I recently saw a fancy pants digital camera on clearance and it got me to thinking that it's about time I purchased a better camera. I'm no photographer and know nothing about cameras. I'm thinking something for when the kids are playing sports and general picture taking occasions. Since my boys are young something that could take pictures in quick succession would be nice. A good zoom would be handy too.
Here's the one I saw:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-SX520-16Digital-Stabilized/dp/B00M0QVTOS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1432228862&sr=8-1&keywords=Canon+sx520hs
I saw it for $170. I'm not ready to buy right this second but when I am I'd like to keep the budget under $250. Any thoughts or advice?
I cannot say enough good things about my Nikon J1. It is small enough to be used for everyday things, but the quality is large enough to leave the big DSLR at home. Performance in low-light is excellent, a big factor for me because my daughter is on the stage a lot. There are limited settings, so the pro photographer may be left wanting, but I have a DSLR for that stuff, I just want to take great photos without having to think or adjust much. This does that better than anything else. Sure, I wish it had more lenses, but overall, it has been the best camera purchase I have made.
And I am talking about the original J1, which is in your price range but at the bottom of the scale for these types of cameras. There are newer models from Nikon that do more, and models from Canon and Sony and others that have even better quality, performance, more lenses, more features, etc.
The point is, skip the bulky DSLR and go for a smaller interchangeable-lens or micro-four-thirds camera.
I'd suggest finding professional reviews of the camera you're looking at before you pull the trigger. Looking at the info on the lens in the picture you've shared, it doesn't look like a particularly fast lens (meaning it isn't great at grabbing all available light) and it's got a really large distance between the min and max focus lengths which can be hard to do "right" and not end up with a lens that overly distorts the image presented to the camera's sensor.
I'm looking to buy a camera for a family member for Christmas (I'm actually trying to shop early this year) as the camera they carry now is pretty bad at low light situations, or situations I wouldn't even consider low light. Right now the #1 candidate is the Panasonic Lumix LX5, used, from KEH.com. I trust KEH and I don't care about it being a few years old. Seems to be an excellent point & shoot and is about the same cost.
pinchvalve: What's the J1 with that lens like in low light? Based on the shown f-stop on the lens mounted in your image, I would guess "not great". Thoughts?
For pro/semipro or artsy stuff, you can't beat a DSLR for adjustability, fine tuning, and low light performance. For the rest of the 98% of consumers, I almost always recommend a high quality point and shoot. I'd skip over the prosumer type models like the originally mentioned Powershot; if you're going to deal with the bulk, might as well go DSLR with a wide range 18-105mm lens. My personal favorite is Panasonic's LUMIX line. You get a Leica lens without the Leica price. You also can't go wrong with anything Canon. Personally, I haven't been that impressed with Nikon's offerings for point and shoot systems, though I love their DSLRs and use a D90 for my semipro stuff. One thing I'd caution: camera companies rely on the idea that consumers think that the newest, most expensive camera with more features will make them a better photographer. The truth is, the only thing that will make you a better photographer is lots of practice. The good news for us grassroots-y type people is this means the market is flooded with cheap used cameras that are only a year or two old. Case in point here .
