Max Kurz Loc: Newark, De

I use a Fuji for my "car" camera, Wal-Mart, under $70.00
Good camera for a good price !

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Why NOT a DSLR?
Something used that takes your lenses would make a LOT of sense.

Pepsiman Loc: New York City

For a 13 year old I would get a Nikon S30, It's water and shockproof...

jjadeco25 Loc: Alma, AR

I highly recommend a Nikon Cool Pix. They are not that expensive and it is a good start to the digital camera. My granddaughter has been using my pocket cool pix since she was 4 and now at the age of 6, she has all the kinks out of her shots. She loves to take pix of herself as you can see.

Rich2236 Loc: E. Hampstead, New Hampshire

Hi photomom, if your daughter uses your 50D and is capable of handling it, i dont think a Bridge Camera is going to do the trick. I would suggest one of the lower range dslr cameras like a Canon t3i.
Rich

tramsey Loc: Texas

Here I am AGAIN at the end of the line. I'll just say I gre with jayme(?) in that a twelve year old that has been using your dslr will not be satisfied with a bridge camera least of all a point ans shoot. Give her yours and you up grade into something where you can use the same lens. Then spend time together shooting.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Oh no! She's 12 and you haven't figured it out yet. You give her your dslr, you come off looking loving and generous, and then in a couple of months you tap the credit card for a 5DIII and claim you couldn't help it - it's in your blood. It's an addiction and you tried to find a support group but there isn't one and you were having DT's every night, hiding it in the bathroom shaking all over, having fits of rage, and thinking about turning to drink. C'mon on. Use some imagination over here already. 8-) How about a nice new over-stocked SX30IS or maybe a 40, or even a 50? Most of the functionality without the cost. Challenge her, don't limit her, but do it as inexpensively as possible at that age.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

\

Budget?

r.reeder Loc: Mesa, Arizona

I'm probably the only one who would appreciate this, but how about an older 35mm adjustable camera & a non-battery light meter? Argus C3, C44, Agfa, Kodak. My kid was using mine when he started taking pictures, & he loved it. (At least, that's what he said.) Like I said, I'm probably the only one in this galaxy who would think this would be a good idea. & I do.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Yep, that's a pretty sad idea there reeder. I'm an old guy and like to embrace and blend history and modern times but there's some things that seem pretty ridiculous to me. One of them is that some schools are using old all manual film cameras to teach photography as though they couldn't just as easily use dlsr's and restrict the features used to "M", iso, aperture, shutter, and how to read the meter. The teachers can access the exif data to see who's not paying attention. Kids need a laptop anyway and could avoid the darkroom and spend their time processing digital.

The kids would be able to practice the fundamentals a lot more and a lot more inexpensively and really get into it without sniffing chemicals, something that maybe less than 1 out of a 1000 will ever do again and probably even fewer will ever graduate to a medium or large format where film is still the goto choice. All they're doing is restricting the students ability to practice more for less money. I have a problem with that. :-) The kids who want to do film can always break into it as did the pioneers if the dedication and desire is there - "the hard way."

ggttc Loc: TN

No your not the only one in the galaxy...an earlier post mentioned an AE-1...and I personally believe that everyone should learn to shoot full manual...saves a lot of time and trouble when they graduate to digital...but 2 problems.

1. A young girl who is enthusiastic will burn enough in film and processing costs to put most of us on food stamps.

2. She can probably do more with my android phone than most PHD's can do...certainly a lot more than I can...so she is probably no stranger to high tech...unlike most of us were when we picked up our first dslr.

I think a reasonable bridge would be the way to go.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

I mentioned the Canon AE-1. I was given one at 12 back in 2002. I know a lot more than people I know who started out with digital. And no, I did not burn through that much film back then. I use far more know in a year now than I did when I was 12 and 13

ggttc Loc: TN

Still have my AE-1...wont ever give it up

rhyde Loc: Little Rock, AR

Most 12 year-olds I know would like to open something NEW. Whatever you choose, in order to save some $$ and still give her a "new" camera, you might consider a refurbished unit from a reputable retailer like Adorama or Cameta.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Agreed. Twelve may be old enough for a DSLR; one of my grandsons had his first SLR at age 8. It depends on maturity, responsibility and dedication to photography