Please recommend a noob friendly camera

[ibex333]

I have an old Nikon 3100 SLR and I'm not too happy with it's performance. Using it on auto, the results are very much hit or miss, with a lot more misses.

I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close and I find the whole thing too bulky. It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all.

I find myself using my iPhone 6s a lot more often for all my picture and video needs, but I wouldl ike to sell the Nikon and buy a smaller camera that would be significantly better than the iPhone for pictures and video.
This camera would have to produce more or less consistently good results without requiring too much knowledge from the user.

Is that even realistic for $200 or less? If so, can someone recommend something? I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance.

 

[arosusi]

For 200 or less, not really, except if you find something decent used, like the first version of Sony's RX100. Mobile phone cameras have pretty much made cheaper point-and-shoot cameras obsolete. Good low light performance requires good lenses which are expensive. Newer versions of RX100, Canon G7X MkII and Panasonic LX15 are all very good, but all of them have their quirks.

For indoor shooting the 3100 can do pretty well still, considering its age, if you get a prime lens like Nikkor F/1.8 35 mm, which happens to be about 200 monetary units. For small rooms it can be a bit too long, though, limiting what you can shoot.

 

[CuriousMike]

• "I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance."
  • That says DSLR
• "I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close"
  • That says not DSLR
• "I find the whole thing too bulky."
  • That says not DSLR
• "It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all."
  • For < $200 - no.

There isn't a $200 camera that's going to perform better than your iPhone 6s for the above.

In other words, your iPhone 6s is the exact best "noob friendly camera" you can own.

Your Nikon D3100 is an awesome camera.
You don't like it's size, that's one matter that can't be fixed.
You don't like changing lenses - (buy one of the good 18-200/300/400 zooms)
If you don't know how to operate it, that can be fixed.

I suspect, even if you bought a new $500 "Canonsonicujiony" -- put it in Auto mode, you'd still complain about hit and miss results.

Hit and miss results can mean a couple of things -- depending on what your misses are.

We might be able to help you use your D3100 if you would invest an hour learning.

If you don't want to invest an hour to learn, then I strongly suggest you stick with your iPhone and save your money.

 

[ibex333]

You don't like changing lenses - (buy one of the good 18-200/300/400 zooms)

Can you recommend one like that on Amazon or elsewhere? It would already be a huge help.

Also, my 18-200 lens cannot really do macro shots. It can get somewhat close, but now very close. It wont focus when too close to the object. The iPhone however or a basic P&S will. Do I need another lens for that?

I tried doing some searching myself and the prices are ridiculous. The lens const more than my whole camera with two lens that were included with it. What's the point investing in such expensive lens when cameras become outdated within few years and newer, much better models come out?

 

[jtvang125]

For $200 you're probably not going to find anything that can do better than what you already have. The iphone is going to be pretty bad in low light no matter what. Just something that you can't help with a small sensor and lens. If you're willing to learn and live with the size of the dslr, you can invest in a fast prime lens (one with a small f number). Something like an f/1.8 or f/1.4 if you're willing to up your budget. A fast lens will allow more light to enter and expose the sensor and thus better low light pictures. This will also allow you to use a lower ISO for less noise and faster shutter speeds to reduce subject motion blur and body shake.

 

[Rifter]

• "I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance."
  

  • "I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance."
    • That says DSLR
  • "I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close"
    • That says not DSLR
  • "I find the whole thing too bulky."
    • That says not DSLR
  • "It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all."
    • For < $200 - no.

  There isn't a $200 camera that's going to perform better than your iPhone 6s for the above.
  
  In other words, your iPhone 6s is the exact best "noob friendly camera" you can own.
  
  Your Nikon D3100 is an awesome camera.
  You don't like it's size, that's one matter that can't be fixed.
  You don't like changing lenses - (buy one of the good 18-200/300/400 zooms)
  If you don't know how to operate it, that can be fixed.
  
  I suspect, even if you bought a new $500 "Canonsonicujiony" -- put it in Auto mode, you'd still complain about hit and miss results.
  
  Hit and miss results can mean a couple of things -- depending on what your misses are.
  
  We might be able to help you use your D3100 if you would invest an hour learning.
  
  If you don't want to invest an hour to learn, then I strongly suggest you stick with your iPhone and save your money.

  • That says DSLR
• "I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close"
  • That says not DSLR
• "I find the whole thing too bulky."
  • That says not DSLR
• "It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all."
  • For < $200 - no.

There isn't a $200 camera that's going to perform better than your iPhone 6s for the above.

In other words, your iPhone 6s is the exact best "noob friendly camera" you can own.

Your Nikon D3100 is an awesome camera.
You don't like it's size, that's one matter that can't be fixed.
You don't like changing lenses - (buy one of the good 18-200/300/400 zooms)
If you don't know how to operate it, that can be fixed.

I suspect, even if you bought a new $500 "Canonsonicujiony" -- put it in Auto mode, you'd still complain about hit and miss results.

Hit and miss results can mean a couple of things -- depending on what your misses are.

We might be able to help you use your D3100 if you would invest an hour learning.

If you don't want to invest an hour to learn, then I strongly suggest you stick with your iPhone and save your money.

I agree with this, id learn how to use what you have if looking to take good pictures for cheap(because learning how to use what you have is free). If looking for a one lens does it all lens the http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/zoom/normalzoom/af-s_dx_18-200mmf_35-56g_ed_vr2/index.htm is alright, but i would suggest getting more specialized individual lens that are better at their intended tasks that one thats ok at them all but great at none, especially so if shooting Auto mode.

I have the Nikon D3200 which is essentially your camera just one gen newer and there isnt anything ive come across so far that i couldn't shoot with the right lens and settings. I have never been unhappy with the results as long as i do my part to set it up correctly for the shot. Sure ive invested some money in Lens for it and currently own 7 Lens for it but you can get away with 2-3 lens that will cover most situations. Get a fast(1.8 or faster) 35mm or 50mm prime for low light, a general use zoom(18-55), and a telephoto zoom(70-300mm) and you will be well setup for 95% of shooting situation. Add a Macro lens if you are into Macro photos.

 

[CuriousMike]

The more I see what you write, the more I'm convinced this isn't for you.
There is no $200 camera (or lens) that'll do everything you want.
There is no camera that takes awesome shots, perfectly everytime without you spending a little time learning.
Your camera isn't outdated as much as tech nerds want you to believe.

With that said:
I would have suggested the 18-200 as my first recommendation. The fact you already own it and it doesn't do what you need further suggests I'm wasting my time.

The smaller the sensor, the closer you can get to the subject.
Phones and P&S cameras are terrific for macro. You would have to buy a specialty lens for a DSLR to achieve the minimal focus distance you so desire.

Best of luck

my 18-200 lens cannot really do macro shots. The iPhone however or a basic P&S will.

 

[biostud]

Stop shooting in auto?

The more you learn about taking control of your camera, the better chance of getting a good shot.

A simple setup would be

P mode, Auto iso max 3200, 1/100s min shutter speed, single point auto focus.

Personally I like shooting in A, manual iso or full manual, depending on the situation.

If you want to spend some money then buy the nikkor 35mm 1.8G lens.

 

[turtile]

Also, my 18-200 lens cannot really do macro shots. It can get somewhat close, but now very close. It wont focus when too close to the object. The iPhone however or a basic P&S will. Do I need another lens for that?

I tried doing some searching myself and the prices are ridiculous. The lens const more than my whole camera with two lens that were included with it. What's the point investing in such expensive lens when cameras become outdated within few years and newer, much better models come out?

You can add a macro filter or extender but they won't work with auto focus. If you want to focus close with AF, you are going to need a lens designed to focus close.

You invest in your lenses, not your camera. I've been using a few lenses for over 12 years and they still work perfect on the newest bodies.

It sounds like you should stick with cell phone. With your budget, you can only really afford an older used P&S.

 

[Syborg1211]

Everything CuriousMike and everyone else has said has been on point. The only thing I want to add is a response to your question of why are lenses so expensive compared to camera bodies.

The thing about lenses is that they are updated far less frequently. Good glass can be used for years, decades, or generations even. Digital cameras fall victim to ever evolving electronics. There's far less innovations in lens design these days than electronics. Every lens I have I intend to use for damn near close to the rest of my life, but I cannot say the same about the digital bodies that match them.

 

[MrSquished]

If you really truly want to explore the world of macro photography, which is a blast I might add, you need a true macro lens. I love mine and it will never leave my kit.

 

[tenthumbs]

I have an old Nikon 3100 SLR and I'm not too happy with it's performance. Using it on auto, the results are very much hit or miss, with a lot more misses.

I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close and I find the whole thing too bulky. It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all.

I find myself using my iPhone 6s a lot more often for all my picture and video needs, but I wouldl ike to sell the Nikon and buy a smaller camera that would be significantly better than the iPhone for pictures and video.
This camera would have to produce more or less consistently good results without requiring too much knowledge from the user.

Is that even realistic for $200 or less? If so, can someone recommend something? I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance.

You're better off taking that $200 and participating in a workshop or intro class>

 

[zCypher]

You definitely won't find a $200 camera that does everything much better than your iPhone 6S. The iPhone 6S is actually really quite good! In the $200 range your only options are low end point and shoots, and modern smartphones make those irrelevant. If you're willing to spend considerably more, then you have several options that can certainly achieve nicer results than a phone.

The thing to understand about photography is that the more you seek better results, the more specialized equipment is required to achieve those results. There is literally no such thing as the single best camera or lens or camera/lens combination. There is only a best option given your specific needs and use case. Whichever way you go, you need to make a compromise. That compromise is either with the size/weight/hassle, the quality/performance, or the price.

Then there is the time investment to actually understand what you're doing and how to operate your camera, as was pointed out. If you are not willing to invest at least a little bit of time (no need to get too crazy into it or anything), then I'd repeat what has been said and don't waste your money. If you are willing to learn a bit, then you can achieve nicer results even with your phone, and that learning experience can help point you in the right direction in terms of figuring out what sort of camera would best suit you.

For me, I got the D5200 (not unlike your D3100) which came with the 18-55 kit lens. I already found it to be orders of magnitude better than my phone straight out of the box without knowing how to use it - but, I did buy it with the explicit intention of actually getting into photography, which I did. It didn't take me too long to get bored and feel limited with auto mode. I will agree that the results can sometimes be inconsistent, but also consider that a DSLR is not designed for use in auto mode. The purpose of a DSLR is to be able to control everything you want, the way you want, to make the picture you want. It's up to you to decide if that's for you - there are many nice cameras that are not DSLRs which come with great auto systems. But none for $200. If I were to buy a point and shoot, I would probably spend $500-$1000. If I really had to cheap out, then I would look for a refurbished or previous generation model, which can shave off a couple hundred.

 

[Rottie]

you hate change lens you could not go wrong with bridged-dSLR camera like Canon PowerShot SX60 HS or the popular SX50 HS for possible less than 200 bucks you can find them on eBay or Amazon

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

For what it's worth, I just scored a D7000 with less than 10k shutter clicks on eBay for $250 delivered. It was the first DSLR I really loved, and I sold it last year to buy a full frame body. I'm happy to have it again as a 2nd camera body.

If you watch the auctions closely and use a sniper you could get a similar deal I'm sure.

 

[ibex333]

For what it's worth, I just scored a D7000 with less than 10k shutter clicks on eBay for $250 delivered. It was the first DSLR I really loved, and I sold it last year to buy a full frame body. I'm happy to have it again as a 2nd camera body.

If you watch the auctions closely and use a sniper you could get a similar deal I'm sure.

"and use a sniper" What do you mean by that?

 

[corkyg]

"Auction sniping is the practice, in a timed online auction, of placing a bid likely to exceed the current highest bid (which may be hidden) as late as possible—usually seconds before the end of the auction—giving other bidders no time to outbid the sniper. This can be done manually, by software on the bidder's computer"

Wickapedia

 

[bigi]

D3100 is an excellent body. Auto, ah and still not good.

Well, looks like user, maybe lens issue really.

 

[Kristy Sackhoff]

I have an old Nikon 3100 SLR and I'm not too happy with it's performance. Using it on auto, the results are very much hit or miss, with a lot more misses.

I really hate changing lenses to shoot far and close and I find the whole thing too bulky. It is missing good 1080p support, and doesn't have 4k at all.

I find myself using my iPhone 6s a lot more often for all my picture and video needs, but I wouldl ike to sell the Nikon and buy a smaller camera that would be significantly better than the iPhone for pictures and video.
This camera would have to produce more or less consistently good results without requiring too much knowledge from the user.

Is that even realistic for $200 or less? If so, can someone recommend something? I am particularly concerned with low light and indoor performance, and less concerned with day/outside performance.

What you need is a point and shoot with semi SLR capabilities. I was in the same shoes not too long ago and had to go through a hell of lot of research (yeah I'm very selective) till I finally settled on my cannon.
I'm pretty happy with it so far to be honest, and its been working good for my use which is both indoors and outdoors.
I suggest you start off with looking up some camera comparisons in that budget, Google will do the trick, like here for example: best camera under $200

Look into the Nikon COOLPIX L340 as suggested there, it makes a lot of sense to me tbh.