For the last year or so we’ve been taking all our photo’s with our cameras, which are fine but I’m wanting something a bit better.

When we’re out and about or for special occassions I’d like a camera thats more ‘stable’ – that is it takes reliable, focussed shots and will result in good photo’s when enlarged.

I’m not particularly bothered about having a massive zoom as most of the pictures will be of the family, indoors and out.

I’ve always had an SLR itch that I’d like to scratch, although a compact is probably more suited to my needs but as its a ‘proper’ camera I’m probably more likely to take it out with me.

Can anyone make any reccomendations for anything under £400, or would simply plumping for whichever Nikon or Cannon I like the most be a safe bet?

How about a Fuji XT10? Easily as good as a cheap dslr.

Looks a bit pricey, second hand I assume?

problem with DSLRs is.. the lenses, you end up spending as much on lenses as the camera. however, they are more future proof than the camera bodies themselves.

my “zoom” lens was 200 quid. fixed focus 50mm portrait lens 80 quid.

got fed up of arseing around and bought a nice little samsung point n shoot for 150 quid.. great little thing.

prior to the dslr i had a lower end fuji, not quite what kiwijohn suggests and it did me well 🙂

I would go to a camera shop and handle a few – see how they feel in your hand, power them on and see if you think you’d get on with the menu system etc…

I’ve bought some cameras in the past thinking they’re ideal, but have had to move them on as I’ve not got on with the balance in my hand or the menu systems.

I’m now on my phone camera and a full on SLR 🙂

I had same dilemma recently. My missus requested same for our recent big holiday. I got a second hand Nikon d3100 with kit lens , which was a mid size zoom. Cost me less than £200 and was basically unused. Super light, super good pictures and video, missus was super happy . Pictures look great on the laptop. Latest gen is 3300 but another few hundred or so, and was not a lot different. I used to have some nice slr lenses, but refused to carry them and never used them.

That’s a good point Jerome, I would go for at least one-generation back from the current new offerings, either NOS or mint second hand.

Also, if you use the back screen a lot for picture taking, make sure you go for a high res one. I hate the photo-taking process on low res screens (I’m not a fan of screens as a viewfinder full stop, but if you do, the higher res the better)

If you want to spend more look for the Nikon with high definition back screen that also swivels….

Sony RX100 seems to be the go to recommendation; but the ergonomics are a bit iffy & I’m not sold on the menu systems. A few people on here seem to have knackered the lenses too.

The Sony A5000 seems to be a popular mirrorless compact, but think about whether you see yourself buying different lenses or not; I’m not sure there’s much point in a system like this if you are going to just keep the kit lens on forever more.

I like the look of the Panasonic GF7, for a good value mirrorless compact & I think that the lens mount is compatible with Olympus, so opens up a wide range of lenses.

I keep looking at the Nikon DL24-85 which has recently come out; it’s got a large sensor (like the Sony RX100) and a fast lens. The ergonomics look better to me than the RX100 & I’m used to Nikon’s menus. It’s currently over your budget at around £550 but this will probably come down in a few months, as it’s such a new camera.

Depends what you are really after.

Dslr, good range of control over how you shoot and lots of room for options on expansion and new lenses etc, image quality is generally very good – depending on the operator. However, they are bulky can be costly, heavier than a compact or compact system, learning how to use it properly is time consuming.

Compacts, small light, easy to use lower image quality than a dslr, better than a phone. No option to change lens so limited to whatever it has at the time. Limited flexibility on control.

Get something you’ll enjoy using.

samsung nx3000 any good?

Pieface, if you’re in the Leeds or Huddersfield area I have a Canon 400D with lenses and accessories that I letting go very cheap, much less than you’re prepared to spend

A lot of mirrorless acolytes will tell you to go for one of those, although they are a bit more expensive.

I think it boils down to whether you just want a camera to take decent pictures, or whether you want to really get ‘into’ photography. Either type will serve you well for the former, but in my opinion, based on 25+ years of doing photography, an SLR type camera (with a proper mirror, not a digital viewfinder), will help you learn how to compose and frame images better. I dare say some have become good photographers simply using a LCD screen on the back of the camera. I, and many others, prefer a mirrored optical finder though. Especially when trying to critically focus for portraits, using a wide aperture lens. And you can use an optical finder to look through the lens, even without taking pictures or turning the camera on. Anyway, whatever suits.

Both Canon and Nikon are comparable in terms of lens range and quality. On higher end Nikon bodies (with a built-in autofocus motor and mechanical aperture control), you’ll have access to a much larger range of lenses and equipment (eg close up gear). Both systems will also offer access to a vastly superior range of flash equipment. I think Fuji use rebadged Sunpak flashguns, which are very expensive for what they are. Buying into a system from Canon or Nikon will offer far more scope for future expansion.

Mirrorless will be smaller and lighter (although not by much really, for APS-C sensor cameras). Micro 4/3rds isn’t as good, quality wise, as APS-C (smaller sensor, not as good in low light). APS-C mirrorless cameras and equipment is relatively expensive.

Shopping second hand for a DSLR would be a very good idea, on your budget. You could get a very decent body, and a couple of nice lenses for your £400. You could get something like a D90, with an 18-55mm and a 50mm f1.8 lens. The latter will be superb for portraits. An older AF-D model can be had for peanuts; I recently bought a mint condition one for £50 (which was less than a new battery for my camera)!

I’d seriously consider Craigxxl’s Canon outfit; I was recently considering this for a friend, and it’s a superb kit for the money! You’d have enough let over for another couple of lenses! 🙂

samsung nx3000 any good?

Could well be a bargain as Samsung have withdrawn from the camera business.

In general a dslr will give you the best value for money at the expense of size. But if you can live with the size you might as well scratch the itch.

I’ve been using a Canon EOS100D for the past few months with a 24mm pancake lens. The body is really small for an SLR – smallest digital SLR out there apparently – and with the low profile lens on it, you get a really compact SLR package that gives really decent results. The field of view using the lens is close to the perspective of the human eye and, going forward, you can always invest in more lens options.

I guess it depends a little on how you see your interest in photography developing, but I’ve been amazed by how well the above works. The plasticky kit lens supplied, you can always sell on or keep as a spare/stand-by.

Thanks all.

Cragxxl – YGM

I recently bought a Nikon D3300 for £300 with lens. It’s quite dinky and seems a tiny amount of money for what it does – image stabilisation, video, lots of megapixels. I’m sure the equivalent Canon etc. would be equally good.

I also have a Panasonic compact TZ-10 which I’ve found to be absolutely brilliant. It’s always with me and takes great photos. You can control aperture, shutter speed etc. but you can’t use filters or take raw or take deliberately out of focus shots. The zoom moves in steps, too. Those are pretty minor issues for most people. I’ve never worked out its macro settings either.

The Panasonic would be my desert island discs choice.