Non-SLR Camera Suggestions etc. (dSLR, Micro 43 etc.)

Newb here on cameras but I know many camera buffs and professionals in this forum.

I need something in the $300 range that is SLR or SLR like. Just glancing at the possibilities these days, I'm dizzy. There are some SLR-like cameras that are in that range, so can I have SFer help with kinds of camera, and recommendations. This if for my wife's birthday...she's tired of taking pics with her phone, wants something better than the little pocket camera we have from 10 years ago, but not spending as much as needed for an SLR.

I hope this is the right place for this request!

Hard to do much in that range for $300 for a full size SLR. Mostly just gets you an older model "toy" slr with kit lens.

You could look into some of the mirrorless offerings. I have seen several Olympus or Panasonic kits go for less than that, same with some of the sony NEX body/lens kits. Especially on ebay...lots of gray market stuff (intended for Japan/other asian markets, but sold to US consumers over ebay)

Seen Olympus E-PL5 kits for less than $300 and E-PM2 kits for more like $200. Perfectly good cameras with the kit lens, and lots of good Micro 4/3 lenses to upgrade to.

Sony NEX-5 or maybe NEX-6 can be had for less than $300 too...although I shy away from them since sony doesn't seem to be supporting the lens format as much anymore....Micro Four Thirds is still going strong with some cool stuff coming out soon.

And if you don't really need interchangable lenses...what about a Sony RX100?

The newest mark III model is out of your price range, but I bet you could find a mk i or ii for a good deal. Solid high end camera but will slip into a small purse.

I totally agree that at your price point, something in the RX100 class with a 1" sensor makes a lot of sense. It's very portable and the image quality is excellent.

If you really want interchangeable lenses, then agree with Micro Four Thirds over a dSLR, or maybe the Nikon 1 J4.

Depends on what you want. Some of the Micro Four Thirds options are pretty cool! If you want to commit to an SLR system, realize you're going to end up spending more on lenses than the camera itself. I have several lenses that each cost more than my Canon 60d. As you probably know the two major SLR systems are Canon and Nikon. As I use Canon, I just wanted to mention you can get a a used 40d or 50d for less than $300 that would be a really great camera as an intro to SLRs. Some of the biggest differences you'll find moving to an SLR are the the ability to control depth of field and speed. A 50mm 1.8 "nifty fifty" lens would only be $100 and that would be a fast lens with a lot of control over depth of field to play around with. You could always start with that and see if you want to go further. The Canon photography forums have a lot of good info if you want to go that route:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9

@otc , @breakaway01 @Fred G. Unn

Hi all, somehow these thoughts didn't kick the thread up on my subscriptions, so I missed these excellent suggestions before I committed. We ended up with a previous version of Samsung's dSLR (NX20) which dropped dramatically in price since the new model has come out.

The package came today so in principle I could still change. Let me know if you have strong negative views about the Samsung. I will look at the Micro Four Thirds given that all of you have converged on it. I suspect inertia will keep me on the current paths.

Thanks for weighing in!

The NX20 looks like a reasonably small camera for a dSLR. Is your wife OK with the size/weight, or does your wife really want something that she can put into a coat pocket or purse? It's often said that "the best camera is the one you have with you."

I have no direct experience with Samsung cameras or with the NX20, so take my comments with a big grain of salt. My biggest concern with the NX system is the relatively limited range of lenses for the NX mount, and the fact that no third-party lens maker (e.g. Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) has yet committed to releasing lenses for this mount, at least AFAIK. That being said, there at least seems to be a reasonable range of available focal lengths. Missing are fast (f/2.8) telephoto zooms and a few fast prime lenses, but these are somewhat specialized lenses that you may never need or want.

Personally, I'd still consider a Micro Four Thirds (m43) camera for the following reasons: smaller, lighter, wider lens selection, higher probability that the lens mount will still be around in 3-5 years.

Sorry to be daft (really a noob here)

I'm looking at these

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/body.html

Micro-four-thirds is the "type" not brand? Or it's both? In the end. lots of lens options is not really an issue. Portability is and I take that point, as is image quality and ease of use with some functionality (though not much). I do think she likes the idea of something that looks like an SLR, though that is not really a functional point.

I like your list of positives which makes the MFT options really attractive. Is the "M43" a type?

Thanks!

It is the name of the system.

Both Olympus and Panasonic make bodies and lenses for the m4/3 system. I believe Kodak also recently created a m4/3 body.
Olympus and Panasonic also make full ranges of lenses for the system (and you can use an Olympus lens on a panasonic body or vice versa), some of the third party lensmakers also produce m4/3 lenses.

It is nice because there are a wide range of bodies available. Unlike the SLR systems which only have full size bodies with all of the controls, there are some very small m4/3 bodies. So you could have a tiny panasonic GM1 (smaller than the RX100 without lens):


and then switch to an olympus OM-D model (not full size SLR, but has all of the manual dials and buttons you might want):


and you could keep using the same set of lenses.
Obviously, your big telephoto might feel silly on the tiny GM1, but your 14mm pancake lens will feel right at home on both cameras.



breakaway01 said:

My biggest concern with the NX system is the relatively limited range of lenses for the NX mount, and the fact that no third-party lens maker (e.g. Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) has yet committed to releasing lenses for this mount, at least AFAIK. That being said, there at least seems to be a reasonable range of available focal lengths. Missing are fast (f/2.8) telephoto zooms and a few fast prime lenses, but these are somewhat specialized lenses that you may never need or want. 

Click to expand...

I completely agree with breakaway. If you are going to go the SLR route instead of 4/3rds, I would really stick with Canon or Nikon. You'll have so many more options for lenses, both new and used, and the good third-party manufacturers breakway mentioned will all be options too. One of my favorite lenses is my Sigma 30mm 1.4!

I would try to come up with a list of why she wants a camera, and what she wants it to do. You mentioned she wants something "better," but what does better mean to her? Better low light (higher usable ISO), faster, more artistic depth of field capabilities, further reach, lighter weight and easier portability, more lenses, fancy brand name? Does she know how to use an SLR, or will she just shoot in Auto (like my wife often does)? All those answers can affect what might be the best camera for her.

BTW, if she is new to photography and SLRs the Bryan Peterson "Understanding Exposure" book would be a great gift to go along with the camera.
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Photographs-Camera/dp/0817439390

Cheers OTC!

FWIW, my dad is a photographer and has shot canon since going digital (I think he had some canon film stuff too, but mostly shot medium format view cameras in the studio).

He was saying, while I was home for Christmas, that he would probably go Nikon if he were starting over with a dSLR system right now.

Of course you can take that with a grain of salt since the reason obviously isn't compelling enough to make him actually switch. Used to be that you went Canon so that you could have access to the 'L' series lenses (and maybe even that you were better off going Nikon if you knew you were never going to spend that much on a lens), but it sounds like the Nikon bodies are way ahead of canon right now and the lenses are solid.

Nikon user here.
I would confirm with your wife if she is interested in "portable" of looking to really learn and understand photography. If she just wants an "upgrade" from her phone, they you have some good selections in this thread.

If not, up your budget and go Nikon or Canon true DSLR.

I think she wants just to be able to take quality pictures but something that has the gravitas of an SLR in appearance (I know that's not functional, but psychologically important). Some additional functionality is useful, so a decent zoom at normal ranges for a family member shooting portraits and occasional landscape. And fit in the purse, which will be pushing it for anything that has the look of a shrunken SLR (given the protruding lens).

On M43s, this seems to be a recommended one that is south of 500, though still a bit pricey.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001FSKDWG/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=AR71E6YLERWBA

Panasonic. I am taking the main advantage to be interchangeability of optics/lenses which for serious photographers is important. I suppose image quality for mirrorless cameras will depend on the technology, so M43s can be better or worse than a given dSLRs abstracting from the optics. Hard to know

The problem with the Olympus OMD is that it is north of 500, alas.

Other problem: I'm running out of time (bday in 3 days)!

You guys have been great...funny haven't run into you in the forum, mostly SWD side?

I just wanted to point out one other consideration. Maybe she cares and maybe not, but when I first got "serious" about photography it was 10 years ago when my daughter was born, and I loved the fact that wider apertures could really allow me to isolate her in the picture and blur the background out. On that 4/3rds Panasonic you linked to, shooting almost wide open at a f/4 aperture will give you the equivalent background blur as an f/5 on a crop sensor, or f/8 on a full frame. It depends on the distance, but that's not a whole lot if background blur and depth of field control is something important to you. (Here's a calculator: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm)

Again, she might not care, but the ability to have artistic control over the background blur was a big reason I moved up to a DSLR. In fact, I almost always shoot in aperture priority mode, unless I'm using shutter priority for sports, or full manual for something creative. Shooting at f/1.8 on an inexpensive "nifty fifty" that I mentioned above on a crop sensor Canon, would require a f/1.4 on that Panasonic, which only can do f/3.5 with the kit lens, in order to have an equivalently shallow depth of field.

I think the 4/3rd format is really great, and I'd love to get something at some point just for the sake of portability in a "walk around" camera, but there are artistic trade offs using the smaller sensor. Just wanted to make sure you were aware if that's something you might think she'll want to do.