What do you tell someone wanting to buy a camera to take pics of their kids?

[sk66]

I generally don't give "reccomendations"; I give the "pro's and con's"....I hate being "on the hook" for someone else's choices.... But I am frequently asked these kinds of questions...

And so here was another one.

I basically told him "you either give up money, or you give up on getting some shots".

A good P&S will get 75% of the jpg "snapshots" a person like that is likely to take.

A very good P&S will allow for some creativity, raw recording, and external flash getting it up to maybe 90% of the shots they might want to get.

But only a DSLR and some fast lenses/spe******ed lenses/accesories (and I don't mean a "nifty fifty") will "cover it all", and even that can fall short at times.

I don't generally think reccomending "going cheap" when moving into the DSLR's is a good idea...it's usually just a "stepping stone" and money that will be spent again later when "upgrading".

But what do you think is truly the best choice for someone like this who just wants good pics of thier kids as they grow?

[SandeeWig]

Seems like it depends on the person doing the photographing, how much time and effort they are willing to spend getting to know the camera, and the flexibility and creativity they wish to have with it. dSLRs have a rather steep learning curve, IMO, and can't really compete indoors to P&S w/o an external flash (i.e. more $$). Kit lenses won't give you the zoom range one might be accustomed to w/ P&S without spending more $$ on a good telephoto.

If he/she's wanting something that will take good snapshots and is a take-anywhere camera, I'd suggest a good P&S - like a Canon S5 IS. It's priced mid-range, has some flexibility, and is reliable in almost any situation, where as some of the cheaper "pocket" cameras aren't so much.

[harrysixtie7]

Your advice is very sound. I hate that question as well, even worse when they want to take pictures of there kids playing indoor sports. Its one of the things you just cannot do without dropping some major cash. I normally tell people who are stepping up to a DSLR system, that the cost is very deceiving, the 4 to 9 hundred you spend on an entry body is just the beginning.

[PnwGuy]

This may sound lazy on my part but I tell people the best thing to do it is to google it. There they can find suggestions from others, and varying opinions and reviews for specific products they lean towards.

You can explain all you want but they can get many more opinions a lot faster doing a little bit of research and you won't be on the hook if they take only your advice and it doesn't work out. Maybe they can run their final two options by you.

I suggest google to my clients. Even though I'm an IT guy, I am constantly asked about the best phones, televisions, mp3 players, camera equipment, etc. They think I'm a technology expert. I tell them I'm a professional. I get paid to do it, I'm not an expert. It doesn't take long for my knowledge to get outdated so I'd rather teach them to fish than to keep fishing for them.

[jagoble25]

Tell them they HAVE to get a D3X a no other camera will do.

[wulf]

One advantage that P&S cameras have is portability. For parents, a portable camera that they have to hand may well be more use than a DSLR that they left at home because it was too much to lug around with all the stuff they needed to bring for their children.

Having said that, for someone who wants to push their understanding of the art of photography further, I'd gladly recommend a set up like mine - a D40 (one of the smallest, lightest, cheapest DSLR bodies), the kit lens for general purpose tasks and a nifty fifty for low light, ultra sharp and funky bokeh work.

Wulf

[Quo Fan]

When recommending gear of any sort for any pursuit, I ALWAYS steer clear of the term "cheap". I substitute the word "inexpensive". To me, those two words are not interchangeable. Cheap, to me, means that it is poorly made, and will not stand up to even casual use. Inexpensive means that it has a quality build, but just costs less. It also means that it doesn't have some features of some more expensive, higher quality equipment.

That being said, When asked for a recommendation, my first question is always "What do you want to do with it?" and I tailor my response to that.

[Chip]

sk66 - I think your past practice of giving pros and cons is the only way to go. Edcutate them a bit. Find out what type of situations they'd like to photograph. Let them know about cost. And then let them decide.

Some people are quite happy to take shots at a soccer (or football ) game with a P&S that has a 3x optical zoom. Others want something else. It's up to them to decide.

[kirbinster]

Most parents wan to take snapshots of their kids, not "photographs" For them a good quality P&S with a large optical zoom is probably the best bet. Portability is key, just like it is with "US" for tripods. IF it is not portable you probably won't have it with you when you need it.

[douglas]

A good P&S if, if they just want to take pictures of the family,holidays day trips etc. etc.
Why? Because they will have it with them, in their pockets, or purses
A good P&S need not be expensive to take these pictures.Go to a good camera store look at and handle the cameras. Talk to friends.
Later they may get hooked, and THEN they can start to look into the myriads of options in DSLR