Camera for 6 year old! [Archive] - Rangefinderforum.com

jesse1dog

08-06-2007, 08:21

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

08-06-2007, 08:24

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

08-06-2007, 08:31

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

08-06-2007, 08:59

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

08-06-2007, 09:02

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

08-06-2007, 09:08

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

08-06-2007, 09:25

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 :D

How about a Holga?

fgb2

08-06-2007, 09:27

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

08-06-2007, 09:37

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

08-06-2007, 10:01

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

08-06-2007, 10:03

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

08-06-2007, 10:15

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

08-06-2007, 12:47

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

08-06-2007, 12:50

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

08-06-2007, 13:12

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

08-06-2007, 13:17

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

08-06-2007, 13:22

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

08-06-2007, 13:36

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

08-06-2007, 13:38

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? :rolleyes: 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

08-06-2007, 14:09

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?

reagan

08-06-2007, 14:21

Good for you, jesse. Have fun!

And IMHO, Go with film! My granddaughters (6 & 10) were given Fuji throw-aways last summer on their MARATHON VISIT!! with us. I heard them reminding each other, "Don't waste it! Take a picture of something good!" They liked the surprise of seeing pics next.day much more than the quick glance at the back of a digital. Plus, they liked getting to take the occasional shots with one of grandpa's *real.cameras*.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c138/CVBLZ4/GoK/photog-1.jpg?t=1186434293

I'll continue giving them a throw-away on daytrips for now and if one of them takes a little more interest in how to get better shots, I have a Minoltina-P held back in the drawer that I think will work well for a first camera. It has a 38mm Rokkor, match-needle meter and the little focusing images on the lens for portrait, group shots and landscape.

...the little angels :angel: :rolleyes:

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c138/CVBLZ4/GoK/funny.jpg?t=1186434016

RML

08-06-2007, 14:24

Film for a 6 year old? Nonsense. Digital is IMO the best approach. My daughter happily took photos with a digicam. Children that young often don't even care for the photo they took. They just want to imitate mum or dad. When you show them the photo they took, they find it cool, perhaps even interesting, but their minds are already somewhere else. They live in their own world, with their own interests and curiosities, and with an attention span varying from hours to seconds.

Now, I cultivated things a little with my daughter by just letting her shoot with a digicam over the years. Then, by the time she was 7-8, I tried to get her a bit more involved in the looking-seeing-taking part. That worked and she started to take photos more deliberately and "planned". Now she's 9 and I've introduced her to the rf VF, which she finds cool. Also, to focusing a rf camera (another cool). And also to previsualising: the difference between what your eye sees and how it will look in the shot (and I told her about Winogrand and why he shot so tremendous amounts of photos. Again, cool). In the meantime I let her help me develop my B&W film, and just a couple of weeks ago I got an enlarger. I'm now setting up a darkroom so I can introduce my daughter to the magic of printing.

Getting your kid into photography is a gradual thing. Just let the kid itself decide when it's ready for the next step. Mine always came to me, and then I explained and taught her. Not once did I force things on her. But because I shoot often when she's around, and use her as a model, she's regularly involved in photography, which keeps her newly found knowledge alive, her thoughts and ideas fresh, and it's fun to do things with dad.

jesse1dog

08-07-2007, 04:57

Thanks everybody.
There is a lot of experience out there for me to get to grips with.
I need to have another think and reread.
The essence seems to be:
Don't force things on the 6 year old - go with the swing.
Talk to them about what you are doing and let them have a go.
Some sort of 'point and shoot' has posibilities, but whatever keep it simple.
And it all depends on the 6 year old!

The discussion between film or digital is an interesting one.

Finder

08-07-2007, 05:31

I am not sure the arguments for digital that it is the technology of the future is valid. That would be like saying there is no point in teaching kids to do math on a piece of paper because there are computers that will do it for them. I don't think it matters whether it is a film or a digital camera; the important factor is that it is simple. I don't think waiting is an issue either - Kids don't seem to forget or lose interest in Christmas and that takes a year to come around. The whole process should center around play as that is the way kids learn.

keithwms

08-07-2007, 10:23

I remember fooling around with my dad's yashica tlr when I was around that age, maybe a year or two older. It really inspired me, not just in photography but in science in general. Being able to see the inner workings of the camera, that was great.

I do worry that digital cameras have become black boxes. When it comes to learning something, I take the Amish approach! I want to know exactly how every bit works. And I think every kid has a great innate curiosity that can be developed, so why give them a black box.

I know that a lot of kids enjoy using throwaways, that may be a good way to go. Polaroid also has some fun things for kids. Seems to me that either of those options would be more suitable than a digital. Digitals produce images- fine. But at that age, as I recall, I was more interested in how things work than getting a printout.

Or get some print-out paper and let the kids play with that, or build a camera obscura and/or a pinhole camera. These are all really fun projects for kids. What kids learn from those kinds of exercises is far more valuable in the long run than relying on black box for capture and another black box for editing and another black box for printout.

Pepe

08-07-2007, 11:42

I've fondled my grandfathers Zeiss Ikon Nettar 6x9 camera from 1941 through my entire childhood. When I found it again in a box when I moved to my own house with my wife it started me going with photography.

Oddily, I've only shot one roll with it (it still works, perfectly, I'll buy a digital when I believe it will last like that). And only very recently.

I can only hope my kids will like it when they get old enough to appreciate it

jbf

08-10-2007, 10:13

For those of you complaining about the idea of instant gratification with digital and that kids should use film and learn patience must have forgotten about a ancient relic known as...

Polaroid.

Have you forgotten about these cameras? I used these exclusively as a little kid. Taking ton of photographs of mostly extremely stupid things like toys or out of focus photos of my dog or shoes.

Its no different than digital folks.

Plus kids get to have a print in their hands.

I say give them a polaroid and also give them a real cheap film (35mm) camera. Let them play with both.

keithwms

08-10-2007, 12:48

Haha, yeah I have miffed many a digital user by pointing out that polaroid prints are had even faster than digital prints ;) Of course, we don't want to talk about the price per capture, and for a 6 year old that may be an issue....

But I was going to mention the polaroid stickies that you can get; you can take pics and then adhere the photos anywhere. Pretty fun for kids. But probably pretty pricey for a 6 year old.

Incidentally, with a little hot water, you can get great emulsion lifts from fuji fp100c, that might also be great fun for kids. You get a durable image on stretchable plastic. Perhaps better for artsy, older kids, but it's great fun and quite fascinating. The lifted emulsion is way less fragile than the previous polaroid stuff, it can be sprayed and hardened and mounted...

dhartse

08-10-2007, 20:35

I used to have a digital point and shoot, which my 6 year-old daughter has laid claim to as hers. (She does let me borrow it.) The rest of my cameras are all film cameras. She's told me a number of times that she likes her camera much better than my cameras. So based on my experience, I'd have to vote with those who say to get a digital camera for a 6 year-old.

Duane

bean_counter

08-10-2007, 21:22

When my daughter was that age, I bought her a Barbie 110 camera. Limitted her rolls so that she had to think a bit about "wasting" shots. A disposable is probably the equivalent.

When she was 8 (nearly 9), I bought her a Canonette. She got used to focus VERY quickly, and stated to take some pretty good pictures. She needed help to load (saving my film budget!), and didn't understand stops and shutter speed, but the auto exposure took care of that.

At age ten, she started shooting chromes, and actually won the 18 & under Landscape category at the county fair. Now at eleven, she's starting to play with exposure, depth of field, and shutter speed (with help, of course).

FUNNY thing happened this week on vacation at The Breakers (Vanderbilt's mansion in Newport Rhode Island); a small crowd of Japanese tourists gathered near her as she was snapping photos of flowers, the Nikon-toting fathers and grandfathers in the group pointing at my daughter and excitedly talking to the youngsters. Couldn't understand the language, but it was almost certainly "gee, I used to have one like that!"

thomasw_

08-10-2007, 22:27

for a 6 yr old? a cheap digital. just for the joy of the instant capture; it is gratifying. let the more complex thinking and reflection take place years later....

a father of twins who shoot away with delight... thomas

dhartse

08-11-2007, 02:07

RML

08-12-2007, 01:15

Let me add that I went to the hardware store and bought a rubber o-ring to put around the wrist strap of the digital camera, so the strap better fits my daughter. I've taught her that the first thing she does when picking up the camera is to put the strap around her wrist and pull the o-ring snug. It's saved the camera from falls a few times.

Duane

I bought wrist straps from Gordon Coale and happily give my R-D1 to my daughter now (to hold while I'm in the toilet, have to dig in my pockets for money, or other while doing other tasks that require a hand without a dangling camera attached to it. :) ). Like you said, the O-ring is very convenient and gives me the assurance I need to let her hold my main (and for me valuable) camera.

dhartse

08-14-2007, 21:57

I bought wrist straps from Gordon Coale and happily give my R-D1 to my daughter now (to hold while I'm in the toilet, have to dig in my pockets for money, or other while doing other tasks that require a hand without a dangling camera attached to it. :) ). Like you said, the O-ring is very convenient and gives me the assurance I need to let her hold my main (and for me valuable) camera.

Those Gordy's straps are nice. The strap that came with the camera is adequate for my oh so ordinary digital P&S, but a Gordy's strap is a good choice for a camera that you value--whether it be film or digital.

Duane

gudlagoba

08-14-2007, 23:14

I think a digi cam would best for starters.

My daughter is 2 1/2 and she has learned to cock the shutter, change speeds and fire. Focus is next. I have given her my SP 500. Whenever I take out my Bessa she runs to her SP 500. But I'll probably get her a digi when she turns 3 and let her continue to train with the SP 500.
http://members.shaw.ca/rajivsankranti/devicamera.jpg

Finder

08-15-2007, 07:13