If I were you, I’d get an compact digital camera like an olympus xz-1. its a little 10mp camera with manual control options. the lens is a built in zoom lens, but it is a wide f1.8 which will allow you to experiment with lower light scenarios and thin depth of field for portraits. It wont get you insane sharpness or croppability (so, get your composition right when you take the shot) but it has nice out-of-camera colors, so you won’t have to delve into the editing world. I shoot film and I got one for my partner so she could have a camera to walk around with with me that looks comparable to film due to its softness.

it wont be as satisfyingly tactile to learn about the exposure triangle (ie, as you change the values of shutter speed, aperture, and ISO in order to capture the right amount of light) as a manual film camera or a digital mirrorless body with interchangeable lenses, but itll definitely be fun to walk around with.

it shouldnt be as overwhelming re: features as modern day mirrorless cameras, which can get confusing with the amount of systems that are within them (like pixel shift, bracketing, internal image stabilization systems, etc. – you don’t need these to learn the basics of photography, and they can be a barrier if you get too caught up with them or finding theyre introducing another variable thats screwing with your shots).

And, if you want to be lazy, put it in auto mode and its a decent little point n shoot. it wont get you near wildlife photography, though, if thats something you’d want to dabble in (that gets expensive). it also wont be great if you want to try manual focusing.

I’d say if you just want a camera for a nice walkaround hobby, a mirrorless or dslr camera is a little bit overkill and the xz-1 is a good inexpensive buy if you can get one for like $300. a good modern starting camera with a lens is probably going to put you around $1k, and thats quite a bit of an investment.

If you want a real satisfying way to learn the utter basics of how a camera works, dont mind some unpredictability, have a camera lab near you, and have a couple hundred to spend, you could pick up a Pentax K1000 with a 50mm f2 lens for like $150 and shoot a few rolls of Kodak Gold 200 and send em off to a lab. But that will be a longer learning process (how to load film, advance it, what shutter speeds to remain under in order to compensate for your body’s movement, how to focus, how to respool the film into the canister once youve taken all your shots, etc). There’s nothing really more satisfying than a no-batteries, all mechanical experience, IMO. but its a lot of learning and can get expensive.

Edit: though, maybe since you’ve already got experience with your Dad’s Nikon, you’d rather something of your own more akin to that…in that case …hmmm well I’m running an Olympus OM-1 mkii as my mirrorless … you could get the mark 1 (essentially the same except for a couple niche features for wildlife) and the 12-40 f2.8 lens for ~1000 and that’d be pretty baller starting kit, imo. the 12-40 is a really really good lens, esp for ~$500. The nice thing about that is it’d be totally weather sealed (like, just let the rain hit it directly and dont even worry) and you have access to try out more modern computational photo tech. It would also allow you to expand into other areas like nature for a bit cheaper than if you went for a Full frame alternative like canon or sony or nikon. You could get a decent birding setup with a Om-1 and a 300mm f/4 pro for ~$5000, where something akin in full-frame land would be more like 7k-10k. Though, there are still tradeoffs going with a smaller micro-four-thirds sensor of the OM-1 – but honestly I don’t think you super need to worry about them.