Please, help me pick a camera

[fewatths]

I'm new here, haven't even purchased my camera yet! I found this site while researching what to buy. I have 3 small children (4,2, & 2 months) & am looking for a camera to replace my need for frequent professional sittings. This past year we have taken professional pics 3 times! Hubby wants to decrease that to once a year, but little ones change so quickly! I would like something small, so I can have it around for snapshots. But I also want frameable results. I have looked at dslrs, but am starting to think mirrorless or even p&s may be my best option. I would like to keep it below $500 right now. This will be my first camera & I would like something that I can learn on, not complete auto. Any suggestions are welcome! Thanks

 

[bunnyfunny]

My suggestion would be Nikon D5100. Though it doesn't rank first based on any individual aspect of the camera, the Nikon D5100 delivers a solid combination of image quality, performance, features, and design. I am using this model and I assure you an
excellent photo quality with a good noise profile, a streamlined shooting design for both photo and video, and a broad, practical feature set contribute to the Nikon D5100's strengths. Most probably, it will also fit your budget

 

[Solarflare]

Well, if you get the D5100 (or any other system camera), you also need glas.

I would suggest the AF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6G VR DX kitlens. It gives pretty good results in the range 24-50mm if stopped down to f/8, and it offers enough macro magnification for babies (1:3.4), and its very cheap, especially if bought with camera.

You might also want a flash, because otherwise the camera will have problems with low light situations, such as indoors. I would suggest the SB700 (or a used SB600 if you can find one), because unlike the cheaper SB400, it can be tilted around for more indirect, natural looking lighting. If you want to go for cheaper flashes from other companies, Metz apparently has a good name.

 

[Braineack]

I'll be putting my D5100, 35mm 1.8G, Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4, and SB400 on the market in the next week or so. FWIW.

 

[robbins.photo]

I'm new here, haven't even purchased my camera yet! I found this site while researching what to buy. I have 3 small children (4,2, & 2 months) & am looking for a camera to replace my need for frequent professional sittings. This past year we have taken professional pics 3 times! Hubby wants to decrease that to once a year, but little ones change so quickly! I would like something small, so I can have it around for snapshots. But I also want frameable results. I have looked at dslrs, but am starting to think mirrorless or even p&s may be my best option. I would like to keep it below $500 right now. This will be my first camera & I would like something that I can learn on, not complete auto. Any suggestions are welcome! Thanks

Ok, well some of the less expensive mirrorless or what they call a "bridge" or "superzoom" cameras are certainly an option. I guess the first question would be how large your hoping to print for "frameable" results. If your going to be doing anything bigger than 8 x 10 then I'd probably lean toward the DSLR. The other consideration is, how long do you want the camera to remain useable? If you go with a bridge, superzoom or even a low end mirrorless my guess is as you learn more about photography you'll probably outgrow it in a fairly short period of time, probably within a year or possibly less.

The other consideration is that right now the kids are pretty young, but it won't be long before the oldest will be going off to school - that means plays, programs, etc - great opportunities for photos but a challenging situation for a lot of cameras. This is where you'll really need something with good low light capabilities - and that means DSLR. So if it were me I'd probably just go ahead and get the DSLR now and then you can always add lenses or extra accessories later on as needed. If you go with the bridge, superzoom or a lower end mirrorless that doesn't have interchangeable lenses then you'll be limiting yourself to whatever you buy now and my guess is it won't be long before you outgrow whatever you buy.

As to DSLR's, I would recommend one of these two - the D3200 or the D5100, both from Nikon. I think either would make a good choice for your current needs and most likely would be something you''ll still be using years from now. Of the two I would lean more towards the 5100 myself, I think as far as bang for your buck is concerned your hard pressed to beat it.

I use the D5100 myself, it is an excellent all around camera. If you'd like to see some sample images taken with a D5100 you can click on the "My Photostream on Flickr" link in red below in my signature line. That way you can take a look at some pictures taken with the D5100 and decide for yourself if they'll meet your quality requirements.

 

[Braineack]

your pictures sure improved when you went away from the Canon PowerShot SX50 HS

 

[Kolia]

You've had many good suggestion. I think your 500$ budget is a bit short tho.

As a side note, mirror less does NOT mean less expensive camera.

 

[robbins.photo]

You've had many good suggestion. I think your 500$ budget is a bit short tho.

As a side note, mirror less does NOT mean less expensive camera.

Well there are less expensive mirrorless and more expensive mirrorless. On the inexpensive ones, the ones that would actually fit her budget, the options are generally fairly limited and many do not have interchangeable lenses, etc. On the more expensive models, well those have a lot more options but I eliminated them from the discussion because she had already stated they were outside her budgetary requirements.

 

[robbins.photo]

your pictures sure improved when you went away from the Canon PowerShot SX50 HS

Oh yes, by leaps and bounds. The FZ-200 was a step up, but I was pretty much just kidding myself even then. I was just never going to get the results I wanted with a bridge camera.