Beginner camera question

[CincyDave]

To all the photographers out there. DW has decided she wants something better than her cell phone to take pictures with. Neither of us really know anything about cameras or photography. It would mainly be used for things like vacation pics, grandkid pics, and bird photography (she is into watching bald eagles).

Don’t want anything too expensive or complicated. A quick search for cameras for beginners seems to bring up the Nikon DS 3500 a lot. Any thoughts on this one? Pros and cons? Anything in a similar price range that might be a better choice? It looks like this one goes for around $500.

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Sunset]

I bought this for DW 3.5 yrs ago.
I liked it so much, I bought one for myself.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product-archive/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-a900.html

I've had large SLR camera's , and after you buy a couple of lenses, the stuff is too heavy to drag around on vacation.

Things I like are: it takes 4K video, has a great 35x optical zoom built in (digital zoom is fake marketing), the tilting LCD is something I've used more than I thought I would.

The thing I don't like about it, is that it doesn't save a RAW file of the image.

 

[Bamaman]

I've got a Lunix camera made by Panasonic, and it has more features.

The new cameras don't come with printed owners' manuals. The manuals are online, and they're like reading a foreign language. And I'm actually a pretty good amateur photographer when using a 35 mm film camera.

Finding simple cameras to use is not easy.

 

[Ronstar]

Th D3500 looks like a good DSLR for a beginner. I had the D5200 and it was great.

I see that the D3500 comes with a 18-55mm lens. That lens is great for vacation pics, so-so for your grandkid pics, and almost useless for bird photography. You would need a longer telephoto lens for birds and for grandkids in sports/play at distances of over 30-50 ft.

There is a D3500 kit that includes the 18-55mm lens and a 70-300 lens at B&H photo for $847. The 70-300 lens would be a great beginner lens for bird photography (20-100 ft away) and also for taking photos of the kids. Good for vacation pics too, but you won't get as much landscape in the frame of a 70-300 as you do with the 18-55.

So I would recommend considering the D3500, 18-55mm and 70-300.

I would also recommend taking a look at the Sony A6000 mirrorless. B&H photo has a A6000 camera combo that comes with a 16-50mm and 55-210mm lenses for $998. This bundle would have you covered for vacation, grandkids and close in bird photography.

Almost all new DSLR's are going mirrorless. So the technology in the Sony is most likely more advanced that the Nikon. I don't know much about the D6000, but I researched it for my SIL. It gets great reviews. SIL bought it and her and BIL like it but I don't think they use it much. They are into bird photography too, but bird photography is best at around 600mm.

 

[CaptTom]

The secret about photography is there's no secret. The old-timers bemoan the loss of technical skill with F-stops and exposures that digital cameras have brought. But in the end, the hardware is almost irrelevant. You can take award-winning photos with a cell phone camera. You just need to be in the right place at the right time, and have the "eye" to see the unique aspect of a scene. Sometimes it's a close-up, sometimes it's the light, whatever.

That said, there are techniques. First and foremost, take lots of pictures. One of them is bound to come out. In the days of film, good photographers would take dozens of pictures, and only print the good ones. With digital, you can take hundreds. Just be diligent about going through them and deleting ruthlessly or you'll be overwhelmed.

Second, frame the shot. Make sure that tower or lighthouse is plumb, the horizon is level, or you have some interesting parallax or whatever.

The huge advantage a "real" camera gives you over a cell phone is the ability to zoom. This can turn a boring landscape or crowded event into a clear shot of one structure or person. Be sure to get something with a half-decent, stabilized optical zoom.

Oh, and the other advantage is you'll be more likely to frame the shot the "right" way. I'm so tired of seeing narrow vertical photos because people don't realize they can turn their phones to "landscape" mode.

 

[target2019]

To all the photographers out there. DW has decided she wants something better than her cell phone to take pictures with. Neither of us really know anything about cameras or photography. It would mainly be used for things like vacation pics, grandkid pics, and bird photography (she is into watching bald eagles).

Don’t want anything too expensive or complicated. A quick search for cameras for beginners seems to bring up the Nikon DS 3500 a lot. Any thoughts on this one? Pros and cons? Anything in a similar price range that might be a better choice? It looks like this one goes for around $500.

Thanks for any thoughts.

I have a Nikon Coolpix S7000 (16MP). It's fallen into disuse, but a good camera for beginners. Check this page for similar cameras, including A1000 and A900. These are cameras which are not bulky, but take very good pictures nonetheless. Other will turn their noses up, but this is the type of camera to begin with.

Catching bald eagles will require a non-point-and-shoot with a telephoto lens. But it might be right for her. Also need a tripod, chair, and good vantage point. Oh yeah, a remote trigger too.

 

[target2019]

I've got a Lunix camera made by Panasonic, and it has more features.

The new cameras don't come with printed owners' manuals. The manuals are online, and they're like reading a foreign language. And I'm actually a pretty good amateur photographer when using a 35 mm film camera.

Finding simple cameras to use is not easy.

Son gave his old Lumix GF-1 to daughter. She used it once and found it very complicated. Of course she is not a patient person. This type of camera is very dated, but would be a good choice to teach someone about f-stop, shutter speed and ASA. Sorta what you're saying...

 

[target2019]

I bought this for DW 3.5 yrs ago.
I liked it so much, I bought one for myself.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product-archive/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-a900.html

I've had large SLR camera's , and after you buy a couple of lenses, the stuff is too heavy to drag around on vacation.

Things I like are: it takes 4K video, has a great 35x optical zoom built in (digital zoom is fake marketing), the tilting LCD is something I've used more than I thought I would.

The thing I don't like about it, is that it doesn't save a RAW file of the image.

I stopped SLR bulk many years ago. It was great for some things, but just not right for me.

Your nexxt camera will be a Leica?
https://cameradecision.com/features/Best-Compact-cameras-with-RAW-support

 

[Jerry1]

I bought this for DW 3.5 yrs ago.
I liked it so much, I bought one for myself.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product-archive/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-a900.html

I've had large SLR camera's , and after you buy a couple of lenses, the stuff is too heavy to drag around on vacation.

Things I like are: it takes 4K video, has a great 35x optical zoom built in (digital zoom is fake marketing), the tilting LCD is something I've used more than I thought I would.

The thing I don't like about it, is that it doesn't save a RAW file of the image.

My wife is the photographer of the family and this camera hits a lot of the uses for her. The OP should really check out this camera. As pointed out in this post (above), unless you’re seriously focused on photography, carrying a bunch of camera equipment around on vacation is a pain. And as also pointed out, unless you go way up on the zoom lens, you’re not going to get those high end nature pictures. This camera is a great looking next step after a phone. My DW doesn’t have this model, but before her phone camera got as good as it is now, she used a similar version of this.

Once you go beyond something like this camera, you’re probably on your way to a new hobby. At that point, you’ll be buying lots of equipment. Personally, I’d still recommend the above camera as it will give you a sense of whether or not you want to get more into the hobby of photography and it’s associated expenses.

 

[Aerides]

I have an entry level Canon Rebel dslr. It's an older model that I got on a deal from adorama 5 year ago and still works great. I paid under $500 in a combo package with a high end printer. They often have deals on basic models as well at costco.

I use the lens that came with (an 18-35), a basic multi-purpose one. Yes, phone cameras have come a long way, but pics with my Rebel still look better. I mainly got mine for small product photography for my hobby business, but I use it on trips as well.

One thing, even if she doesn't get multiple lenses, the camera is still bulky, and needs its own bag for trips (definitely something cross-body, with pockets for a phone and wallet and stuff). So that's gonna take the place of a purse or carry on. Or at least put its padded bag in the middle of your biggest stuffed suitcase. It can be less than practical if she wants to take pics say, out on a 3 hour hike.

 

[DrRoy]

DW has decided she wants something better than her cell phone to take pictures with. Neither of us really know anything about cameras or photography. It would mainly be used for things like vacation pics, grandkid pics, and bird photography (she is into watching bald eagles).

Don’t want anything too expensive or complicated. A quick search for cameras for beginners seems to bring up the Nikon DS 3500 a lot. Any thoughts on this one? Pros and cons? Anything in a similar price range that might be a better choice? It looks like this one goes for around $500.

Unless you are wanting to change lenses or get into very advanced birding, I would suggest that you get a higher level point and shoot with good telephoto range. I am not very familiar with that type of camera so do not have a specific suggestion. The Nikon D3500 is a good entry DSLR, but a 5000 series is better and not harder to use.

 

[CincyDave]

Thank you all very much for the replies and recommendations! I think the first decision we need to make is whether to get a DSLR/mirrorless, or something more compact and simpler with a high optical zoom. I do worry that if it's too complicated, she won't use it and also the fact that there is a lot more equipment to carry around with a DSLR. Consumer Reports has a pretty in depth report on cameras which I'm looking at now. Never realized buying a camera would be so complicated. Again, thanks for all the replies.

 

[easysurfer]

Thank you all very much for the replies and recommendations! I think the first decision we need to make is whether to get a DSLR/mirrorless, or something more compact and simpler with a high optical zoom. I do worry that if it's too complicated, she won't use it and also the fact that there is a lot more equipment to carry around with a DSLR. Consumer Reports has a pretty in depth report on cameras which I'm looking at now. Never realized buying a camera would be so complicated. Again, thanks for all the replies.

As the saying goes, "The best camera is the one that's with you".

You don't want to spend a lot buying a really nice camera and gear but find yourself not wanting to lug the equipment around.

I think you are approaching things right buy knowing what will be the camera's use and size to narrow things down. I guess similar to car shopping. Knowing if you want a subcompact or a SUV or sports car already helps rule out some choices.

 

[someguy]

I know lots of others have weighed in but wanted to reinforce the best camera is the one you have with you. Cell phone cameras have gotten good enough for a wide range of needs. The big exceptions, IMO, are high zoom and movement/fast focus. Trying to catch a kid or dog at that perfect instant and without blur is nearly impossible with a cell phone cam. Also, long range zooming in just doesn't exist, or is faked with digital zoom.

I'm a huge fan of the Sony RX100 series (check out lightly used ones a couple generations old for a great value) and Canon G7 X mark II. Both will fit realistically in a jeans pocket or a small handbag. They have superb image quality and bigger sensors than most of the point and shoot, including the super zooms. In the hands of someone who's learned their features, they can focus very fast and have fast lenses to help in low light and to reduce blur. They can be used one-handed and won't tire you out carrying them or attract unwanted attention. Their main lack for OP's needs are in long range zoom.

 

[samm]

Last year I sold my Canon SL1 DSLR and vowed to never again buy a DSLR camera because they are too heavy and big to carry all the time.

I replaced the DSLR with a small Canon PowerShot that is far more practical.

https://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Digital-Optical-Stabilization/dp/B019UDI1EE

 

[MBAustin]

I bought a Sony A6000 mirrorless a few years ago. Although I had originally planned to get a DSLR (having been a big film SLR user back when that was a thing), the size/weight advantage of the mirrorless is amazing, and I still can use multiple lenses based on what I'm shooting. If she wants to be able to do that, I would go mirrorless, otherwise, a good solid point-and-shoot should do the trick. I had a Sony point-and-shoot and interestingly many of the the controls are quite similar so if she masters that and wants to move up (or down) later, it would be easier if she stayed in one brand.

In addition to Consumer Reports, she could go to a good independent camera store and talk through the advantages/features of different cameras and brands and actually hold them. I went with Sony over other brands as I felt it fit my (small) hands better and wouldn't have known that if I hadn't gone into the store.

 

[OldShooter]

From advising others on this topic, I have learned that the first question has to be "How big a camera is she willing to carry on a regular basis?" This is derived from the ironclad rule that the best camera is the one you have with you.

DW has carried Panasonic ZS-series cameras for years, currently a ZS-70. This size fits comfortably in her purse, where the bigger cameras with protruding lenses and fake pentaprism bulges to not come close. For routine use, the images this camera produces are indistinguishable from what I get from a few thousand $$ in micro four thirds equipment. More than once I have been proud of a travel picture that turned out to be from her camera.

Forget worrying about camera features. From what you say, she will just use the fully-auto setting (as DW does) and the results will be just fine. When she wants to get more sophisticated with depth of field, bokeh, and motion-stopping shutter speeds, the ZS-class cameras from Panny, Olympus, Nikon and Canon will take her a long ways. Often the first thing we buy just teaches us what we really wanted. If she starts to really get into photography you can expect that to happen here, too.

 

[stepford]

It would mainly be used for things like vacation pics, grandkid pics, and bird photography (she is into watching bald eagles).

For vacation pics and grandkid pics all the suggestions made so far are fine. Bird photography is a whole different ballgame. For this you really need a long lens. How long is a matter of personal preference, but I'd say at least 400mm.

Fortunately compact "superzoom" cameras are available with even longer lenses. I bought my wife a Nikon B600 which has an effective zoom range of 24-1440mm and lets her take some great bird photos. The camera is a bit too chunky to put in a purse, but weighing a bit over 1 pound is light enough for her to carry around all day. Several other manufacturers make similar cameras with differing costs and capabilities. I think we paid around $300 for ours.

a little technical note: As on all the compact cameras the focal lengths are given in 35mm equivalents. The lens on the B600 has a real focal length of 258mm rather than 1440mm, but gets the same field of view as a 1440mm lens by using a smaller sensor size. A real 1440mm lens on a 35mm camera would weigh over 10 lbs and cost an ungodly amount. This is why compact superzooms are so cool.

 

[Sunset]

Besides the camera, for any long zoom shooting, she will also need to carry a tripod.

A compact camera can fit on a tiny tripod, but a DSLR will need a big one.

Possibly work around would be to carry a bean bag.

I'd be interested to know what the fantastic photographers on this site use, instead of a tripod, if anything.

 

[Green Papaya]

I passed on my DSLRs to my son. I used to carry at least two lens and a body on vacation but they became too heavy, especially if you like hiking. I still keep my Canon G16 because it has full manual functions, takes raw files, and is lighter to carry around on vacation. However, it is 7 yrs old. I am sure you can find something newer and better nowadays.

 

[stepford]

Besides the camera, for any long zoom shooting, she will also need to carry a tripod.

With modern image stabilization (IS) this isn't really true anymore. Current digital cameras with 4-5 stops of image stabilization can produce quite sharp handheld images even at longer focal lengths. I will admit that at the superlong lengths (>1000mm equivalent) even a good image stabilization system can benefit from some sort of support, but you might be surprised how well IS systems work these days. My wife never uses a tripod with her (up to) 1440mm B600 and gets sharp results at all focal lengths. At the longest lengths, though, she usually tries to steady her hands on something like a bench or fence post when shooting.

 

[OldShooter]

... I'd be interested to know what the fantastic photographers on this site use, instead of a tripod, if anything.

Well, I don't know about "fantastic" but I use a monopod. Image stabilization is nice, but I belong to the school that believes there is no such thing as a camera that is too stable. Here's the setup in use, game drive in Africa Feb. 2020:

​

Monopod leg from Benro carbon tripod, Acratech SP ball head, Acratech lever lock Arca-Swiss clamp. A monopod is far more versatile and far less bulk than a tripod.

For the OP, don't worry about 'pods. If DW decides she is losing too many shots to instability, that will be the time to start shopping.

 

[Freedom56]

Don't buy a DSLR (I have two of them), they are going obsolete. Buy a mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses (I have two of them). The Panasonic GX85 is a nice compact solution with in body stabilization and can also shoot 4K video. It is often on special for $498 with two lenses. You can also buy a Canon M50 for about $400 on special with one kit lens. However, the video quality of the Canon does not compare to the Panasonic.

 

[Dave J]

Start with something more compact with a built in lens in the $300-$400 range(used). If she gets bit by the bug and wants to move up, she will have some experience and can sell the old camera for not too much less than she got it for. You can get some very good photos from these cameras. I started that way, got bit by the bug, and $300-$400 is nothing. A fun hobby.

 

[CincyDave]

OP here. Thank you all again VERY MUCH for all the input and valuable information. After reading all the posts and doing some more research online, I'm thinking a superzoom might be a better choice than a DSLR where you would need to buy additional expensive lenses to get the same zoom as a superzoom. I realize the quality of the photos may not be quite as good as a DSLR but from what I've read a superzoom will still take very good pics. I'm thinking something with a 30x+ zoom would be great for her needs, particularly birding photographs at a distance.

I've seen these cameras referred to as "bridge cameras" which I assume means bridging between a simple point and shoot and a more professional DSLR camera. So many choices out there.