom, image stabilization that actually works and you can see in action, good flash, more than enough MP, etc.

No picture I've taken that you've seen here or on my SmugMug has been any higher than 8-12mp. Before last winter, I never had a camera above 8mp. You just don't need super high mp, there are more important factors at work.

[Nirvana]

I have a Lumix FZ8 12x zoom love it love it love it

[classicman]

The reference to the phone camera was that IF we are buying one, then we have to step up and buy the better camera. The phone camera is fine for pics of family and friends at parties and all that. To get into photography, he will def need a much better camera.

That Lumix is one that we are looking at, as well as an Olympus, Sony, Nikon and Canon...
Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[Bullitt]

From my experiences and research before getting my Lumix: Canon has a good line of superzooms, the S series. Their G-series is fantastic but very expensive and limited zoom. Nikon superzooms haven't received glowing reviews. Sony is Sony, overpriced and doesn't offer anything others don't for the premium cost. Olympus unsure, my parents have a point and shoot from them that they like a lot. Seems like decent build quality so I wouldn't rule them out.

[classicman]

Thanks for the info everyone -

The sales guy was really pushing the Nikon.

I had an Olymus OM-10 a thousand years ago and loved it. I don't think my experience from thirty years ago means much though.

Sony - yep - overpriced, but ....

I have a Canon now, point & click, I love it.

I've got him to get off the initial emotional response and into a deeper, more information gathering mode... so far so good.