Friday, February 28, 2014

Best digital camera for shooting kids?




m_manary


Looking for one that has rechargeable batteries, like you plug the entire camera into a socket to recharge (biggest pet peeve is digi-cams that eat batteries like candy) 12 mega-pixels, shoots still shot and video (I don't want a recorder that does still cause I hear they shoot craptastic pics), cool features, easy to use with SD card, and finally no more then $250.
If you do not use P & S cameras what do you use? I've never taken a photography class and my Dad always had an expensive Nikon with two lenses and back then it was all film.
Thanks for everyone's input and after doing a lot of reading and realizing our old camera which we loved but died after 3+ years of use was a canon power shot we are going with the Cannon PowerSot SD780 IS, if after a few weeks of use we do not like we will give the PowerShot SX120 IS a try.



Answer
I changed from P&S cameras to my DSLR because of two problems - low light issues and shutterlag.
My little P&Ss made me miss so many opportunities with my kids and other subjects.

However, it sounds like you do want just a P&S. Here is my usual speech on the subject, I'm sure you will find something helpful in it:

At least 10 - 30 times a day someone on YA asks: "Which one is a good camera to buy?"
A quick search would have given you hundreds of instant replies (without having to wait for answers), but once again here is my 10 cents on the subject:

Point & Shoot cameras are wonderfully handy because of their small size.
When light conditions are ideal, they even take really nice photos - all of them do.

However, they all DO have limitations - they don't do very well in low light situations (i.e. noisy photos, hard to avoid blur, etc). The little onboard flash is very harsh at close range, and doesn't reach very far.
Many of them have no manual functions, so you are limited to only very basic photos, you can't compensate for unusual situations, or do many fun "tricks" and special effects.
P&S's also suffer from frustrating shutterlag and many of them chew through batteries rather quickly.

If you're ok with all those limitations, then go ahead and pick one, most of them (the same type and same price range) are rather similar. Personally I would pick either a Canon or a Nikon, and would certainly stay away from Kodak.

A higher end P&S will give you more manual options and better quality. Many of those even give you the option of adding a proper flash (which makes a big difference to your flash photos).

Don't worry too much about megapixels - all modern cameras have plenty enough, plus there is a limit to how many pixels you can squash into a tiny P&S sensor before you actually LOSE quality rather than gain it.
Don't worry about digital zoom, in fact, don't EVER use it. It simply crops away pixels, i.e. destroys information. The only real zoom is optical.


Some words about special effect features such as color accent, or even just b/w or sepia:
About applying any sort of effect in camera: DON'T DO IT !
Imagine if you just happen to take the best photo you ever took - surely you would want to have it in all its glory, right?
Always set your camera to biggest size, best quality (and to color).
That way, you start with the best possible photo as your original.
Then you make a copy and edit it to your heart's content.
You have much better control over any editing on your computer, even something as simple as b&w will look MUCH better when it was processed properly instead of in camera.
You can do all sorts of things to it PLUS you get to keep your original.


Decide which features are important to you, and look for cameras that have that feature.
Then go compare a few models on www.dpreview.com .

The very best thing you can do for your success is to borrow some books and learn about photography. A bit of knowledge will make a much bigger difference to your photos than your choice of P&S camera can.

For what it's worth - if I was in the market for a P&S camera right now, my choice would be a Canon Powershot SX20 IS http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=19208

Which camera should I buy?




Alex


I am an amateur photographer and I'm buying my first DSLR camera. I've been looking at the Nikon d5000 for quite awhile and I really like what it has to offer. However recently someone suggested buying a used nikon d200 because it's more of an advanced level camera and has some better features than the d5000. Now I'm stuck between the two and I don't know what to buy. Leave your thoughts about it. And I'm **not** interested in buying a Canon or Olympus or anything else, I'm a Nikon kid and you can't convince me otherwise.


Answer
I am a big proponent of going the used D200 route (it may have been my suggestion that you saw in another question). Here are the reasons I recommend the D200 over a new amateur level DSLR:

1. They are more durable than the amateur level cameras. The D200 is a 'semi-pro' body, so there is a good bit more metal in the construction, which makes it sturdier. It also has better, more intuitive controls which are basically of the same layout as the pro bodies, so as you move up, future cameras will require less of a learning curve.

2. They can autofocus all Nikon AF lenses. You aren't limited only to AF-S lenses, which opens up a huge range of very high quality used lenses that perform wonderfully and will last decades, but are quite inexpensive just because they aren't the newest, hottest thing on the market. This includes all of the lenses designed for FX (full frame) cameras, both film and digital, which are the lenses you should buy if you think you might want to go full frame on down the road, even if that is several years away, because again, lenses last decades, and you don't want to spend good money on lenses that will be useless to you on down the road.

3. Someone else has already taken the hit on the new cost of the camera. Digital cameras are like cars. They depreciate the second they are taken out of the store. With the rapid pace of new digital camera bodies, there is no need to pay full retail price for a brand new one.

4. Sure, the d200 may only be a 10 megapixel camera, but you can still make massive prints from a 10 megapixel body. In fact, you can make large prints from anything six megapixels and up.

5. The money you save in the long run by staying a generation or two behind the curve will allow you to invest more money in high quality lenses, and it will allow you the freedom to move up to nicer bodies on down the road without spending two grand every couple of years. By the time that D200 is kaput, you will be able to get a D700 at a similarly reasonable price.

6. The only place the D200 is slightly lacking is in high ISO noise. This, however, is balanced by the fact that you will be able to afford faster lenses than the lousy f3.5-5.6 kit zoom that will be useless in a few years anyway. With a 105mm f2.8 lens, you can shoot a full two stops of ISO lower than you could with a zoom that only goes to f/5.6.

7. Just because a new model comes out, it doesn't render previous models useless or inadequate. The D200 is still just as good as it ever has been. Tons and tons of fantastic images have been made with d200s, and there is no reason that fantastic images can't still be made with them.

If you are looking to impress your friends or the people at the local camera club with the newest and best equipment, the D200 is not for you. If you are looking for fantastic value in good quality equipment, and you want to get more for the same or less money, go with a D200 and a good selection of used non-DX lenses.

Lens recommendations to accompany a D200 that will last a lifetime:

Primes:

20mm f2.8
35mm f2
50mm f1.8
105mm f2.8

zooms:

20-35 f2.8
35-70 f2.8 micro
80-200 f2.8 af-d

If you are a beginner, stick with primes.

Good luck!




Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Title Post: Best digital camera for shooting kids?
Rating: 92% based on 9788 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Yukie

Thanks For Coming To My Blog

No comments:

Post a Comment