What is the best bang for the buck Camera?

<p>I am having a hard time choosing which camera to buy. I really need help guys. Please help me choose a camera to buy out of all these 9 cameras. Out of all these 9 Cameras, which camera is the best for me? The P610, WX500, HX90V, A5100, RX100 II, FZ200, DMC-GF7, SX60 HS, or the S9900? Which of these 9 cameras is the best in low light? I do not like a lot of noise in low light. I want a good camera to take pictures and record video for vlogging. I am looking for a camera with a tiltable/swivel screen or articulated LCD for selfies, shoots 1080p 60p video, has great low light performance with little to no noise in low light, and that costs $400 and under. I need help finding more cameras that are better than these 9 cameras. Maybe these 9 cameras that I found are not good enough and there are better cameras out there that I have never heard of. No noise in low light is what I like. It seems like the cameras with the larger zoom like the P610 struggle in low light. While the cameras with the smaller zoom like the RX100 II are much better in low light. Why are cameras with smaller zooms better in low light? Is zoom important when it comes to cameras? I do like to zoom at far away things, but maybe zoom is not as important as larger image sensor and a wider aperture.<br /><br />What is the best bang for the buck camera that has all the features I want for $400. The best bang for the buck camera. Again, I am looking for a camera with a swivel screen or articulated LCD for selfies, shoots 1080p 60p video, has great low light performance with little to no noise, Large Zoom, and that costs $400 best bang for the buck. I would like camera recommendations from you guys. Which of the 9 cameras would you guys pick? The P610, WX500, HX90V, A5100, RX100 II, FZ200, DMC-GF7, SX60 HS, or the S9900? The only problem I have with some of the 9 cameras is the small zoom. I do like to zoom at far way objects. Does anyone have anymore camera recommendations? I would like someone to tell me cameras I have never heard of before that are similar to these 9 cameras.</p>

<p>It's kinda hard to answer your question because you didn't say what you need a camera for? For example, are you a professional wedding photographer or do you just like to post selfies on Facebook? <br>

My best advice is to buy a used camera on Ebay. Play with it for a few months and then sell it back. This way, you can learn about different cameras, figure out what you like, and you won't have to invest any money in it.</p>

<p>$400 and under- Sir you make me laugh</p>

<p>Good low-light performance and a swivel screen are almost mutually exclusive, especially if you want it cheap. Cheap and low light performance is a hard combo, probably only a used out-of-date dSLR or mirrorless camera would provide that. Your lens alone on one of those would be $100 at the low end, $300 for midrange, an ungodly sums of money for the high end.</p>

<p>Oh come on Spencer Lange, I know there has to be a great bang for the buck camera with all the features I want $400 and under. What cameras would you guys pick out of the 9 cameras? I would like some more camera recommendations please. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I know there has to be a great bang for the buck camera with all the features I want $400 and under. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, it really doesn't exist. Good low-light performance requires a large sensor and a fast lens. Those things don't happen at the price range you're demanding.</p>

<p>No $400 bang for your buck camera exists? That's unfortunate :( Maybe there is a great bang for the buck camera with all the features I want. I would probably have to buy a used camera, used cameras are cheaper. What camera has decent low light performance. I won't ask for "best" low light performance because the best usually is more expensive. Decent low light performance is cheaper. So what camera has decent low light performance? What cameras would you guys pick out of the 9 cameras? Again, I would like some more camera recommendations please.<br /></p>

<p>Kenny I'm not familiar with the 9 cameras you are asking about but one of the cameras that I have and like is Olympus E-PL5. It has many features that you are looking for. It has tilt screen, very decent low light/high ISO performance, in camera image stabilization, and 1080 video.<br>

You can probably buy a used one in good condition with a kit lens for about $300 to $400. I bought mine used for $200 without lenses. You can shoot it in all auto with a kit lens or learn how to use it in a manual mode. You can add zoom lenses to this camera later. What's more and the reason why I picked this camera, when you learn how to shoot in manual mode, for about $30 you can buy a lens converter and use old inexpensive but vary good quality manual zoom lenses from Nikon for that extra zoom reach.</p>

<p>Dear the OP! Yes there must be a camera that offers the best bang for the $400 bucks. That is there is a camera that offer the most value for your $400. However none will be noiseless in low light which is what you like.</p>

For the money, the Panasonic GF7 and Sony RX100 II would be high on my list because of their low light

performance because their sensors are much larger than the other compact cameras you listed. You can add

the Olympus E-PL5 mentioned above (and the E-PL6 I have very recently seen available for about $250) to the

list of bang for the buck. The Sony has the fastest lens of the bunch I mentioned, so it may be better in low

light than the micro 4/3rds cameras with a slow standard zoom lens. Put a fast lens on any of the Panasonic or

Olympus cameras describe here (which are interchangeable lens cameras) and it will provide excellent low

light capabilities, especially the Olympus models which have image stabilization built into the camera.

 

Don't know if this meets your wish list. If not keep looking (or keep wishing).

<p>A Nikon D5200 has a larger and more sensitive sensor, in several cases much larger and more sensitive, than all the cameras in your list that I recognize. Even with a rather slow kit lens lens it will give you better low light performance than those cameras. It also has a swiveling rear screen. You can get a different lens in the future. It is available new for $500 at B&H, and refurbished from the Nikon store for about $400.</p>

<p>I have personal experience with a Nikon D5100, and have friends who shoot its later siblings (D5200, D5300, D5500). You can buy a used copy with 35mm/1.8 lens (and a very good lens for the price) for about $400. If you are curious about potential results, there are quite a few images in my portfolio taken with the D5100. I don't know anything about the models you listed, but the combination of features and price you quoted are tough to find. I can guarantee that even the very best, most expensive digital SLR's with the highest-quality lenses will begin to show noise effects in low light at values above ISO 800-1600. Newer models in a given line tend to have improved signal-to-noise performance than earlier models, but the price goes up too, and fast.</p>

<p>I just can't believe it. All this time I thought the RX100 II had a flip up selfie screen. I was so wrong. The RX100 II does not have a flip up selfie screen. So I can cross the RX100 II off my list now.</p>

<p>Kenny, I'm loving this thread, but are you for real? I notice you haven't been here very long.</p>

<p>Brian, good question.<br>

Back in Feb this year was a <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/compacts/nikon_cpp610/questions-and-answers">similar query</a>.<br>

How about <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dschx90v/questions-and-answers">April</a> this year?<br>

<a href="http://forums.steves-digicams.com/what-camera-should-i-buy/216041-what-best-bang-buck-camera.html">Here</a><br>

<a href="http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=37931813">There</a><br>

Oh, <a href="http://www.overclock.net/t/1585322/which-of-these-8-cameras-is-the-best-for-me-these-cameras-are-400-and-under">here's another</a>, though a different name.<br>

How 'bout <a href="http://www.cnet.com/forums/discussions/which-of-these-8-cameras-is-the-best-for-me/">this one</a>?<br>

<a href="http://www.tomsguide.com/answers/id-2910953/cameras-cameras-400.html">Here's</a> another.<br>

And <a href="https://forum.teksyndicate.com/t/what-is-the-best-400-bang-for-the-buck-camera/94013">one more</a>.</p>

<p>Kenny, it does seem that you've asked just about everyone the same question. You've been given a lot of answers. It's up to you to get one.</p>

<p>Kenny, what make are all these? Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, other?</p>

<p>(This does feel like an Ali g episode....)</p>

<p>If it were me I would go to BHPhoto and buy the Olympus OMD EM5 with a 12-42 kit lens for $429.00 and be happy. It's been on sale but that sale ends tonight. If you wanted a more point and shoot model then the Olympus EPL6 with lens is $299.00 (regular price). Same sensor I believe but the controls are more oriented to point and shoot. You can purchase lenses and flash gear later on for either camera if you want to build an Olympus system. Or just shoot it the way it is as you please.</p>

<p>Perhaps you need to read all the specs of the 9 cameras and choose the one that comes closest to your most pressing needs. You seem to have booked enough time to do that little research. Acquire and use the camera and decide by the feedback (your photos) whether you, and it, can do what you want. Only then will you be able to decide how much "bang for the buck" you have. All else is merely conjecture. Good luck!</p>

<p>At the risk of taking something serious that isn't all that serious,<br>

I'd consider a GoPro Hero 4. It's not great in low light, but good video in low light is not going to happen (read: add a LED light), the still images are quite decent and you can do all the self-glorifying shots using your cellphone to control the GoPro. Plus, it can be done within your budget.<br>

Else: I would go with the Sony or Panasonic, and accept that selfie-screens are not usual on good cameras, and good low light performance does not exist on cameras with selfie-options. So, pick your priority.</p>

<p>I bought a used D5200 during the summer and combined it with a used Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS. My total cost was about $500.</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/folder?folder_id=1083102"><em><strong>Here</strong></em></a> are some of the results. I was impressed with both camera and lens.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>here</p><div></div>

<p>There are so many good DSLRs on the used market that are better choices if you want more bang and less bucks.</p>

<p>The compact digital cameras are fine for what they do. They are especially nice for those who don't want and don't need the controls on a DSLR. There are nice ones in the $100 range for those people.</p>

<p>But by the time you get to $400, and want actual bang instead of convenience, you want a DSLR.</p>

<p>And you can get a fine, but older and used, DSLR and lens for less than $100. </p>

<p>Just to see what is available, I just looked on eBay and found a new Nikon D3200 with a new kit lens for less than $340.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>I thought long and hard and I believe the best camera for your needs and budget is a smartphone. Samsung has a great camera, including a selfie one. <br>

Happy shooting, and call when you find nirvana!</p>

<p>Shoot yourself with a super wide angle lens on a DSLR. You can crop everything out but yourself.</p>

<p>Of course, your nose will be a foot long, but at least it will be you.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>