Starter camera for 12 yr old

Frankly, I believe that digital cams for kids make a lot of sense. As Patrick and Daisy say, you don't need anything fancy to start out. Many of us had Brownies or something similar when we were kids, but digital is much cheaper in the long run as you don't have to pay to process film. My kids have had some sort of digital cam for years (many years with a vivitar 1MP). It is loads of fun to see a kid's-eye-view of the world.
 
It is loads of fun to see a kid's-eye-view of the world.

Nothing like mama stepping out of the shower, to see a flash go off...

"Hi! Mommy"

Didn't happen to us, but that's a true story...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

As long as the kids aren't budding internet entrepreneurs as well as photographers ...
 
.... but if you are going to spend the $200 on a camera because you want to and you can, then might as well get something decent. Sure you dont NEED that, but then again, how many times to we buy based off of need vs want?

And if you are going to get something, might as well be the best it can be.. again, i'd stay away from the Digital Image Stabiliser (like Nikon P&S) and Digital Zooms.
 
Found this camera in a black Friday ad for 129.99. Kodak Z915? Would this one be a good starter camera? Looks like it has an optical Zoom 10x and an optical ISO
 
Last edited:
Go big or go home, Canon AE-1 and some lenses on E-bay. You can stay under budget and she can learn more about camera use and maintance than a P&S could ever teach her. It is by all means a disposable SLR, that she can learn on. She could make mistakes and damage something and and learn from it with out putting you out two or three hundred bucks. Then when the time comes she will be better able to acclimate to a dSLR having experience with an SLR, she'll already know how to take care of it and use the basic functions like aperture, different focal lengths and so on.
 
Go big or go home, Canon AE-1 and some lenses on E-bay. You can stay under budget and she can learn more about camera use and maintance than a P&S could ever teach her. It is by all means a disposable SLR, that she can learn on. She could make mistakes and damage something and and learn from it with out putting you out two or three hundred bucks. Then when the time comes she will be better able to acclimate to a dSLR having experience with an SLR, she'll already know how to take care of it and use the basic functions like aperture, different focal lengths and so on.

I humbly disagree with this suggestion. I think film is a mistake in this age group. Firstly, unless you are independantly wealthy,film is an expensive habit to maintain even if the initial investment was low (especially if, as my kids do, she photographs everything in sight). Secondly, at this age group, instant gratification is important (trust me -- I have twin 13 year olds). Digital allows them to see what they did immediately and improves the learning curve incredibly. I think, in the current era, film is not for beginners but for those of us who have experience with it to begin with from 'the olden days', or for those who start with digital and want a new venue for their talents.
 
Go big or go home, Canon AE-1 and some lenses on E-bay. You can stay under budget and she can learn more about camera use and maintance than a P&S could ever teach her. It is by all means a disposable SLR, that she can learn on. She could make mistakes and damage something and and learn from it with out putting you out two or three hundred bucks. Then when the time comes she will be better able to acclimate to a dSLR having experience with an SLR, she'll already know how to take care of it and use the basic functions like aperture, different focal lengths and so on.

I humbly disagree with this suggestion. I think film is a mistake in this age group. Firstly, unless you are independantly wealthy,film is an expensive habit to maintain even if the initial investment was low (especially if, as my kids do, she photographs everything in sight). Secondly, at this age group, instant gratification is important (trust me -- I have twin 13 year olds). Digital allows them to see what they did immediately and improves the learning curve incredibly. I think, in the current era, film is not for beginners but for those of us who have experience with it to begin with from 'the olden days', or for those who start with digital and want a new venue for their talents.

I do understand your point but I personally feel the restraint of a point and shoot is a hinderance that can potentially make for confusion and difficulty when the child does upgrade to the SLR class of body. I feel it's best to start them out with all the amenities of an SLR camera. At the same time I also find the potential for damage in the hands of a minor too great to feel comfortable handing them a modern digital SLR. The price of film is not greater than that of comperable digital equipment, yes instant gratification is sacrificed, but from my personal experience with a four year old it is a sacrifice that can be made.
 
Well, I split the difference. Mine (now 13 y/o twins) had 1MP digicams from the time they were small. When I bought my 30D 3 years ago, I gave them my Nikon Coolpix 7MP P&S (they were a bit over 9 y/o). When we went to Alaska in June (they were 12), I bought them a Panasonic Lumix Z28 Bridge Camera. This works well for them. They had no difficulty moving from a P&S to the bridge cam. They don't like to see me futzing with changing lenses, but they like the 18X zoom on their bridge. They shoot manual/RAW and I have given them lessons on DOF, ISO, etc. which all can be adjusted on their cam. I made a point to get one that had a viewfinder, so they don't count on the live-view mode. It cost a bit more than a P&S, but they baby it. They sometimes put me to shame with their talent.
 
Back to the question at hand

Found this camera in a black Friday ad for 129.99. Kodak Z915? Would this one be a good starter camera? Looks like it has an optical Zoom 10x and an optical ISO

Technical Specs
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

Back
Top