Help me pick a new camera to buy!

[Gilbert]

Hey guys, I recently have started to want to take some pictures/videos for around school and in my marching band to be able to show the moment with the whole school. No i'm not asking for anything too expensive, just something that is decent for 1080p pictures and is easily usable, i'd like to have a DSLR camera instead of a camcorder.

 

Thanks!

[dragoon20005]

max budget?

 

any particular brand of DSLR you are looking at?

[ZacDaMan72]

Canon T3i? Budget would be great.

[Gilbert]

Oh sorry about leaving the budget out, i'm willing to spend at max around 500 dollars.

 

As for the brand, i like Canon, i used to have one,really old, it's a rebel one...

[CaffienatedBovine]

Pentax k-50

[ZacDaMan72]

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-NIKKOR/dp/B007VGGFZU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408586589&sr=8-1&keywords=d3200

[Gilbert]

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-NIKKOR/dp/B007VGGFZU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408586589&sr=8-1&keywords=d3200

I looked at the link for the D3200, watched the sample videos too, i like the colors and how it's crisp. Thank you!

[dragoon20005]

so far among the best DSLR for video will be the Canon 700D

 

may be slightly over the budget but worth it as the lens on the 700D is silent during recording and will auto focus constantly with the dual AF CMOS sensor

[Gilbert]

so far among the best DSLR for video will be the Canon 700D

 

may be slightly over the budget but worth it as the lens on the 700D is silent during recording and will auto focus constantly with the dual AF CMOS sensor

Hmm.... This one had a flip screen... I would need that.... 

[dragoon20005]

Hmm.... This one had a flip screen... I would need that.... 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-700d-rebel-t5i

 

check the reviews

 

i am using the 550D which is the earlier gen

[TheGrapeEscape]

I second the Pentax K-50 @ $449 http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-K-50-Digital-Camera-3-Inch/dp/B00DBPKBQO

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Pentax-K-50

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-T3i-vs-Pentax-K-50

Canon's and Nikon's lower end cameras tend to be terrible value for money. You need to get at least a:

Canon

APS-C: Canon 70D

Full Frame: Canon 5D MkIII

Nikon

Full frame: Nikon D610

Before you start seeing any value for money.

[dragoon20005]

I second the Pentax K-50 @ $449 http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-K-50-Digital-Camera-3-Inch/dp/B00DBPKBQO

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Pentax-K-50

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-T3i-vs-Pentax-K-50

Canon's and Nikon's lower end cameras tend to be terrible value for money. You need to get at least a:

Canon

APS-C: Canon 70D

Full Frame: Canon 5D MkIII

 

actually the 700D is still quite good mid entry level DSLR for Canon range

 

70D is more towards semi pro users

 

and for full frame the Canon 6D is a good full frame at a damn good price to beat

[TheGrapeEscape]

actually the 700D is still quite good mid entry level DSLR for Canon range

 

70D is more towards semi pro users

 

and for full frame the Canon 6D is a good full frame at a damn good price to beat

I can't say I believe that. Take for instance the 700D ($750) vs Pentax K5 IIs ($800) http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-700D-vs-Pentax-K-5-IIs There's greater value in the K5 IIs.

There's better value in the D5200 ($670) vs the 700D http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-700D-vs-Nikon-D5200

And then lets compare the Canon 6D (~$1800 body only) to the Nikon D610 (~$1800 body only) http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Nikon-D610

As you can see, I think I've been fair when I made my previous statement.

EDIT: Those are all prices from Amazon for new stock that include the body and a standard zoom (~18-50mm)

[DoubleY]

so far among the best DSLR for video will be the Canon 700D

 

may be slightly over the budget but worth it as the lens on the 700D is silent during recording and will auto focus constantly with the dual AF CMOS sensor

Constant AF isn't usually what you want. Especially if the AF system isn't the best in the world... I would say the best thing to do is to learn to manual focus. If you shoot at F/4 and a focal length of 18mm (which is fairly common focal length while shooting indoors with an APS-C sensor)

 

Anyways, if your subject was 5 feet in front of you with an 18mm focal length at F/4 (which most, if not all, lenses can do at 18mm) your total depth of field is still 4.63 feet which allows for some user error in manual focusing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANYWAYS, I say learn to manual focus. 

[Cupitor]

double post

[Cupitor]

dammit double x2 post

[Cupitor]

Always the body...!

The two brands to consider !if! your in it for the long haul are Nikon and Canon for one reason: the lenses. Think of a camera body as an analogue 2a graphics card. The body contains CPUs, firmware, wireless/gps... the tech is fast, like ARM processor a advances between two generations of high end smart phones.

Tech burn: After spending $700 on that galaxy iPhone S7, 2 years later it's a fossil. Marketing has bedazzled people with and to photo, ironically because of phone-togrophy and all that insta-vine stuff.

Fortunately camera-bodies last much longer, I know many professionals that use 8 year old bodies.

But...lenses...

there's no equivalent in anything tech-related. Higher/high end lenses, as long as the only damage is cosmetic, hold their value crazy like- some lenses, they wine, value up, years pass by.

Unless you plunk $2000+ on yer first lens...ones you'll be using won't increase in value....buuuuut the cheapest ones, if kept well with box hold their value...

It's more then common for serious photogs to keep (and use) lenses 2 decades old and use them with new bodies.

Remember. It's person first, then the lens. Bodies come and go as fast as Gpus do, the exception being the top of line models...they go "tock" (3-4 years), anything under 2-3000k goes tick and tock.

The so called "beginner" (I hate that stupid marketing parlance any DSLR these days, with duh skillz, can make amazing stuff. Ain't the camera*

Models $800 and less are re-up'd yearly.

Like AMD and Nvidia, Canon and Nikon take turns having the best bodies (sounds weird huh Recently Nikon wowed everyone with the 810 model, but Canon is coming out with a refresh of 2 big models soon.

It's all about the lenses. And both have sooooo many!

Canon does by a tiny bit lead in lenses. Also this->

Something super new in the photog world. For the first time ever, a few (main one is sigma) 3rd party lens makers are...actually making some amazing lenses..they always come out for canon first then a year later Nikon (Mac game port?). Lots of third party lenses are not compatible with Nikons autofocus- so that's a drag.

Canon has a wicked (and cheap feeling) 50mm f1.8 that costs $100. The Nikon equiv. costs $270ish. That $100 lens is used by many super-pros (journalists usually) because it's stupid sharp and if it explodes...well, much better than the 50mm 1.2L, which is $2500...Nikon doesn't make a 1.2

The general consensus is: Nikon has wider dynamic range which can be a deal maker for some pro-landscape photogs. Forever, more pros were using Nikon for portraiture, these days, the gap is narrow-er-ing. Canon is the action camera*...sports photography is the most expensive kind regarding gear-cost. 20k is probably the baseline for a pro-sports photog. Everything else

(aside from astro-photography, Canon wins because of things like a 1.2 50mm and the super legendary 1.0)

99.9% skill/technique. I have 3 bodies and 1 point and shoot. My main back up camera is a canon t2i (2009) which has the same sensor as the t3i, t4i, t5i and the 7D. The 1080 video taken with the t2i looks as good as anything in 1080p (provided you have the skill and some expensive steady-gear n software).

I love Pentax- lenses are the only reason I don't have one. Same with some others.

Oh yeah, unlike ratings for Gpus/Cpus, which can be determined absolute with quantitative stats, cameras are different. More megapixels=better is 99.9% BS. The new galaxy note is 16mp. Canons 1X has a similar mp spec, the body alone is 7-8000k.

I don't know if I mentioned that between Canon and Nikon, consensus has always been Canon=Video.

Side note: For video only people who can't afford a RED, it seems the new 12mp sony DSLR is crazy-holyshit good (still many $1000$) it's competitor is the Panasonic GH4 (also $$$).

Everything does 1080p well. I saw (ergh forgot name) a full length, big cast/decent budget movie made only with phones. I never though "phone" while watching. Made me feel stupid...

advice time....

If you are sure you'll be buying different lenses down the road...it's Canon or Nikon. Remember, camera body reviews, unless it's something like "it ate my parakeet, then my mom"...the reviews should be used as guideline only for Nikon/Canon Dslrs. Newer formats, like mirrorless or micro 4:3, the reviews are more important, because of the (kinda) uncharted new tech.

Review Hyjinx:

...take two cameras both made to compete against each other. Similar price, same demographic...

Nikon 600 vs Canon 6D

These were the first two "affordable" full frame dslrs (2000ish body only).

Paper and reviews: the Nikon killed the Canon in all categories- dynamic range, megapixels, speed, autofocus, everything.

Well but well.. speed (finger holding down shutter button...click click click etc) on the Nikon was something either 1 or almost 2 fps faster. 6D was 4.5 fps. What all reviews didn't test, or mention until a year later, was the buffer. After 20ish photos on the Nikon, buffering slowed things down like crazy. The 6D would maybe hiccup after 200 shots.

For focus, the 6D had pathetic specs. 1 cross type in the center, and 14 (I think) single point types spread around. The Nikon, just had a lot more, soooooo many x-type focus points...this did make the Nikon better with tracking a subject, especially an approaching (someone running towards you) one. The canon can perform on the same level, but with more duds

But!

Why did I get a 6D specifically FOR it's crappy focus? The 1 x-type focus spot is ridiculously sensitive at night. Can autofocus on objects at -3ev (a tree stump under moonlight). No IR beams, no pre-flash to focus in low light. In fact, the 6D has the best low light sensor canon makes on any of their dslrs.

Who knows about the 810. That thing has taken over the world.

Nikon ended up having a real problem with oil getting in the wrong places. For all the graphs, points, percentage scores, tech data showing the Nikon to be the obvious winner- it lost. It lost so bad, that 1+ year later they discontinued it, replacing it with the 610, which is supposed to be a killer camera,

-

Sooo, part of me says Nikon 3XXX or 5XXX- especially the 5300- heard nothing but great things about it.

Other part says...Canon, because Canon has a much better UI (seems subjective, which it is) because Nikon requires going thru more menus, controls are set up in a way where two hands are needed to change some settings which becomes clunky/loose the shot.

The 5300 is superior for real with spec, but I don't know if I'd be able to say "yep, that's way better".

It comes down to...

are you in it for the long haul (once you get another lens, you're married)

and which one fits and feels your hand better?

I always buy the extension grips for my cameras, I guess I have kinda big hands, but the larger chunkier grip feels way better, nocramps.

Go to a store and hold the camera, walk around with it for 30 minutes (hand attached of course).

You can't go wrong either way. If anyone says "well, camera xyz takes sharper/better pictures...has xyz and abc, blah sell a lot blah score this..." they're spewing crap at you. The truth is "well, person who learns/reads thing+takes photos all the friggin' time cause they dig it will take best photos"

Pick a budget with a 100$ range / variable

find models that fit in that range

pick the one which feels best in hand, through the eye.,.twist dials, press buttons (a mushy button is insta-no)..,do the hokey-pokee,..

and yup

[Silvercall]

Hey guys, I recently have started to want to take some pictures/videos for around school and in my marching band to be able to show the moment with the whole school. No i'm not asking for anything too expensive, just something that is decent for 1080p pictures and is easily usable, i'd like to have a DSLR camera instead of a camcorder.

 

Thanks!

Just some friendly advice... As you are just starting out I would recommend you try to stick with your budget and mainly focus on developing your skills by shooting tons, reading alot of books on photography/videography, and watching how to videos on YouTube. Any of the entry level camera's recommended here will serve you well while you improve your skills. Once you get more comfortable and know you will stick with the hobby, he consider upgrading IF you find your equipment is not good enough.

Whatever camera you buy, I would next add a cheap prime lens (35mm or 50mm) to help you isolate subjects. Good luck and I hope you find what you are looking for.

[mrltpwnage]

I would recommend that you spend less on your camera body and spend more on lenses, get an adequate dslr and buy some nice lenses. Remember, you will replace your camera body after a few years but you will use the lenses for a lot longer.

[Williamchan87]

How about Fujifilm X-A1