If you are ok with using adapters and using manual capabilities on the lenses…there are adapter rings that can adapt the lenses to almost any camera. I did that starting off as a way to save money.
I'm not against using my camera in manual mode, but I tend to lean towards program mode since I am generally just trying to capture moments of my kids
Adapters lots of times don't transmit lens data to the camera so you can lose features such as image stabilization, autofocus, aperture adjustments, and metadata. Though I believe MD lenses are manual to begin with.
As someone who did this within the last couple years, my suggestion would be to just buy whatever new kit appeals to you and don't worry about adapting your lenses. If you had Minolta autofocus lenses it might be worth getting into older Sony A Mount system, but if I remember right the adapter Minolta made for the manual focus lenses is rare and expensive.
I had a bunch of manual zuiko lenses and kit for my Olympus OMs, and adapted them on a Canon apsc DSLR and now a Sony a7s full frame. The fact of the matter is that other than a few times that I need a specialty lens the one modern lens that I bought basically lives on it.
Focusing a manual focus lens on an autofocus body is really hard. The focusing screens aren't really made for it. On the mirror less a7s it's better, but that's largely because you can zoom way in on the screen and it has focus peaking like a video camera.
If you don't care about video (which is worth considering) an older Sony is worth considering. An a6000 with the kit lens should run about 350-400 USD for the body used and about 50-150 for a used kit lens. Even the fancy g master standard zoom runs about 4-500 USD used. That's looking at keh.com anyway, you could probably get a better deal on marketplace or eBay - they were very popular and pop up locally pretty much everywhere. If you want video moving to a new body like the 6400 gives you 4k which is a nice to have.
The photography world has changed quite a lot since the Minolta days.
To answer your question directly, I’d recommend getting a used Sony a7 of whichever generation you like the price of.
That being said, if we dig a bit deeper, kids are some of the most challenging subjects, and family gathering some of the most challenging events: fast movement requiring fast focusing, low light requiring wide apertures, high ISO or flash.
I’d consider switching entirely to a modern system that can get you those features.
I would 100% not recommend honing your skills with film. Just get any old DSLR. Second hand they can be had for almost nothing for an entry level DSLR. Then you can take 2000 photos in an afternoon and really start to learn the craft of photography and it's cost you nothing.
What's your budget for a new camera?
I would have to put a cap at 500 dollars
With that budget I would say get the Canon EOS R100 which is on sale on B&H for $379 currently and normally $479. Then get the FotodioX Pro lens mount adapter (MD-CRF-P) for $65. Don't forget a memory card; the SanDisk Extreme Pro SDXC 64GB for $16.
You're paying $75 total for three rolls of film. If you take photos a lot then buying a cheap modern mirrorless camera (DSLRs are dated) will definitely be cheaper.
Two great free photo editing software's are Darktable (editor and photo manager) and PhotoGIMP (a patched version of GIMP to make the UI similar to Photoshop). Bruce Williams on YouTube makes great tutorials for learning how to use Darktable.
Since you are primarily taking photos of your kids I suggest saving some money for a cheap hotshoe flash. It'll really benefit photos of people.
This is a solid recommendation
say goodbye to grain.
Like others have said, I'd recommend a mirrorless camera over a DSLR, especially if you're taking photos of kids. I've recently switched from a Pentax k-x DSLR to a Sony a6000 mirrorless. One of the main reasons I switched was for the burst speed of a mirrorless.
This means that if the kids are running around like lunatics, I can set the burst mode to high, and it takes 11 photos a second, for a bit over two seconds. I've got a much higher chance of catching them with their eyes open, or not pulling a face as they're moving, and so on. With a decent sized memory card you can take thousands of photos, and just delete the ones you don't like.
The camera is a lot lighter too, and the lenses can be smaller, so they're easier to carry and to use hand held.
c/photography is a community centered on the practice of amateur and professional photography. You can come here to discuss the gear, the technique and the culture related to the art of photography. You can also share your work, appreciate the others' and constructively critique each others work.
Please, be sure to read the rules before posting.
THE RULES
This Lemmy Community is open to civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, photography. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted.
All discussion threads must be photography related such as latest gear or art news, gear acquisition advices, photography related questions, etc...
This Lemmy Community is about photography and discussion around photography, not religion or politics.
All is in the title. This is a casual discussion community.
One post, one photo in the limit of 3 pictures in a 24 hours timespan. Do not flood the community with your pictures. Be patient, select your best work, and enjoy.
If you want contructive critiques, use [Critique Wanted] in your title.
Flair NSFW posts (nudity, gore, ...)
Do not share your portfolio (instagram, flickr, or else...)
The aim of this community is to invite everyone to discuss around your photography. If you drop everything with one link, this become pointless. Portfolio posts will be deleted. You can however share your portfolio link in the comment section if another member wants to see more of your work.