Camera for 6 year old!

[jesse1dog]

I thought I had started a thread about this a couple of days ago but it seems to have disappeared.
So here goes again.

Holidays are here and as Grandad will be using his camera why shouldn't Gregory use one too. At this stage all he has seen is his Mum's digital!

With the thought that we can both take pictures, what camera should I start him off with? I reckon to get something on echo-bay.

As there are 4 more grandsons all lined up I can start with something relatively simple and buy a second when there is experience to work on. The first buy will come in useful 'down the line'.

j

 

[MartinP]

Something like a Smena Symbol perhaps ? Or maybe that has too many adjustments, in which case the Olympus Trip would do the job I'm sure.

 

[Finder]

For film, a plastic disposable. Maybe waterproof. 6 year olds are not really into focus and exposure - they just want to take a picture. I have done photography classes with young children. Keep it simple. A 24 exposure camera is best - 36 can take forever for a child.

 

[Farace]

I have in the past bought cheap 35mm P&S cameras from thrift shops and church rummage sales. I've gotten perfectly good Kodak and Konica autofocus/autoadvance cameras for very little. The kids were (are) rather hard on them, so I wanted something that wouldn't upset me when (not if) they destroyed it, but would give a decent picture while it survived.

 

[shadowfox]

I'll go against the grain here and recommend a simple, cheap, waterproof digital (Olympus and Pentax are the leaders in this area).

Why? because there is not a thing that film can provide more than digital for a 6 years old. Unless you're ready to pay the price (both financially and mentally) for lots of "practice" films and processing (either scan or print).

What I would do in your shoes is to discourage him from chimping. Teach him to treat the camera as a film camera, where he has a fixed number of images per outing. Work on his composition, framing, and timing first. And later on, edit the images with him and award him for good pictures.

When he's ready, award him with a "real" camera 🙂
I like Olympus OMs so I'd get him an OM-2n.

 

[rich815]

My son at 4 and 5 years, (now almost 6) has successfully used one of those disposible cameras with flash (even learning how to hold the button down to get the red flash light to light), and even better (no winding) an Olympus Epic Stylus.

 

[sienarot]

I'm sure a 6 year old will be bit clumsy here and there so I'd recommend something durable. Perhaps a nice Leica M4? Hahaha, kidding 😀

How about a Holga?

 

[fgb2]

I have a 7 y/o boy & 8 y/o girl. Hoping they will grow up thinking "real" cameras are the ones with film in them I got the boy a Canon WP-1 (waterproof, 35mm lens) and the girl a Canon Sure Shot 85 zoom (35-85mm lens). That way each has a different, special feature. About $30 each on ebay. Watch out for corrosion inside the "waterproofs", ours has some but it "doesn't affect image quality". I added some silicone O-ring lubricant and tested it in the kitchen sink before immersing with film.

They take surprisingly good pictures (the cameras, not the kids). We get one 36 exp roll color print film for day trips and develop the next day. They love it.

The waterproof digital (I use Pentax) is indispensible for water park trips, but I use that rather than the kids.

 

[Thea]

I let my 4 year old use my small P&S digital (Canon Ixus) and these are the shots she took, I was pretty impressed with the framing, although they are alittle blurry, (Hay its her first time AND shes 4!)
I am going to get her one of those Fisher Price Kid Tough cameras for Christmas, and as Shadowfox pointed out, digital saves paying to have film developed, when its just practicing.

 

[rover]

Sammy runs around with a 4mp digi cam, set to a low resolution with 256k card. He can snap away to his heart's desire and have fun.

 

[ywenz]

don't give a 6 year old film camera... they won't have the concept of pushing a button = an image 2 days later.. they need the instant feedback of a digicam to understand photography.

 

[Matthew Allen]

I agree with those who've suggested a digital camera. It's so much easier to learn with one, and he'll quickly figure out what not to do, rather than getting frustrated because his first film turned out black or his finger is blocking the lens in half his shots.

If you succeed in firing his interest and you coach him on technique, then he might want to move onto something more 'serious' later.

I suppose the ideal would be a digital with some manual controls that he could learn from when he's ready, but at the moment such things are expensive and not at all suitable for a small child.

Matthew

 

[lns]

My kids -- ages 6, 10 and 11 -- like to use film cameras, and don't have any problem waiting a day (really, an hour) to get the results. That's part of the fun for them. And they love having the prints.

It's just an occasional thing with them, on vacation or at a special event, so I find the cost of development is minor. Totally offset by their joy in holding their own prints and showing them around.

I would enthusiastically recommend a fixed lens Olympus Stylus Epic. You can get it at Target or Amazon new, or on ebay. It's reasonably priced, very durable, and it's quality is such that you will use it happily yourself. Really. The drugstore disposable cameras don't have as nice a print quality, in my experience. But those are a good option too, especially as you seem to have more than one grandchild. That way they can each have their own, and you know who took which set of pictures.

On the other hand, my 10-year-old got a digital p&s for his birthday, and I have been underwhelmed by his response. They did love seeing the results instantly. But they lost interest quickly too. Perhaps it's because we are less likely to make prints -- actually, we've never made prints. These digital p&s cameras are complicated too, and somewhat fragile, neither qualities that recommend them for children. Of course, YMMV. Either way, it's a great thing to do for your grandchildren, and I wish you a lot of happiness with it.

-Laura

 

[Farace]

don't give a 6 year old film camera... they won't have the concept of pushing a button = an image 2 days later.. they need the instant feedback of a digicam to understand photography.

There have been some good arguments for digital, but honestly, I think one thing kids need to learn these days is patience. <curmudgeon>When I was a kid, we had to wait 6-8 weeks for our free premium for saving cereal box tops. Took time for the TV to warm up. Film couldn't even be developed in an hour, never mind having an instant image--it was sent away for that same 6- to 8-week period before you saw the prints.</curmudgeon>

But seriously, I look at my five-year-old son and realize that he's gotten used to instant gratification, but there are still some things--worthwhile things--that require patience. Not much seems to teach it, though. (I have to take him fishing more.)

I might have been about 8 or so when I was given a Kodak Instamatic. Still have it somewhere.

 

[colinh]

I let my kids (twins just turned 7) use my ex-DSLR Nikon D70 and my wife's Canon 350D. They set it on "P" and have to explain to my wife when and how to activate the flash. They zoom and expose and get to see the picture.

My daughter likes to take lots of pictures of the same thing (dog, teddy bear, puddle etc and also of me 🙂 ). My son tells her off for wasting film 🙂

If you have a DSLR lying around - they're good because of the decent (compared to P&S) viewfinder and instant shutter release. And, come on, what else are DSLRs good for? They've been very careful with them, so far.

colin

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Minolta weathermatic 35. 35mm film. Autofocus. When not enough light flash pops up. When at end of roll of film it will automatically rewind. sets exposure via DX on film cannister. Has 35mm & 50mm lenses that change by ther press of a button. Bright yellow. Good in pools and ocean and on beach. Original price was $189. Now used under forty & even lower.

 

[ywenz]

There have been some good arguments for digital, but honestly, I think one thing kids need to learn these days is patience. <curmudgeon>When I was a kid, we had to wait 6-8 weeks for our free premium for saving cereal box tops. Took time for the TV to warm up. Film couldn't even be developed in an hour, never mind having an instant image--it was sent away for that same 6- to 8-week period before you saw the prints.</curmudgeon>

But seriously, I look at my five-year-old son and realize that he's gotten used to instant gratification, but there are still some things--worthwhile things--that require patience. Not much seems to teach it, though. (I have to take him fishing more.)

I might have been about 8 or so when I was given a Kodak Instamatic. Still have it somewhere.

Instant gratification when it comes to photography is the wave of the future. Why start them off with anything else?

 

[shimo-kitasnap]

give em film

give em film

I don't know about you guys but I grew up in the 90s and the first camera I ever got was some kind of plastic P&S canon. I got it for x-mas when I was 7 in 1993. I never had any problems with it although I did take many useless pictures with it, but eventually I learned to take decent photos on school feild trips and then upgraded to my dad's AE-1 when I really got into photography in high school.

my point kids need to learn the effort and patience are needed for making a good picture. Treating them to instant satisfaction is going to spoil them. Sure it's great fun to have pictures right away but they'll eventually get bored and lose interest in the whole photography thing. With film at least you can have them wait to be supprised by what they took pictures of. It gives them something to look forward too.

If you really want them to have fun and you have black and white paper and chemicals you could try the oatmeal can pinhole camera and teach them how to develope a print. Although I think this may be better for older kids say 7,8,9 years old. I did this for a college photo class in the first week of the semester and did we have a blast!

 

[Farace]

Instant gratification when it comes to photography is the wave of the future. Why start them off with anything else?

I can't exactly disagree with you, other than what I've already noted as my feeling about kids' need to learn patience, and also because, well, why are we using film? 🙄 I may be wrong, but I also think that having only "x" number of frames forces one to take more care. Digital seems, to me at least, to foster a "throwaway" mentality: There are almost unlimited shots available, so let's just snap away and hope something looks good and delete the rest. If the intent is for the child to learn something about photography, I think a more deliberate approach, forced by having limits, may be better. Just my opinion, of course

 

[Thea]

Without getting into a debate about film vs digital, you have to be realistic.

By the time my daughter is an adult, film is going to be a very marginal part of photography, only used by people like us in our spare time, or fine artists like Michael Kenna. Its already pretty difficult to get medium format colour film processing done now..
Whereas who knows where digital will be...

Personally, I know that if I didnt work with a digital camera professionally, I wouldnt be able to get any work full stop.
You have to move with the times, so giving my daughter a digital camera to start with is just equiping her with the tools she'll be able to use in the future, as Ywenz states, why start with anything else?