UKC

With a sprog on the way, and my gold medal ability to not recall things, I'm looking at getting a half decent camera to record the memories of the kid, for them but also for me!

So I'm looking for a proper camera as I'm not that keen on having a massive camera roll of crap phone photos. 

I'll need a decent digital all rounder that is robust and compact enough to be used on days out and lumped about the hills. Budget wise, I want something good that will last so am willing to look up to ~£400 if necessary

Any thoughts on what makes/specs I should be focusing on (pun intended)? Are there any decent places to get second hand? (Will have a lookin the local camera shop, but would like a bit of info beforehand!)

Also, any experience on storing electronic images? Picassa/Flickr or similar? Any experience of electronic photo frames?

Honestly phones these days are so good, in favourable conditions they are easily capable of shooting as well as a "proper camera" from not that long ago. the newer google pixel phones can take some amazing photos. Shooting RAW is also possible on some phones which is handy if editing is on the radar. 

If hell bent on going down the proper camera route I'd go mirrorless and with interchangeable lenses, just personal preference, others may suggest a bridge type camera. a Sony A6000 series is a safe bet, easily picked up second hand from reputable places like MPB.com. but lenses are where the expense is. That said the standard 16-50 kit lens is decent, versatile and cheap enough to be within your budget. You can add more over time if you catch the photo bug.

Agreed - an expensive phone with good camera ratings will always be with you and most have immediate cloud upload in most phone operating systems.

If you are not that organised then having a camera that needs charging, downloading and filing makes photos not happen!

As others have said, if you don't want to get a decent mirrorless/SLR and learn to use it, your phone is your best tool. Either have a look for something used on MBP or Web, or just add £400 to your next phone and buy a flagship, whether you want Apple/Android.

To add: I have a fancy camera, and sometimes end up using my phone for stuff. The best camera is the one you have handy. The tech is a bit limiting for sure, but I'd guess the limit of the quality of your phone pics is in fact your skills. (assuming here you haven't really looked into photography ever).

i'll leap in before the lemming: micro four thirds is quite compact and still popular.

i've been using the olympus e-m5 until recently when the shutter stuck- got a replacement body - oly e-m10 mk3- for under£200 off the bay- i like the retro styling..

For children and family photos it’s the phone camera all the way (*). When those moments arrive were you want to take a quick snap, there’s a good chance there will be lots of other faffing happening at the same time. So you need something quick and ready to use. And then you can WhatsApp them to family and friends. 

(*) for those occasions when you have more time and are more prepared, a Panasonic lumix or equivalent and within your budget would do the job very well.  These are the photos that you could get printed and framed etc.  

Photoframes = don’t bother (quickly get bored with them). 

My tip would be to make sure you upload to your laptop, be ruthless in deleting all the duffers (because you will end up having sooooo many photos that you never look at them), and back up. I use external drives. But I think you can get a freebie Flickr that stores 1,000 photos?

Olympus Toughcam is a good one (TG-6 that I have) - I bought a filter adapter for it that allows a lens cap to be fitted.  Always amazed that so many "tough" cameras don't protect the lens as once it's scuffed the photos are usually rubbish.

I prefer having a stand alone camera for a lot, mostly to keep my phone battery from dying on days out.  Though my phone's camera is crap and slow so maybe if it was better I'd be more keen on using it!

Photo frame - a bit gimmicky but we got one for my parents and the family upload new photos to it remotely for them.  They really like it, but I personally wouldn't bother with one.

Cheers,

Stu

I think one area where phone cameras can struggle is in poor light. I guess with a new baby, you will want to take lots of indoor shots where the light may not be ideal.

Ive got a mirrorless camera system, but whilst it is a lot smaller than many traditional SLR cameras, I still find it is a very conscious decision to take it with me somewhere. I use my iPhone a lot as well, but the camera I often use, particularly indoors is an old Leica D-LUX, which is nice and compact, but is much better than the iPhone in less than ideal light and actually better than the larger mirrorless camera as well.

The Leica is well out of your price range, new at least, but it is a rebadged Panasonic LX100. The Panasonic is also out of your price range, but you can probably find something use that isn’t too old for the money you want to spend.

What about one of the Panasonic Compacts TZ100 or such? As others have said phones do a great job nowadays and justifying buying a camera is becoming harder as they become more advanced.

Cheers for the tips everyone, wasn't that keen on getting a top-line phone as the idea of having something that pricey on my person at all times gives me the willies (currently use a refurbed Galaxy from Argos for £100, will last me a while) but will have a think - having it there and ready to go is a major plus point.

If going standalone something along the lines of the Panasonic/Olympus sound OK. We have a gopro (though it might have been waylaid in several moves) for expansive landscape shots!

Pretty good phone cameras aren't confined to the real top-end these days. So although phone prices are getting pretty out of hand, you could probably get a significantly upgraded phone for similar or less money than you're considering spending on a camera. Google's Pixels are noted for having good cameras and even the latest models brand new have options that are priced more mid-range than top-end. Last year's Pixel 6 was five or six hundred quid new but can be had refurbished for under £300 and takes excellent photos. The biggest limitation would probably be lack of a true zoom, depending on what kind of photos you're after.

I was in the same position 10 years ago. I had a bunch of cameras, film and digital. The one that was used the most and got the best photos was a bright blue, bulbous, waterproof  Olympus. Just 35mm fixed lens, opening to 2.8, decent flash especially for fill-flash. Took video too.

Parents dropped it, baby threw it, finally died when eight years later, the ex-baby finally drowned it in a swimming pool. (The seals gave up.)

The best photos, the unguarded moments of warmth, giggles, cries, bath time, nap time, first steps etc etc - the blue blob caught them all.

The best camera is the one that is easily to hand when you need it and won't break if you/yours drop it, sit on it, use it as a hockey puck...

I'm learning about this. It would be useful to get feedback on which features people justify investing in a dSLR, ie. not just expectation but what actually works out. Mega pixels seems to be terribly over-rated, I know hardly anyone who blows their images up big enough. Speed ? what subjects do you want to freeze ?? Frames pr second does seem really useful in many circumstances, but I'm told smartphones do this now.

Apart from the above, facilitating greater control over image composition is certainly useful but this is where a substantial overhead is necessary to appreciate the selection and setup eg. where and how (fast) the (auto) focus operates, aperture/speed/ISO priority for different light/subject scenarios.