First child is on the way and I want to get a camera to capture her growing up.
I had a 50d but sold it grrrrr. Been out of the game for a few years and keen to get back into it.
Heres what I'm after.
Canon, but willing to look at the darksideNikon
One lens solution. I cant be bothered changing lens. When they are old I will get a long lens for sport.
I'm chasing image quality. So thinking a 6D, cant afford a 5d3. Maybe a 7D but get a better lens. Maybe all I need is a Rebel and an even better lens?
To take pictures documenting your kid growing up I think you'd be better off with a versatile point&shoot (long zoom, both auto and manual functionality, etc.) than with an SLR. Or maybe even a Canon D-10 or comparable waterproof/shockproof model you can use in the rain, pool or tub. I think you'd miss too many "moments" fiddling with lenses and settings with the SLR.
Now, if you want to take "portraits" of your kid, some kind of SLR (and some lights) probably are in order, but I can't make any specific recommendations on those.
I would suggest a high end Rebel for now. Comparable to the 7D in terms of image quality (and better than a 50D), but much cheaper... especially refurbished. Second choice would be a large sensor point and shoot like a Sony RX100 or Canon Powershot S110.
7D, and glass with fast autofocus, learn how to use it now because once they start moving on their own, you wont have time to learn how to keep up.
also you dont want a ILC or new Aps-c compact, the AF is far to slow to catch anything that moves with consistency. You want a dslr, you want something that locks focus fast and has very little shutter lag.
Since you'll be doing a lot of video I presume, I recommend a micro-4/3 camera like the Panasonic G5 or Oly OM-D.
The G5 is pretty cheap right now--since the G6 is out...you can get a two lens kit for under 500 (USD).
Larger sensor than the Rx100 and all the compacts, a bit smaller than APS-C, but still great quality (the OM-D matches just about any APS-C sensor in low light, and the Panny is excellent as well).
The Panny has the faster autofocus of the two. Great for videos too because you can use the viewfinder, unlike a dSLR (except for Sony translucent dSLRs)
Lighter and easier to carry around as well.
The RX100 is a good choice too, but no viewfinder for video and not as much potential for wide and zoom (and more expensive than the two lens panny kit).
For video, the panny's rule, and that can be justification enough. You can always get another SLR later...though you may never need to!
I'm with Mike, DSLR is the way to go. I have a DSLR and a "fast" autofocus point and shoot. Now that my son is alomst 2, getting clear shots is much easier with the focusing of the DSLR.
You could easily get away with a rebel, but I think the 7D sounds perfect for you. Get the 15-85 to go with it (instead of the kit lens) and you will be a happy camper.
I'm with Mike, DSLR is the way to go. I have a DSLR and a "fast" autofocus point and shoot. Now that my son is alomst 2, getting clear shots is much easier with the focusing of the DSLR.
You could easily get away with a rebel, but I think the 7D sounds perfect for you. Get the 15-85 to go with it (instead of the kit lens) and you will be a happy camper.
one lens? really i'd suggest sticking with a 35 or 50mm prime or a get a 2.8 zoom. the 15-85 wont cut it indoors.
if you like to stay wide another possibly would be the 16-35/1.8 from sigma.
fwiw - I like my current combo - the Canon 60D combined with a Tamron 18-270 Piezo zoom. Camera (body only) was $900, lens $450 (both new). I really like the fold-out display on the back, and the camera does a reasonable job up to around ISO 6400. The lens almost allows shots of a tall-steeple church from across the street, to doing a reasonable job of drawing in your subject. The 270 still isn't enough for bird photography, but hopefully that won't be a factor with your child. A word of note - Tamron had an earlier version of the 18-270 that was heavier, bigger, and with a slower auto-focus - the newer version is definitely worth the price difference.
Congratulations on the new little one on the way. Beware. Your life will change.
24-105L is a beauty of a lens. Wish it opened to 2.8, though. But I have a tamron that's something like a 28-75 2.8, and I never go back to it, because it just ends not having the reach I want. Always go to the canon 24-105L instead, even though it doesn't open up as much.
I have the 7D with the 24-105L combination. That would work quite nicely for you as, as well.
WHile looking for a 24-105L I came across one for sale and it comes with an old 5D. around $700 US for both. Seems like a good deal. Will I like a 5d mk1? or is it too old now
WHile looking for a 24-105L I came across one for sale and it comes with an old 5D. around $700 US for both. Seems like a good deal. Will I like a 5d mk1? or is it too old now
Make sure you look at the Micro four thirds range as Neil suggested above if you want an interchangeable lens camera that has top quality lenses and a third of the weight.
It really is an amazing alternative to the heavier DSLR's if size matters to you and the quality of the primes and fast zooms is top notch.
WHile looking for a 24-105L I came across one for sale and it comes with an old 5D. around $700 US for both. Seems like a good deal. Will I like a 5d mk1? or is it too old now
Fantastic camera for image quality, and a very nice lens as well.
So I think Im back to a 7D and a 24-105L. 6D seems to expensive. Could get a second hand 5DII for that price
If you're going back and forth between the 5DII and the 7D -- I'd ask yourself what else you're interesting in. If you have any interest in wildlife, I'd go with the 7D -- if it's mostly going to be kid, I'd be tempted with the 5D. The crop sensor and the faster frames per second are really sweet for wildlife. Otherwise, a full frame seems like it would be really sweet. (both are absolutely perfect for kids. :)
