Please help me select a camera/lens

[dullard]

I may give my wife a camera in the next two/three months. We currently have a Canon S110 which is pretty much perfect for our main needs: great travel photos while being able to slip into any pocket, plus the photos come out great.

She would like a secondary camera for photos of nieces/nephews (babies) and still images (mostly food shots). I think these are our criteria in order of importance:
1) She wants faster shooting for the babies. The faster the better.
2) A larger image sensor is also a great plus for food which is often in dim light.
3) She wants interchangeable lenses.
4) I would like cost of the camera + at least one additional lens to be under $1000.
6) She likes Canon but could be persuaded differently if there was a much better camera at the same price point.
7) It doesn't seem like much, but a touchscreen is actually really helpful for us. Lack of one isn't a deal breaker though.
8) If all things were equal, a smaller body is a plus given that my wife has small hands (but I would only use that as a tie-breaker).
9) WiFi is really nice, but also not a deal breaker.

I thought about the Canon Rebel SL1. It meets the requirements. But it just didn't really seem dramatically better than what we already have. Maybe the Canon EOS 70D on sale? I don't know any other brand, so I'd need some help there.

Thanks.

 

[iGas]

My S95 focus speed is quite slow and so as the shutter lag hence I often misses shots of kids playing/walking. The S110 shutter speed is a bit faster than the S95 but it's auto focus like the S95 still far behind DSLR auto focus. Hence, I tend to use the 5D mkii for most situations.

There isn't much different between Digic 5 & Digic 5+, and the auto focus of the 70D is slightly better than the SL1. Center focus speed between the 2 cameras are virtually the same, however the 70D is a hair faster at focus tracking when use multi points.

Canon 70D Video AF vs Nikon D7100 & Canon SL1 - AF Rack Focus

IMHO, the SL1 is the perfect camera for women with small hands, and it is quite light as well. And, my boss got the SL1 for his wife this past summer to take pictures of theirs toddler (and they are very happy with it), because she didn't like the size and weight of theirs Nikon D7000.

And perhaps, pick up a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 for those time that you need a fast lens.

 

[blastingcap]

I may give my wife a camera in the next two/three months. We currently have a Canon S110 which is pretty much perfect for our main needs: great travel photos while being able to slip into any pocket, plus the photos come out great.

She would like a secondary camera for photos of nieces/nephews (babies) and still images (mostly food shots). I think these are our criteria in order of importance:
1) She wants faster shooting for the babies. The faster the better.
2) A larger image sensor is also a great plus for food which is often in dim light.
3) She wants interchangeable lenses.
4) I would like cost of the camera + at least one additional lens to be under $1000.
6) She likes Canon but could be persuaded differently if there was a much better camera at the same price point.
7) It doesn't seem like much, but a touchscreen is actually really helpful for us. Lack of one isn't a deal breaker though.
8) If all things were equal, a smaller body is a plus given that my wife has small hands (but I would only use that as a tie-breaker).
9) WiFi is really nice, but also not a deal breaker.

I thought about the Canon Rebel SL1. It meets the requirements. But it just didn't really seem dramatically better than what we already have. Maybe the Canon EOS 70D on sale? I don't know any other brand, so I'd need some help there.

Thanks.

EOS with 22mm f/2 lens. Since you don't need fast autofocus tracking. Kids don't qualify. Kids are just fine in AF-S mode and any of the modern ILCs will do just fine... it's only when you try to photograph kids running around playing sports that you'd want better. Just remember to upgrade the firmware to speed up the AF. Under $300 easy.

If you want a viewfinder, an a6000 or NEX-6. a6000 is better in all ways including AF, more customizable controls, and more responsive EVF despite lower resolution, which you will NOT miss.

The SL1 is hardly pocketable, but if you are ok with it sure... just know that many DSLRs wind up gathering dust in closets because nobody wants to carry them around on a regular basis.

 

[dullard]

IMHO, the SL1 is the perfect camera for women with small hands, and it is quite light as well. And, my boss got the SL1 for his wife this past summer to take pictures of theirs toddler (and they are very happy with it), because she didn't like the size and weight of theirs Nikon D7000.

And perhaps, pick up a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 for those time that you need a fast lens.

I just saw this deal tonight: http://www.fatwallet.com/Adorama-co...-pro-100-printer-50-pk-photo-paper/2534446-3/

Is it worth it?

 

[blastingcap]

I just saw this deal tonight: http://www.fatwallet.com/Adorama-co...-pro-100-printer-50-pk-photo-paper/2534446-3/

Is it worth it?

The lens is crap and the printer is worth like $20 on craigslist, or $40 with ink. It's bundling crap together with a good camera.

 

[dullard]

The lens is crap and the printer is worth like $20 on craigslist, or $40 with ink. It's bundling crap together with a good camera.

Both lenses are crap, or just one of the two?

 

[Berliner]

Canon makes nice pocket cameras, like the one you have.

I prefer Nikon for DSLRs because of image quality; so I'd recommend you take a look at the Nikon D3200. It comes with the 18-55mm VR, which should be good for most things.

Then get either the 35mm f/1.8 oder 50mm f/1.8G for indoor kids pics, I'd go with 35mm, unless you only do head portraits.

For food, I'm guessing she does not need makro (1:1)? The fixed lenses do not focus very close, e.g. the 35mm goes to about 1:6. The 18-55 VR however has about 1:3 magnification, which should be close enough.

 

[Rdmkr]

The D3xxx line is attractive for its weight as well. Not that much worse than the Nex line and the lenses are in the different league, although also heavier and bigger. And that price tag. Wow. I don't think you can find 24MP APS-C + mirror based view finder in anything cheaper.

At one shop around here they offer a pretty sharp 18-105mm lens with Nikon Dxxxx cameras for +/- $160.

 

[Syborg1211]

Lots of good recommendations already so I'll bring up some other things to consider:

1) Faster shooting - With your current S110, are you sure that the autofocus speed is the issue? It might help to post example images of the shots that the S110 couldn't handle so we can advise. Lots of times when you're indoors, the camera will automatically use longer shutter speeds. So you could be getting good focus but with too slow of a shutter, ending up in blurry photos due to the subject moving too fast.

2) In my opinion, dim light is junk light, regardless of how good your sensor is. Here's something to try - turn your phone's camera LED into a flashlight and light your food and try a shot with the S110. I bet it's all you need. Alternately, you can make your phone show a white screen and turn the brightness up to max and you have a softbox in your hand for food.

3) Why does she want interchangeable lenses? What exactly is appealing about having to carry around extra lenses? Does she know what specific reasons you need interchangeable lenses?

6) Most tech-y people end up with Nikon over Canon because of the specs and low light advantages that most Nikons have over Canons. Fuji is also a really awesome APS-C alternative, but you'll be hard pressed to meet your budget with Fuji.

9) You can stick an Eye-fi card in any camera and make it able to wirelessly send photos to your phone or tablet or whatever. The only thing an Eye-fi doesn't give you is remote shutter capabilities which can be done using a cheap 15 dollar IR remote control.

Another thing to consider is if you intend to use it in Auto mode or learn how to take more control of your camera. I already alluded to it in #1 - Auto mode is crap. Using a big DSLR in Auto mode is basically just turning it into an oversized point and shoot camera that will make the same mistakes that your S110 is making.

Take your camera off Auto mode and learn that you can be smarter than the camera since the camera can't read your mind!

 

[CuriousMike]

Lots of times when you're indoors, the camera will automatically use longer shutter speeds.

This is something that most cell-phones beat out most "cameras".
i..e, cell-phones seem to be tuned to boost ISO to ensure a minimum shutter speed understanding that most people don't want a 2" exposure--- they need a 1/30" exposure.

I would want most cameras to default to auto-iso *on*, and let the more photography-geeky people turn it off.

 

[Spoooon]

What syborg said first. Barring that, have you considered a (formerly known as) NEX system camera? A6000 bodies can be had used for $600, the 16-50 for 100.

 

[Syborg1211]

This is something that most cell-phones beat out most "cameras".
i..e, cell-phones seem to be tuned to boost ISO to ensure a minimum shutter speed understanding that most people don't want a 2" exposure--- they need a 1/30" exposure.

I would want most cameras to default to auto-iso *on*, and let the more photography-geeky people turn it off.

I never thought about that! Pretty sad when cell phone makers can figure out cameras usage cases better than camera makers. I guess camera-makers believe people would rather have blurry photos than grainy ones, but with high ISO performance these days they should make the change to default auto-iso on as you suggested.

 

[Berliner]

Pretty sad when cell phone makers can figure out cameras usage cases better than camera makers.

Makers of DSLRs have to think their customers want a little more control than others and should have some basic knowledge.

At least enough knowledge to figure out or look up how to set their camera to their preferred automatic algorithms.

 

[iGas]

Every camera have it place in the market, and everyone have their preference. And, user friendly and comfort IMHO are the uttermost important, otherwise the camera will end up collecting dust on the shelf.

Maybe you should take your wife to the local camera store and have her try out various cameras to see which camera suit her.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens Review

 

[blastingcap]

Both lenses are crap, or just one of the two?

The 70-300

It has a bad reputation for a reason.

 

[blastingcap]

What syborg said first. Barring that, have you considered a (formerly known as) NEX system camera? A6000 bodies can be had used for $600, the 16-50 for 100.

Actually the A6000 is on sale for $600 NEW sometimes.

As a former user of a Canon S95 and Nikon DSLRs, I have zero, ZERO regrets about switching over to an a6000. I still have an RX100 for portability but the a6000 is small enough that it isn't a big deal to have a smaller camera, as it was back when I had DSLRs!

An a6000 is basically a miniature DSLR that takes photos that are as good or better, while letting you see the effects of changing camera settings in real time via the EVF and LCD; DSLRs only let you do that with the LCD, which is hard to see in bright sunlight. The a6000 autofocus is better than equivalent-priced DSLRs.

There are a few drawbacks, such as lower battery life and smaller selection of lenses at somewhat higher costs (but also higher quality so it's not apples-to-apples). But batteries are cheap, and I would only ever buy a handful of lenses anyway and Sony/Sigma/Zeiss/Samyang have most of the go-to lenses covered already or will soon cover them (see Sony FE-lens roadmap).

Everything else like focus peaking, zebras, the ability to super-magnify in the EVF, face and eye recognition, etc. is a plus. I can even have a custom Autofocus On button.

That said, if you shoot sports/wildlife using very long focal lengths, stick with the DSLR, something like the 7DMkII is just about perfect for that kind of stuff. The mirrorless cameras aren't at that level yet, not even Micro Four Thirds, which has a smaller sensor so it's like giving up 2/3 stop of light. So those vaunted M43 f/2.8 lenses are more like f/3.5 lenses by APS-C standards.

But very few people really NEED a 7DMkII caliber camera and long lens. It's just ridiculous to spend $4000+ on a 7DMkII with 70-200 f/2.8 + TC kind of setup unless you really, REALLY like that kind of photography or have the next LeBron James as your son and want to document his high school theatrics.

 

[CuriousMike]

Makers of DSLRs have to think their customers want a little more control than others and should have some basic knowledge.

I might assume that, but
a) I read countless posts about people with DSLRs never getting out of Auto mode
b) If DSLR customers have basic knowledge, then it would be trivial for them to set it up how the want. It's not trivial for the non-photo-enthusiast purchaser who "just wants better image quality." i.e., I still contend camera manufacturers setup DSLR's backwards.

 

[iGas]

na

 

[dullard]

It might help to post example images of the shots that the S110 couldn't handle so we can advise.
...
In my opinion, dim light is junk light, regardless of how good your sensor is. Here's something to try - turn your phone's camera LED into a flashlight and light your food and try a shot with the S110.
...
Why does she want interchangeable lenses? What exactly is appealing about having to carry around extra lenses?

Below is a photo that turned out poorly. The S110 sensor was too dim in morning light. True, the shutter could have been left open longer. But unless you like carrying around a tripod, we would rather carry around a camera that can do it right without needing a tripod for every shot. And a cell phone just isn't handy for a flash when you are alone.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerUntouched.JPG

Here is roughly how I wish it looked (I simply changed the color levels in GIMP). But I couldn't change the focus in GIMP. A better camera maybe could have focussed differently and had a brighter image to start.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerRetouched.JPG

Here is a picture that we took and I like. Sometimes we try to get photos of each other posing as seen inside the dewdrops. But that isn't very easy with the S110 (it works quite well in ice-covered nature shots, but not so well in dewdrop covered items since the dewdrops are even smaller than icicles). That is why I thought a good camera with a macro lens would help. But if you think we can get better dewdrop reflections with the S110, I'll gladly accept pointers.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/GoodFlower.JPG

Here is just another typical example of photos that she takes. She grabs the camera from the house and photographs what she sees lying around. She is only carrying it around for 15 feet or so--a bigger camera with a different lens doesn't seem like it would be a problem (remember we will use the S110 for carrying around, the new camera will be just for around the house stuff). A different f-stop would have probably helped in the pumpkin photo to blur the neighbors but I think she wanted the tree somewhat in focus as well. No real complaint about the S110 here, but I thought that I'd give you a better example of what types of shots she is going for.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/Pumpkin.JPG

 

[dullard]

The 70-300

It has a bad reputation for a reason.

I was asking, since the rebate is for any Canon EF lens. The 75-300 in that link is just one example. Are many of the Canon EF lenses in this link below crap?

http://www.adorama.com/pdfs/rebates/...f?s=detailpage

 

[Gooberlx2]

You could consider a Pentax K50 and two lens kit for ~$600

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/982535-REG

Or the body only + DA 35mm f2.4 or DA 50mm f1.8.

Great sensor and the weather sealing is a nice feature at that price point.

 

[Belegost]

Below is a photo that turned out poorly. The S110 sensor was too dim in morning light. True, the shutter could have been left open longer. But unless you like carrying around a tripod, we would rather carry around a camera that can do it right without needing a tripod for every shot. And a cell phone just isn't handy for a flash when you are alone.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerUntouched.JPG

Here is roughly how I wish it looked (I simply changed the color levels in GIMP). But I couldn't change the focus in GIMP. A better camera maybe could have focussed differently and had a brighter image to start.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerRetouched.JPG

Here is a picture that we took and I like. Sometimes we try to get photos of each other posing as seen inside the dewdrops. But that isn't very easy with the S110 (it works quite well in ice-covered nature shots, but not so well in dewdrop covered items since the dewdrops are even smaller than icicles). That is why I thought a good camera with a macro lens would help. But if you think we can get better dewdrop reflections with the S110, I'll gladly accept pointers.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/GoodFlower.JPG

Here is just another typical example of photos that she takes. She grabs the camera from the house and photographs what she sees lying around. She is only carrying it around for 15 feet or so--a bigger camera with a different lens doesn't seem like it would be a problem (remember we will use the S110 for carrying around, the new camera will be just for around the house stuff). A different f-stop would have probably helped in the pumpkin photo to blur the neighbors but I think she wanted the tree somewhat in focus as well. No real complaint about the S110 here, but I thought that I'd give you a better example of what types of shots she is going for.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/Pumpkin.JPG

Looking at those it feels like she definitely wants to get photographs, not snapshots, so the entry-level DSLR/mirrorless is the right direction.

I have the SL1 with the kit lens and the 55-250 IS II, and both my wife and I use it regularly. My wife is about 5'1" with smaller hands to match and she really liked the feel of the camera in her hands compared to larger DSLRs, especially the touchscreen which was very intuitive to her coming from an iPhone.

For me, I have been quite happy with the image quality and portability. You can rummage through my photobucket library and look at the pictures we've taken on it.

As it stands my wife is asking about another camera for Christmas (so we're not sharing the SL1) and it's hard not to just get another given how satisfied we've been with it.

I would definitely look around for deals with the EF-S 55-250 bundled if you're wanting a telephoto, and consider the 24mm f/2.8 pancake if you're looking for something slim and good for general purpose use (I stopped by the photo shop a while back and tested it, I can easily slip the SL1 and pancake in a jacket pocket, or even my pants pocket, though I'm 6'3" with bigger pockets.)

 

[Syborg1211]

Below is a photo that turned out poorly. The S110 sensor was too dim in morning light. True, the shutter could have been left open longer. But unless you like carrying around a tripod, we would rather carry around a camera that can do it right without needing a tripod for every shot. And a cell phone just isn't handy for a flash when you are alone.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerUntouched.JPG

Here is roughly how I wish it looked (I simply changed the color levels in GIMP). But I couldn't change the focus in GIMP. A better camera maybe could have focussed differently and had a brighter image to start.
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/dullard/MorningFlowerRetouched.JPG

That shot was taken at f/2 with a shutter of 1/400 of a second. There is definitely room to up your exposure in that shot by increasing the shutter speed without the need for a tripod. At the bare minimum you could have doubled your exposure with 1/200 of a sec and not seen any camera shake whatsoever. So you could have fixed your exposure just by taking control of the camera for this shot.

This photo is not a focus issue either. I think you are confusing a very shallow depth of field with a bad focus. The center of that flower looks dead on focus to me. However, because you are in macro mode and focusing on something really really close to the camera, your depth of field is going to be really shallow.

Getting a larger sensor camera will actually hurt your macro shots because larger sensors have a shallower depth of field at equivalent apertures. So if you did the same f/2 with shutter of 1/400 of a second with a DSLR, even less of that flower will have been in focus. Also realize that exposure doesn't change with sensor size when all settings are equal. So f/2, 1/400 will be just as dark on a DSLR as it was on that S110 if the ISO settings are set equivalently. On a DSLR, you could potentially raise the ISO and get a better exposure, but as everyone has already explained you'll only gain that flexibility by taking control of your camera and leaving Auto mode in the dust.

 

[dullard]

That shot was taken at f/2 with a shutter of 1/400 of a second. There is definitely room to up your exposure in that shot by increasing the shutter speed without the need for a tripod. At the bare minimum you could have doubled your exposure with 1/200 of a sec and not seen any camera shake whatsoever. So you could have fixed your exposure just by taking control of the camera for this shot.

This photo is not a focus issue either. I think you are confusing a very shallow depth of field with a bad focus. The center of that flower looks dead on focus to me. However, because you are in macro mode and focusing on something really really close to the camera, your depth of field is going to be really shallow.

Getting a larger sensor camera will actually hurt your macro shots because larger sensors have a shallower depth of field at equivalent apertures. So if you did the same f/2 with shutter of 1/400 of a second with a DSLR, even less of that flower will have been in focus. Also realize that exposure doesn't change with sensor size when all settings are equal. So f/2, 1/400 will be just as dark on a DSLR as it was on that S110 if the ISO settings are set equivalently. On a DSLR, you could potentially raise the ISO and get a better exposure, but as everyone has already explained you'll only gain that flexibility by taking control of your camera and leaving Auto mode in the dust.

You could have posted something helpful by taking control of yourself and turning off pretentious mode. We rarely use Auto mode. Sometimes we like to have greater control of the focus than the S110 gives us. You are confusing the field of depth of a single shot on a website with all of the possibilities that we might want out of a camera. So please stop making assumptions that make you sound like a fool.

 

[CuriousMike]

Wow.

I didn't read Syborgs suggestions as being pretentious at all ...