• This topic has 41 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 3 years ago by toby1.
Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 42 total)
  • camera advice
  • winston
    Free Member

    My 13 year old daughter has expressed an interest in photography and is taking art for GCSE and probably A level as well. She is already using her old iphone to take some quite good photo’s to use in art projects etc and has asked for a camera for xmas. Now I used to be into photography in the film era but the last camera I bought was a Nikon D70 about 15 years ago.

    she is clear she doesn’t want a great big DSLR but something she can put in her pocket or at least in a small bag and use whenever she is out, mainly for macro, portrait and urban rather than expansive landscapes or telephoto.

    Having looked there seems to be a huge range of cameras out there and my question is firstly, with phones being so good (not hers perhaps but my S10 takes pretty good photo’s) am I going to be disappointed by what I can get for 3-400 quid? I used to buy all my film cameras used and got great value for money, but is that even possible now with tech moving so fast?
    I’ve noticed that higher end mirrorless seem to hold value quite well – but i’d be worried that anything expensive and electronic just won’t last.

    Basically can you get a good compact camera for under £500 which won’t just get obsolete/stop working after a year or do you basically have to spend a grand plus for a Fujifilm X100 etc?

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    You don’t need to spend anything like that.

    I’ve bought many SH without a single issue. I think some shops sell with warranties also.

    SH prices.drop over time but I wouldn’t call my RX100 redundant or obselete, I think they are £100 ah just now, the new/updated one is £300+?

    I had mirror less but realized I could not justify a camera that good and also it was too big to carry everywhere. I went for sensor size

    tall_martin
    Full Member

    I have had a cannon g9 since 2010. They seem to be £100-200 on eBay.

    I will fit in a big pocket.

    It would be great for all of the things you are after. Newer cameras are better at low light.

    I suspect any of the cannon g series would be great.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    Mikeypies
    Free Member

    Just buy a second hand DSL’s I picked up a Nikon D5000 for £75 with a low shutter count and the suitable lens for another £75 ,if she changes her mind you can simply resist it, not all DSL’s are big and the big advantage over compact cameras are that the menus for manual settings are easier to access.

    She won’t need anything more than a half decent mobile phone camera for gcse and that from the wife who is a art teacher.

    thisisnotaspoon
    Free Member

    Cameras (like bikes) dont get worse over time, but new ones get better. I’ve got a knackered old Nikon compact, must be 10+ years old that still takes a decent photos.

    It is more limited though, low light, the AF isnt quick, etc. A bit like a 10 year old bike is harder work downhill, but ultimately just as fast overall as your legs are the limiting factor.

    Or to put it better, pick a budget and pick the canon/nikon/fuji that fits it best. There wont be too many oddities, older higher end cameras end up about the same value as newer mid range ones with similar specs/features/performance.

    grum
    Free Member

    Curve ball but would she be interested in an old 35mm film camera and a basic black and white developing kit? I think it would offer more difference to a phone camera and learning with manual focus lenses etc is a great hands on experience.

    eg https://mifsuds.com/product/used-olympus-om-1n-chrome/

    Or go the whole hog and get a medium format film camera https://mifsuds.com/product/used-bronica-sq-b-camera-body/

    Depends how much of a hipster she is I guess 🙂

    If you buy a decent mirrorless camera they won’t be obsolete in a year but to get the most out of them you would ultimately want at least 3-4 different lenses, which ramps the cost up a lot.

    Cougar
    Full Member

    STW, two days ago:

    Camera for 11 yr old

    colournoise
    Full Member

    As a GCSE Photography teacher, I don’t really mind what camera my students have if they have one of their own – I’m just glad they’re that engaged to want one (having said that, I’m lucky enough to teach in a school that funded enough cameras for every one of my students to use one each in lessons).

    The demands of GCSE don’t need anything more than what a modern phone camera can do. It’s nice to have a decent bit of kit but by no means necessary in any way.

    When parents ask me this question, my response is always to set a budget and then buy whatever Sony fits that.

    winston
    Free Member

    @grum  that is a fantastic idea – whilst I don’t think it will suit for what she wants a camera for in general, I have a couple of 35mm SLR’s in the loft which I might get down and we can have a play with B&W developing.

    It may be more to indulge dad though…..

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    Macro and urban narrows it down. You want something really user friendly. Will have a look later. Compact zoom or a prime and macro adapter may be a good call to keep costs down.

    I had a Sony RX100 but the usability and macro capabilities were very poor IME, so as a camera it was a let down. Ended up with a (now discontinued) Pentax MX-1 compact zoom which has a nice bright lens and ‘super-macro’ (focuses down to 1cm!). As an all-rounder on the whole very happy with it.

    Does she have any experience with cameras/UI?

    footflaps
    Full Member

    Cameras (like bikes) dont get worse over time, but new ones get better. I’ve got a knackered old Nikon compact, must be 10+ years old that still takes a decent photos.

    +1

    Likewise all the manual controls haven’t changed in decades, so nothing wrong with a 10 year old Nikon D80 (as an example).

    EDIT: The video stuff does seem to have come on a lot as 10 year old DLSRs didn’t have the processing power to handle high res video. But for stills, there’s nothing much in it.

    grum
    Free Member

    Something like this plus a changing bag would do the trick

    https://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-paterson-ilford-film-processing-starter-kit-ptp574-.htm

    I gather film photography is actually pretty popular with some younger folk, I guess as an antidote to the digital world they mostly live in, same as with vinyl.

    winston
    Free Member

    @p7eaven

    Macro is important – I’d ideally like it to be down to 4 or 5 cm if possible. Her interest in art seems to centre around close ups and roofline, trees and portraiture. I think she might get into vlogging too though – connectivity seems key here.

    I was looking at something like this?

    jamiemcf
    Full Member

    The best camera is the one on her hand. Composition is key not an all.singing all dancing SLR. I say that as someone with an all singing all dancing SLR.

    A well composed photo on a camera phone will always be better than a poorly composed image from a DSLR

    colournoise
    Full Member

    Totally agree with Jamie there. I have a small collection of cameras, but the big boys very rarely come out to play. Partly due to my love of dirty, lofi images but mostly because they’re a right faff. The vast majority of my photography is done with Google Photosphere on my phone (I use it for non-360 images), or my little slightly modded Fuji XP130.

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    @winston that fujifilm should be a nice starter camera. The kit lens I suppose is the biggest ‘weakness’ but it’s solid enough in reviews. 45mm is just doable for portraits.

    ‘Macro’ with that lens would be 13cm at best. So that would be something to think about. I’d be looking to see if an extension/converter tube kit (£40ish?) would work with this lens in order to get closer without splashing a small fortune on a dedicated macro lens? Even then I think she’d be better off with the 18-55mm kit lens for portraits vs the 15-45mm. Not sure if that’s still sold as a kit option? Still (more) useless for macro unless want to play around with adapters and reverso-lens shenanigans.

    Vlogging? The XA-5 I believe only reaches 15fps at 4k so 1080p would assumedly be used? It gets favourable reviews, and the screen flips right up so v useful as a monitor when vlogging (just near in mind that the hotshoe would be blocked)

    There is an external mic option which is pretty much essential for vlogging. That’s the one thing that would put me off my forming suggestion of a large-sensor compact zoom such as the Canon G9X Mkii, G7X etc.

    It’s always difficult to cover such a diverse range of requirements to a budget. Othwerwise we’d all just buy the best most usable mirrorless system and then a top-notch lens for every occasion 🤑

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    BTW the X100 is a very nice camera, have a few friends with one or another version and haven’t heard (or read) of any significant longevity probs/weaknesses. Pants for macro tho…

    As for longevity? Can only speak from personal experience, ymmv.

    Alongside my DSLRS (Still can use my 20yr old Canon D30!) I’ve always kept a compact zoom backup, going right back to 2001 and so have a owned a good few, always upgrading/selling on. Only ever had a failure once and that was a Sony RX100 Mk1. The infamous ‘lens error’.

    Other than the Sony have used a handful of Nikon, Lumix and Powershot compacts, and all no problems. The MX-1 I use nowadays is built like the proverbial with brass plates etc. If it had a bigger sensor it would be near perfect. As it is it still knocks spots off any 12mp smartphone.

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    OP I took a few 1cm macro samples this morning on the Pentax MX-1. Converted from RAW in Snapseed just to give an idea. Don’t have a flickr account so the preview resolution reproduced here is immaterial as imgbox downsize the uploads. The MX-1 generated 26MB RAW files.

    Handheld, daylight @ 100ISO (internal ND filter off)

    Victorinox SD Classic Alox, 20p and 5p coins. You can see fingerprints on the tiny scissors on the crop (pic 4). And the grain in the stainless steel

    If interchangeable lens cameras are more her thing then I’d still recommend grabbing an older smaller-sensor compact zoom for macro. The MX-1 is the most solid all-rounder I’ve found. This is proven out on the DPreview studio comparison tool IMO

    So far it’s stopped me investing in an X100T as I’m not printing large these days. I’ll probably get an X100 at some point for the extra resolution and the viewfinder, but I won’t be moving this on, it’s an unsung gem IMO.

    thisisnotaspoon
    Free Member

    @grum that is a fantastic idea – whilst I don’t think it will suit for what she wants a camera for in general, I have a couple of 35mm SLR’s in the loft which I might get down and we can have a play with B&W developing.

    It may be more to indulge dad though…..

    Get them out and use them, I’m a magpie for stuff like this on facebook marketplace. Last thing I bought was a job lot of cameras and lenses. It was a crying shame that the cameras had obviously sat for so long that all the seals were rotten, the batteries had leaked, etc. The job lot paid for itself with one lense that I actually wanted, and the cameras were used for spares but still a shame as I’d happily have given them away if anyone actually wanted to use them.

    Curve ball but would she be interested in an old 35mm film camera and a basic black and white developing kit? I think it would offer more difference to a phone camera and learning with manual focus lenses etc is a great hands on experience.

    I think the big benefit of using film is it forces you to work slowly and methodically. You have to frame up the shot and think “is this worth the cost of film/developing” before pressing the shutter. Whereas digital tends to encourage just pressing the button and then sifting through thousands of images in the evening.

    But actually learning the technical stuff from experience (e.g. the difference between under/correct/overexposed raw or film then being corrected in lightroom/developing) is easier on a digital camera as you can go outside, take three photos, plug it in, tweak the levels then put them side by side and see how it affects the highlights and shadows and then you know immediately how you can apply that. Doing the same experiment with film would take weeks (and cost money). Ditto flash photography, with film it’s basically guesswork unless you have time to play with a light meter (fine in a studio, not really practical in the real world).

    finishthat
    Free Member

    Fuji X100 original version have bad problem with aperture mechanism before a certain serial number , all the black ones are OK , and all the later models are fine.
    I have 2 of the original model that only work at F2 , its fine iso and built in proper ND filter can be tweaked in very bright conditions. They were very cheap used buy with fault and are really nice things for enthusiasts , macro is OK – goes very close , the flash is amazing too – perfect balance for fill in . They are not pocket cameras though far too big , light though.
    I would look at something like this in budget – or rather less!
    https://shop.fujifilm.co.uk/fujifilm-x-a5-kit-xc15-45mm-lens-refurbished

    loads of adaptors to put old lenses including proper macro on at later date.

    joshvegas
    Free Member

    Would an old gf1 be of interest.

    M4/3

    Has a 14mm and a zoom.

    And an adapter to use old canon lenses. Etc

    I think its a great camera but its rubbish for the action shots because theres no view finder and the zoom in to focus is useless if you want to be fast.

    winston
    Free Member

    @finishthat  I did look at those as they were (up till yesterday) on a special at amazon for £299 with the kit lens. What put me off was lack of viewfinder though to be honest I don’t think my daughter would care about that but I’m old fashioned and the fact the body wasn’t metal but plastic……not sure either are valid concerns but it stopped me buying at the time.

    Have been looking at a Lumix GX80……

    To be honest I’ve decided to buy her something else for Christmas and also buy a camera for both me and her to share……

    TiRed
    Full Member

    I’m of the opinion that the limitation in the camera forces improvement in technique. Obviously if you want sports or wildlife, then closeups will be challenging without a decent lens and SLR. But iPhone or fixed lens compact (no zoom) will teach you composition and exposure.

    My friend (Sun photographer) rates the iPhone very highly indeed. Parallax Correction is probably the first skill to acquire for decent output. The HDR processing for exposure is excellent.

    So iPhone and my B&W Nikon FM with 24mm nikkor 🙂

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    fixed lens compact (no zoom) will teach you composition and exposure.

    ^ Broadly agree with this as far as fixed lens and composition is concerned. iPhone taught me nothing about exposure though! Maybe with a 3rd party app?

    Cut teeth on a Praktica 35mm SLR (although I started out in digital with a small Nikon compact zoom)

    DSLR with 50mm prime taught me most everything that I failed to learn with compacts. Again, it depends on whether you are pursuing photography as an art/craft in itself, or just as a way to grab some images for inspiration.

    joshvegas
    Free Member

    come on P7eaven I know you have an olympus trip, thats what taught you everything you know.

    I also think the same about film.

    When you have 36 shots and you get no instant gratification you think about hwat you are doing. As a consequence of my trip and pen (72 shots!) i raise the camera to my eye far more often than i press the shutter release.

    Photos are still crap, just less to sift through!

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    argh! ^ yes I have TWO Olympus Trips, one thanks to joshvegas. And still yet to dismantle/rebuild. A lockdown opportunity missed.

    OP and other mirrorless camera-botherers – here’s something niche and fun

    midlifecrashes
    Full Member

    @p7eaven, that Pentax MX-1 looks nice, I had a film Pentax MX as my main camera from the mid 80s through to going digital, so naturally it appeals. I just wondered how my phone would stack up, as it claims to have a macro mode, so I had a quick go just now.

    Not bad for a “budget” phone (Moto G 5G), but I still like the feel of a traditional camera with buttons and dials for settings.

    thisisnotaspoon
    Free Member

    Just remembered I’ve got my dad’s old 4/3 Olympus E-300 DSLR in the loft with the kit lenses (14-45 and 40-150 from memory). If anyone wants to make an offer for a decent camera to start with, it’s not a pocket camera mind you.

    He doesn’t do photoshop so used it for doing some really cool arty type stuff with glass/mirrors and zooming through long exposures to get two things into the same image. Proof that you can do all that stuff with digital cameras and a bit of imagination without resorting to photoshop!

    joshvegas
    Free Member

    that pentax is ace. ITs like a digital Pen-F which i also want

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    Not bad for a “budget” phone (Moto G 5G),

    (Throws Pentax in bin)

    midlifecrashes
    Full Member

    Nah, too big and clumsy, Auto110 is where it’s at.

    winston
    Free Member

    I had an auto 110 for a bit, and the XA rangefinder with A11 flash. At the death of film when digital was really going mainstream around 2000 you could pick up 35mm kit for absolutely nothing. I bought a load of gear including stuff like F100’s, had a play and then punted it on for a bit more then what I bought it for assuming it would be worthless in a few years. Actually a lot of that stuff has gone up again….

    Always wanted an OM4Ti and though they would be giving them away by now…..but good ones are still £500!

    toby1
    Full Member

    Speaking as an X100F owner (2nd hand when I bought it but still £600ish). It’s an amazing camera and very portable, as mentioned above, not really pocket size, but it goes in any bags with ease. It’s a better camera than I am a photographer (see instagram or facebook pics from X100 enthusiasts). It also removes (a lot of) the kit hunting as you can’t change the lens!

    It’s gets a lot more use than my wife’s Nikon Z6 which is gathering dust and depreciating rapidly.

    Skankin_giant
    Free Member

    I have a Pentax Auto 110 and a XA, sadly the battery bay on the 110 keeps splitting. Good fun to use though and I’ve adapted the lenses to my Fuji.
    I also have the Minolta 110 SLR mk1 which is just mental and not as nice to use as the Pentax 110.

    Fuji X30 took over as my main camera for quite a while, did everything I wanted it to do and had a mic input, which my X-Pro 1 didn’t. Bought an X-H1 during their offers, so the X-Pro and X30 are sitting at the bottom of my camera cabinet. The X10 which has better B&W than the X30 IMHO was a decent camera as well, sadly no evf just a dumb viewfinder.

    lunge
    Full Member

    I take a lot of pics on my iPhone, and you could argue some are better than on my camera.
    But I don’t agree you learn more on phone than a camera.
    Having to balance the various settings on a camera is really engaging and enjoyable, even if the temptation is to just put it at f8 and ignore it sometimes. You learn a lot there at the same time as composition. Get a prime lens if you don’t want zoom.
    I’d get a small, mirror less camera that’s small enough to carry around. I like my Canon M50 but there are loads out there is a similar quality.

    beanum
    Full Member

    OP – I don’t think you should rule out the Sony RX-100. The first requirement you mentioned was pocketability.
    Macro is fine – I have mine in front of me and there’s a macro Scene mode that focuses down to a couple of centimetres… Mine is the original Mk1 and the ability to move the focus point coupled with the wide aperture allows for some quite creative effects.

    The only reason to get a better one in my opinion would be for the tiltable screen on the MkII for more unobtrusive street photography or the built-in viewfinder on the MkIII..
    I’ve had a Nikon D7000 DSLR and now a Sony 6300 and neither of them are as good as the RX for night photography (kit lens, without a tripod).

    petec
    Free Member

    at the end of last year, I got myself a Canon M100. As it was already replaced (by the M200…) it’s cheaper. I never had my dSLR on me – too big and bulky.

    Came with 22mm and 15-45mm lenses. With the 22mm lens (which is equivalent to 35mm), it’s a very small camera that’ll fit into a jeans pocket, and it’s a f/2.0 lens. It’s generally always with me now, and would be ideal for urban shots. It’s seriously good. Since got a 28mm macro lens to go with – and that takes very good closeups. Next in line is the wide angle lens 11-22. I’ve also got an aftermarket lens converter so can put all the old dSLR lenses on (although it’s a bit forward heavy with the big lens!)

    Something like this anyway https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EOS-M100-Mirrorless-Camera-with-15-45mm-22mm-Lenses/362524551152

    highly recommend it. And within budget.

    finishthat
    Free Member

    @winston if you want an OM4Ti then don`t exclude the OM4T – same but usa model , I got one for a song. there are a few on ebay – check Germany – the US troops will have sold them after buying from PX , there is a silver one on there with a 50/1.4 prime for around 200 – which is a good price – they all look shagged as paint never stuck to the titanium unless you never used the camera.

    p7eaven
    Free Member

    ^ Low light/bulb mode on RX100 is good. Very good in fact. Some of my best night shots (maybe the best from any compact I’ve used) came out of that thing.

    Macro? Not so much, so I have to disagree.

    there’s a macro Scene mode that focuses down to a couple of centimetres

    Are you quite sure? I could only seem to get about 2” min from the subject and then at full wide so it was distorted and needed tight cropping to get a ‘pseudo macro’. Am pretty sure the ‘macro scene’ is just an f-stop preset (f5.6 iirc). It wasn’t in the same league as other compact sensor/lens combos for macro. I found that was one of the tradeoffs with a large sensor in a tiny camera. Great low light pics, but really average/meh ‘macro’.

    I really wanted to love the RX100 yet of all the cameras I’ve owned it was the least intuitive/most frustrating UI/menu, slippery, most fiddly and ultimately delicate camera I’ve ever owned. For ages I tried to rationalise that it breaking on me must have put me off replacing it with another RX100 – but in all honesty I never once enjoyed using it as a photography tool. I’d rather carry my old Canon 10D which is so beautifully tactile and swift/intuitive/instant to use. With a pancake lens. But it’s blimmin heavy!

    ymmv. There may be someone who finds it intuitive/tactile. Maybe a Sony employee 😬

    beanum
    Full Member

    @p7eaven – I’ve just double checked the macro on my RX100 and you’re right, it “only” focusses down to about 2″. I guess for me that’s pretty impressive compared to kit lenses or prime lenses that I have for Nikon and Sony cameras..

    I’ve got used to the UI, to the extent that I doubled down on the Sony A6300 with a similar UI. I do miss the dedicated buttons from my Nikon DSLR for sure.
    As for slippery, I couldn’t use an RX without a stick on grip..:-)

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 42 total)

The topic ‘camera advice’ is closed to new replies.