Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

HappyDude20

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Jul 13, 2008
3,688
1,479
Los Angeles, Ca
I want to buy my nephew a digital camera who is into photography. Not able to afford a modern expensive camera, in wanting to gift him something retro and old, but digital.

I saw a Sony Mavica camera from the late 90s that is digital and uses floppy disks but gotta assume Modern MacOS wouldn’t support this.

Wondering how far back in time I can go when searching for an old digital camera?

I used to have some FujiFilm digital camera like 2MP back in 2005. It doesn’t have to be Sony. Just something that can produce cool old grainy shots and works with macOS.
 
I'd think you're fine as long as the camera can present itself as a USB storage device -or- stores data on a memory card you can get a reader for. Even for that Sony Mavica, you can probably find a USB floppy drive that would get it working.
 
I want to buy my nephew a digital camera who is into photography. Not able to afford a modern expensive camera, in wanting to gift him something retro and old, but digital.

I saw a Sony Mavica camera from the late 90s that is digital and uses floppy disks but gotta assume Modern MacOS wouldn’t support this.

Wondering how far back in time I can go when searching for an old digital camera?

I used to have some FujiFilm digital camera like 2MP back in 2005. It doesn’t have to be Sony. Just something that can produce cool old grainy shots and works with macOS.
How old is your nephew?
Imo nowadays it's easier to gift him/her an inexpensive smartphone (eg ~$100-$150), be it a used iPhone or a cheap Android. iPhone will work well with macs, and cheap Android tends to have an SD card slot so you just pop the card out and copy the photos from it.

Why a smartphone? Because of the large (screen) viewfinder. That way your nephew can focus on learning about composition (eg rule of third). And even cheap phones today would produce something that's more satisfactory than an old digital camera. Also, phones are essentially prime lens (no zoom capability), thus will encourage your nephew to be more creative in composition.
 
Last edited:
I am by no means a photographer, not even a hobbyist one yet, even though I have the gear (DSLR), it's something for when I retire but I do get them out once in a while and when I do I always use my imac 2010 with an external SD card reader because the majority of digital cameras, old and new and many android phones old and new take SD cards.

in my opinion, if your wanting to do photogrpahy even for some fun hobby stuff, never use a mobile phone, always use a dedicated digital camera because the size of the camera CCD sensor matters and digital cameras have much larger CCD sensor than mobile phones do meaning you get much sharper and crisper pictures than you would on a mobile phone.

I've got some semi pro Cannon and Nikkon DSLR's but I also have some old Fuji and Sony digital cameras that take SD cards. The only time i've ever done a direct camera to device is when connecting my DSLR's to my ipad3. It detects the DSLR's instantly and shows a thumbnail of each picture ready to transfer to my ipad.

Therefore in my opinion as someone who does do photography using a mac, albeit very limited, I would recommend getting a digital camera that takes SD cards and get a external SD card reader for the mac. I've been doing it this way for over 15 years and it works very well, never had any problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
A problem you may run into with something like the Sony Mavica (or others with floppy especially around that time period) is the file format that the Sony would use since Windows PCs were much more dominate than they are now (still pretty dominate) so even if you were to find a compatible flopper disk reader for Mac OS Monterey the ability to actually see what is on the floppy may be another hurdle.

Have you looked into different brands cameras that first started using the SD card? the SD card would be compatible with current Mac OS and those cameras should still have the grain that you want
 
  • Like
Reactions: ian87w
If your nephew wants to get into photography buying him a camera from the 1990's will make him wonder what he did to upset you.

You can pick up a really good older Canon for near $100 (eg the Powershot G9) which is an absolute beast. If you want a compact anything made around 2007-onwards will do and you can buy these for peanuts as people prefer phones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J.J. Sefton
OP:

Why don't you tell us how much you're willing to spend?
Without that info, it's all-but impossible to make a suggestion...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ray2
I suggested a film camera above; I do actually shoot film and it's great if you want the grainy look, and you can control it based on the film stock.

I'd be hesitant to buy a 2MP camera for someone wanting "retro." The grain in a camera like that is just poorly resolved noise and lack of resolution.

Has your nephew indicated he wants something retro? What does he currently shoot with? I think if we had a budget, like Fishrrman suggests, we could suggest something more appropriate than an out of date digital camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
He wants something old from before his time.

Budget would be like $100 at most.

He already has two cameras, one DSLR worth around $500 and another film camera that’s about the same price. It’s a hobby of his and definitely said at a BBQ once he wants something old from the 90s to mess around with.

I saw Apple made a crappy QuickTake camera. So long as it’s as close to plug and play as possible. Just saw the Mavica series aren’t great with modern macs even if you manage to get all the right floppy disk peripherals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
He wants something old from before his time.

Budget would be like $100 at most.

He already has two cameras, one DSLR worth around $500 and another film camera that’s about the same price. It’s a hobby of his and definitely said at a BBQ once he wants something old from the 90s to mess around with.

I saw Apple made a crappy QuickTake camera. So long as it’s as close to plug and play as possible. Just saw the Mavica series aren’t great with modern macs even if you manage to get all the right floppy disk peripherals.
So he's not that "young", I assume. :)
The problem with older digital cameras are their interfaces (sometimes proprietary) or their capture formats (often they are only usable with a program from the manufacturer). And their low-res output is not really useful to "learn" photography.

Since he already have a DSLR, I would actually put the money into an inexpensive old prime manual lens + adaptor for his DSLR. Manual lenses will allow him to experiment with things like manual focus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
So he's not that "young", I assume. :)
The problem with older digital cameras are their interfaces (sometimes proprietary) or their capture formats (often they are only usable with a program from the manufacturer). And their low-res output is not really useful to "learn" photography.

Since he already have a DSLR, I would actually put the money into an inexpensive old prime manual lens + adaptor for his DSLR. Manual lenses will allow him to experiment with things like manual focus.
He’s 13 and yeah no he wants something retro. His parents can get them add on accessories for his fancier dslr camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
Thank you.

As of now the Apple QuickTake is winning.

I think this is about as good a fit for the brief as possible.

I too am crying at the realisation that I am now old enough for a new technology to have been invented, become mainstream and become obsolete within my life time.

"vintage MP3 player" :eek:

I think if it has to be retro, 90s AND digital then the quicktake is a fit. Would I recommend buying one? not really. Nasty VGA resolution images are going to get old real quick.

I would probably encourage him to try making a pinhole camera - something more fulfilling with a chance of being used more than once.

The risk here is that he will use it once realise how terrible it was back then and then move on.

If this is about scoring "awesome uncle points" then just go for something with a removable card that can be read in a reader to minimise technology hiccups.

Would you be sure to let us know how you get on though? this is really interesting
 
^^^ tempted to agree by all of this. IMO old digital cameras are nothing more than a curio whose novelty will soon wear off because the quality they produce is so dire. They are interesting collectables, but unlike a film camera which is a completely different discipline still capable of giving superb results, it's difficult to fall in love with (using) a 25-30 year old digital camera when the results from an iPhone knockoff from Wish will give better images.

But I think it's something the lad's going to have to go through to get it out of his system.
 
If you specifically want old, I'd suggest at least going good, and the beauty is it's affordable these days.

The Nikon D2x is actually quite a good camera. It was Nikon's first attempt at a CMOS sensor. It sort of falls apart at high ISO, but at 100-400 it can give quite clean results.

No one I'm aware of is making CCD based cameras anymore for good reason, but they do have some interesting features. The Nikon D1 series actually have flash sync at any speed because of how the CCD is operated at high shutter speeds. Weirdly enough, in the 2020s, I've found the D1H the least reliable of the bunch. The orginal D1s tend to work well in my experience but they are clunky. The D1x is a good option and it has a 6mp sensor with an interesting arrangement that many people back in the day would interpolate up to ~10mp or so. The biggest problem with all of these cameras is that the batteries weren't great when they were new, and are often awful now.

For something of a classic, I might suggest a Nikon D100. This was one of the first consumer-class DSLRs(although a $2000 camera when new) and has a decent 6mp CCD. The biggest weakness I seem to run into with them is that the mode dial, which was pulled straight off the N80 film camera but needs to be moved any time you want to change ISO, sometimes gets touchy. The D70/D70s are newer cameras that are improved in a lot of ways but IIRC have the same 6mp sensor. Choosing between them, I'd get a D70s for the better screen. When I was jumping ship to Nikon and decided I'd go all in, the D70s was the first Nikon DSLR I bought(used it for about a month before I bought a D2x and then went in big with a D800) so it is a sentimental favorite for me. The D100 and I think the D70 use the EN-EL3 battery. The D70s uses the EN-EL3e, which is backward compatible with the EN-EL3 and was used in a pile of different very popular Nikon cameras through the 2000s(D200, D300, D700, D80, D90).

For something different, I still like the Fuji DSLRs, which are Nikon mount. Back in the day, all the makers were trying all kinds of tricks to squeeze more resolution out of relatively large pixels and also improve dynamic range(a real weakness of CCDs). Fuji's answer was the "Super CCD" which used a honeycomb array of photosites, and even more interestingly had two pixels(called the R and S pixels) per photosite. The first gen(S1 and S2) had 3 million photosites and the second gen(S3 and S5) had 6 million photosites. Of these, I'd completely avoid the S1 and S2. Both are very much "digital camera stuck into a film body" cameras, and you actually have to keep CR123a batteries in them to operate the camera functions as well as AAs to operate the digital functions. The S2 can run off just the AAs, but nearly all of them today have dead sensors. The S3 integrated things a bit better, but is still slow and clunk to use. It is meant to run on NiMH AAs, and can use any that you buy today, but will chew through them like crazy. The S5 is D200 body with a Fuji sensor and electronics, and actually operates like a modern DSLR. The big catch with it is that even though the batteries are Nikon EN-EL3es, they have Fuji-specific firmware in them and the S5 will refuse to work with anything that's not a Fuji battery. The camera will power up but refuse to do anything other than tell you invalid battery(Nikons will gladly use the Fuji batteries). I've had good luck with aftermarket ones out there for it, and most of the originals that I find are still good.

I've had several Kodak DSLRs, all in Nikon mount, although many models also were made in Canon mount. They are interesting and many pros loved them for their unique color rendering. The last of them, the DCS 14/n, was the first Nikon mount camera with a 24x36mm sensor, but that was about its only upside. From my observation, though, Kodaks are also some of the only truly collectible early DSLRs and you will pay dearly for them.

All of the above are capable of outputting JPEG files that can be read by any computer. Apple RAW and Adobe RAW in 2022 are both still capable of reading the RAW file output of all of these. All of the cameras I've specifically mentioned use Compact Flash cards, but for most of them you need 2gb or smaller cards, so if you decide to get one be prepared to hunt. All of the Nikons other than the D1 series can be connected to your computer via a USB cable for file transfer(the D1s need firewire) or of course use a card reader.
 
When I hear 90s I don't think digital. It's such an odd request, IMO. I fear that even $100 is going to be wasted on this after he takes a photo or two and realizes just how bad the resolution is.

I've had it in my mind to start a thread on early digital cameras, and actually partially just to show how awful they were! I was going to do it in response to a thread a few weeks ago about 2mp images, but I seem to have misplaced the charger for my D1 batteries...
 
I want to buy my nephew a digital camera who is into photography. Not able to afford a modern expensive camera, in wanting to gift him something retro and old, but digital.

I saw a Sony Mavica camera from the late 90s that is digital and uses floppy disks but gotta assume Modern MacOS wouldn’t support this.

Wondering how far back in time I can go when searching for an old digital camera?

I used to have some FujiFilm digital camera like 2MP back in 2005. It doesn’t have to be Sony. Just something that can produce cool old grainy shots and works with macOS.
Have you been to Best Buy? Any digital camera Sony, Canon, or whatever brand will work on a modern Mac computer. I have seen digital cameras there for under $200.


 
Last edited:
I am by no means a photographer, not even a hobbyist one yet, even though I have the gear (DSLR), it's something for when I retire but I do get them out once in a while and when I do I always use my imac 2010 with an external SD card reader because the majority of digital cameras, old and new and many android phones old and new take SD cards.

in my opinion, if your wanting to do photogrpahy even for some fun hobby stuff, never use a mobile phone, always use a dedicated digital camera because the size of the camera CCD sensor matters and digital cameras have much larger CCD sensor than mobile phones do meaning you get much sharper and crisper pictures than you would on a mobile phone.

I've got some semi pro Cannon and Nikkon DSLR's but I also have some old Fuji and Sony digital cameras that take SD cards. The only time i've ever done a direct camera to device is when connecting my DSLR's to my ipad3. It detects the DSLR's instantly and shows a thumbnail of each picture ready to transfer to my ipad.

Therefore in my opinion as someone who does do photography using a mac, albeit very limited, I would recommend getting a digital camera that takes SD cards and get a external SD card reader for the mac. I've been doing it this way for over 15 years and it works very well, never had any problems.
You do not necessarily have to buy a SD card reader but you can use the USB cable that came with the camera.
 
Thank you.

As of now the Apple QuickTake is winning.
Has the criteria of what camera he wants changed then because a Quicktake camera will not work with modern OSX but yet your title refers to wanting a sony camera that works with macos Monterey.

There are plenty of old retro cameras out there but that is not what was requested. So, again, has the criteria changed and your are no longer looking for a sony camera to work with macos Monterey?
 
You do not necessarily have to buy a SD card reader but you can use the USB cable that came with the camera.
Remember we are talking about macos here. I have a number of old digital cameras, Fuji, Sony and Panasonic that are not detected by macos when connected via their USB cable (yes they are setup correctly in the camera's settings). I have an imac 2010 i3 model with OSX 10.13 and it does not detect my older digital cameras when they are connected to the machine via their usb cables which is why I have to use a USB card reader because each camera uses an SD card.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark
Nikon_Coolpix_900.jpg


He wants a Nikon Coolpix 900 series*. With its split-body design, it has all the retro '90s appeal he could ask for, plus it was a decent camera at the time. Takes CF cards, but not large ones.

Here's one, a Coolpix 995, for sale for $25 https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-coolpix-995-compact-camera.html
And here's a Coolpix 900 for sale on eBay https://www.ebay.com/itm/334437361985

* NOT the Coolpix P900, that's a different kind of camera entirely.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.