Baby-friendly point-and-shoot camera sought

March 17, 2008 11:36 AM

I'm looking for point-and-click digital still camera to replace my Canon A95. I need something dead simple for snapping lots of baby pix, often indoors, in motion, and in low light.

My Canon A95 has been very good to me. But, with the birth of my son, it has met its match. It's great for outdoor pics, but it's never been any good for anything in motion. It also is problematic indoors, as using the flash washes everything out but not using it leads to dark prints that can't be printed without a lot of tweaking (if even then). And, being a new dad, I have very little time on my hands.

So, help me keep my marriage together by recommending a good point-and-shoot camera that's great for baby pix, particularly indoors and that's fairly tolerant of motion and has some sort of image stabilization to assist my shaky hands. I like Canon and Sony but am open to other brands. My budget is $300-$400, but I'll take other ranges into consideration.

posted by wheat to technology (19 comments total)

Sony's DSC-50 might be a good fit. ($400)

You'll need a camera with a low f/stop lense (for instance that sony has a 2.7 lense, your A95 is 2.8, so very similar) and also allows a high ISO rating (Your A95 is 400 max, the sony can push 3200-- *big* difference).

That combination will mean you get a good performance in low-light/high motion areas.
posted by Static Vagabond at 11:59 AM on March 17, 2008

I currently own a Sony Cybershot DSC-W80, and I know a few people who have recently upgraded to the newest version of it. This site seems to give it good reviews, as it is on the editor's list of Top Pick point-and-shooters. It does have image stabilization, as well as a handy face detector, which a) insures that the camera focuses on any faces in the frame and not something large in the background and b)auto-adjusts the flash to minimize "wash out" on faces. It also has some nice options for manual shooting if you ever choose to do so.

I drop this little baby in my purse anytime I'm going anywhere picture worthy, and have taken tons and tons of pictures. So far, nary a blurry one to be found.
posted by tryniti at 12:04 PM on March 17, 2008

Do you mean this one, Static Vagabond?
posted by wheat at 12:07 PM on March 17, 2008

The Fuji F-series with the SuperCCD are highly regarded for low-light and motion, except that the best of the range -- the F31fd -- now sells on eBay for above retail. So I'd lean towards the Sonys.
posted by holgate at 12:14 PM on March 17, 2008

Yup wheat, that's the one. I know it mentions a may release date but I've seen it online for sale.
posted by Static Vagabond at 12:17 PM on March 17, 2008

I have recently acquired a Canon SD 850 IS and I am loving it. You should be able to get one between 200 and 300 dollars, and it is the easiest point and shoot I've ever dealt with. FANTASTIC photos with minimal effort.
posted by indiebass at 12:21 PM on March 17, 2008

Keep with Canon. The SD1000 are about to get real cheap (around $150) because the new 2008 line of the compact point and shoots are coming out really soon.
posted by ijoyner at 12:21 PM on March 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

The Canon Elphs are very nice and convenient. Some come with image stabilization ("IS" in the name) which helps a lot in low light. Some also have a tendency to overexpose the flash, so look for one that allows independent exposure control of the flash. Non-flash pictures usually look better anyway unless you have a fancy bounce flash, but then you are into serious coin for the camera and flash and considerably more bulk. Image stabilization and a lens that goes down at least to f2.8 or lower are your best bet. Ken Rockwell likes the SD850 IS. I have been thinking of ditching my SD600, no image stabilization, for the SD 850 IS.
posted by caddis at 12:36 PM on March 17, 2008

My wife recently picked up a Canon Powershot A460. Good in low light, small camera size, multiple point autofocus, same resolution as your current camera. Only downside is you'll need to pick up a new memory card as it uses SD rather than CF. Uses standard AA batteries instead of a proprietary pack, which is a really great feature to have in a camera. Spare battery packs can be damn expensive!

If you want to go for something a little bulkier, the Canon S1 line are good cameras, and have some of the advanced features you'd normally find on a DSLR while still remaining point-and-shoot. We had an S1 IS that not only took nice photos, it also had great video features. A bit bigger than the A series but not as bulky as bringing both still camera and video. Bonus, newer versions of the S1 can take full-resolution still images while shooting video, without pausing.
posted by caution live frogs at 12:39 PM on March 17, 2008

I'm a professional photographer and have done a lot of research on point and shoot cameras. I can tell you that the hands down best value in point and shoot digital cameras are the Panasonic Lumix line up. While other companies wow you with megapixels and other impertinent technical specs, this lineup of panasonic cameras uses some of the best lenses in the world, the Leica lenses, exclusively! If I ever ran out of film for my medium format camera, I wouldn't hesitate to pick up one of these and substitute, because you wouldn't know the difference. Other lenses will distort your subject, actually magnifying objects closer to the camera, rendering them disproportionately large as compared to objects further away. So you're baby close-ups will make your baby look sort of gonzo (big nose). Get any Lumix camera, I'm telling you, and you will be very happy. Several of my friends have these cameras on my recommendation and are ecstatic, as am I, because I don't wretch when I look at their photos anymore. Straight lines are straight, and people's features seem proportional.

FYI the Panasonic Lumix is also sold under the name Leica, for collectors, and the same camera easily sells for double the price. I don't really understand why, but it's true.

My website is www.lakelandaerial.com.
posted by tosteka at 12:43 PM on March 17, 2008 [3 favorites has favorites]

My wife has gone through 2 different Sony P&S cameras since we started having kids (DSC-S75 and DSC-S40). Her biggest complaint is what she consideres shutter lag, which I actually beleive is the delay for auto focus, light metering and any other bells and whistles that have to fire off before the shutter actually clicks. I've always considered this to be the necessary evil with point and shoots, but with fast moving kids, the great shot is lost more than half the time while you wait for the 1-3 second delay after actually pressing the shutter button. I am not sure which P&S has the best performance on AF, etc, but I would definitely consider this as you look for a new camera.
posted by tdischino at 4:09 PM on March 17, 2008

I've been pretty happy with my Panasonic TZ1, with a Leica lens, like tosteka recommends above. One of the really neat features that the camera has is a baby mode. You input the birthdate and all of the pictures will have the child's age in the data.

My flickr page is linked in my profile, if you'd like to see the kind of pictures I've taken with it.
posted by sugarfish at 4:15 PM on March 17, 2008

I had the Canon A95 before moving to the A5 IS. I loved the A95 and I used it to take 1000s of baby pictures of my girls. I highly recommend setting it on the "kids and pets" setting. It will make a huge difference and handle motion a lot better. "Kids and pets" is pretty much the same as the sports setting. Either will help.

If you still want to upgrade the A5 IS is fantastic, though bulkier.
posted by Abbril at 5:45 PM on March 17, 2008

i just bought a canon sd1000. i played briefly with the panasonic/leica cameras and i was not terribly impressed. the things that made me choose the canon over the panasonic were the startup time, the overall construction, and the menu layout.

i felt like the form factor and the external controls on the panasonic camera i looked at (sorry, i can't remember the model) were chintzy and seemed fragile. i also liked the canon's smaller size.

what really sold me on the canon, though was the menu system. you can get to all the really important stuff (iso, flash settings, macro mode shutter mode) with one button press. and the rest of the shooting settings are easily accessible, too. (maybe i just haven't picked up enough digital cameras in the last few years, but i found the menu way more intuitive than any other camera i've played with in the past.)

oh, and the pictures were nice, too. good luck.
posted by clockwork at 7:29 PM on March 17, 2008

I'm a big fan of the Canon SD800IS. The 800 comes with a wider-angle lens than most point and shoots. It's hard to find, and its usually a bit pricier than the other current SDs out there, but I love the wide angle shots. With a baby, you'll want to be close and shoot at the same time. And the IS means it has image stabilization. A lot of cameras have that now, but the Canon has optical, instead of digital, which means the image is stabilized before it hits the sensor, not after.

Seriously, you should check this camera out. The wide angle shots are the best, and will work out great for the baby.
posted by MrZero at 7:51 PM on March 18, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Thank you MrZero. I did not realize that Canon had a 28mm equivalent focal length lens with image stabilization in an Elph camera. That wide angle setting is far more useful than the 135mm vs. 105mm on the opposite end, at least to the way I take pictures. When my kids were babies most of the pictures were either a close up with a zoom in the 105mm range or an environment shot with a 24mm lens. When going wide you want to get right down to their level and take in the floor, their toys, them etc.
posted by caddis at 10:51 PM on March 19, 2008

So many choices! I appreciate all the input but am still having a hard time making up my mind. The image stabilization feature will save me lost shots due to my own shaky hands, but I guess only a high ISO (and more grain) or a flash (and I really hate using a flash) will stop a shaky baby.

So, far, based on what's been said here and my own poking around on dpreview, I'm torn between the Canon SD800 IS (or perhaps its newer cousin, the SD850 IS) and the Sony DSC-H50. I'm also curious about he Canon SX100 IS.

I'd really rather spend too much here than too little. If an extra $100 or so makes all the difference, I'd be down with that. Should I abandon point-and-shoots altogether and start looking at lower-end DSLRs? Some of those have auto modes as well, I take it.
posted by wheat at 3:40 AM on March 25, 2008

Hmmm.... after a little more research, the S5 IS and the SX100 IS are in a cage match in my mind. Will the S5's fast shutter (1/3200) help me stop that kiddo? The SX100 seems to have the edge based on Amazon product reviews. I'll do some more reading, but I'd like to order something this week. If you have any final thoughts, chime in. I'll post a follow-up when I order.
posted by wheat at 4:20 AM on March 25, 2008

After much deliberation and research, I decided to move a bit more up-market and picked the top of Canon's point-and-shoot line: the PowerShot G9. It's probably overkill for my current needs, but I think it will be a flexible solution with room for growth. The A95's lack of tweakability always bothered me, so having a full manual mode will be welcome. I'll blog the results if anyone is interested (link in the profile). Thanks to all. Practically every answer has been helpful to me. You guys are great.
posted by wheat at 6:01 AM on March 27, 2008