Best entry-level DSLR for video?

[Bsmith]

Yeah but the 700d has continuous autofocus while recording

 

go the 600D, you will regret continous AF with a DSLR when recording, since the noise form the focus engine will be picked up

 

This is helpful how?

Obviously I was joking and I wrote in my first post what I'm looking for.

Ok, thanks man, even though I'd rather not shoot in 720p but anyway.

I've seen some videos about ML.

Do you perhaps know if on the 700D it has to be installed voiding the warranty or it can just run off of the SD card, like I've seen in another video.

 

installing ML doesn't void warranty, unless it is the reason the DSLR breaks, wich is pretty unlikely to happen.

ML only works when it is installed on the SD card, removing the SD card will remove the ML software all together.

(ML is freaking awesome)

[Omon_Ra]

They're too expensive and MFT.. 

 

What's wrong with MFT? It is a little bit more expensive, but the GH2 still holds its own. And since you were fired up about Magic Lantern hacks, the GH2 has hacks as well. Having said that though, as far as price goes, it'll be hard to get a GH2, a kit lens and a 50mm equivalent for your budget. You'll also want a 95MB/s card, at the least, if you're going to do any of the high-bitrate hacks with the GH2. Also more hard drive space. Mine hacked is doing about 1GB per minute of footage.

[Walter H.W.]

In terms of sensors, the canon crop sensors are still pretty far behind the current sony sensors

 

e.g., compare canons best crop sensor camera (recently released 7D mk2), to the entry level nikon D3300.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Nikon-D3300___977_928

 

The main reason why canon is so popular with video is in the past, they were the only ones offering decent video capabilities (most other companies were offing basic video with little to no manual controls)

 

While other companies eventually caught up with the manual controls, the open source community, took canon even further e.g., with magic lantern, you are able to achieve end results that you simply cannot achieve, even with the highest end Nikon DSLR.

Magic lantern is probably the biggest selling point for canon crop sensor cameras now. and if it is released for the 7D mk 2, it will likely dominate the independent film space (if their storage controller can do over 100MB/s), as it will mean 1080p raw video at over 30FPS. That will mean essentially having close to the post processing latitude found in cameras such as the RED epic, but at a lower resolution.  The main bottleneck when recording raw video, is the storage controller, on the lower end crop sensor cameras, it is often 45-50MB/s while a camera such as the 5D mk 3 may push 90+MB/s

 

It all depends on how far you are willing to take your post processing. If all you are planing to do is set the basic manual controls, hit record, and then cut together a few clips and probably perform some basic color correction if needed, then you are better off with going with a Nikon crop sensor camera that offers all of the manual video controls that you need, as you will get cleaner video out of it due to the lower noise levels.

 

DXO mark ISO tests measure the cameras ability to retain fine detail, at the max listed ISO, you pretty much have little to no fine detail remaining, and any fine detail that you think is there, is an illusion that you are getting from the fine grain in the photo (basically details that are visible at the lowest native ISO, that are no longer visible at at the cutoff point that they list, when all of that detail is gone,  you have essentially lost part of the image and that is transition marks the highest ISO for taking detailed low light images.

 

I understood half of what yo wrote, jk, but leaving out the D3300 because it feels too cheap imo, what's the next best I can buy? I've been told that something like a Sony SLT-a58 would be a good one but I really don't like having to buy expensive Lenses from Sony or adapt lenses.. 

 

Maybe you can answer me about the low light ISO noise, does it matter in videos too or it's a spec just for pictures?

Thanks

 

go the 600D, you will regret continous AF with a DSLR when recording, since the noise form the focus engine will be picked up

 

 

installing ML doesn't void warranty, unless it is the reason the DSLR breaks, wich is pretty unlikely to happen.

ML only works when it is installed on the SD card, removing the SD card will remove the ML software all together.

(ML is freaking awesome)

 

Roger that (ML)! For the DSLR I'm still not sure, looks like no one suggests Nikon except of Razor512, or Sony or anything else.

 

What's wrong with MFT? It is a little bit more expensive, but the GH2 still holds its own. And since you were fired up about Magic Lantern hacks, the GH2 has hacks as well. Having said that though, as far as price goes, it'll be hard to get a GH2, a kit lens and a 50mm equivalent for your budget. You'll also want a 95MB/s card, at the least, if you're going to do any of the high-bitrate hacks with the GH2. Also more hard drive space. Mine hacked is doing about 1GB per minute of footage.

 

Wow, I could make a 8 minutes video! (not even). Lol.

And ye, the GH2 solution is too expensive.

[Razor512]

The D3300 was not a recommendation, it was more of a comparison to canons best aps-c sensor, to the aps-c sensor in nikons cheapest modern DSLR to further show how far behind canon is when it comes to sensors. The D3300 lacks many useful controls, and the D5300 will be a far better choice for basic recording.

 

Overall, canon offers more control.

 

It all depends on what you plan to do with the recorded footage. If you will do color grading  then canon is still the best choice because while you will not get the same noise performance, you will have a lot more control when color grading.

If you have no plans for color grading and the extend of your video production is setting shutter speed, aperture, and ISO, and tweaking the in camera color settings for its built in encoding, then nikon or sony (both companies now use the same sensors), will give you the best overall video quality in terms of low light (as you will likely not be doing every video shoot outdoors during the late morning or early afternoon.

 

With raw video on a canon, you get similar dynamic range to a high end $30,000+ camera

 

The dynamic range is just exponentially higher than the compressed/ encoded video that the camera will normally spit out.

The only issue is that you will need a lot of storage as data rates are just like those camera, you will be writing to the card at nearly 40MB/s for 720p video, and 80MB/s+ for 1080p

 

capabilities of currently supported cameras. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgQ2MOkAZTFHdFFIcFp1d0R5TzVPTVJXOEVyUndteGc#gid=5

 

 

this also means that you will end up recording many terabytes of data when making a short film (though you can throw away the raw files after color grading and exporting to a more reasonable format) (64GB SD card may give you around 25 minutes of raw sub 720p video)

 

if you do not need the max dynamic range of the sensor, you can record using its normal encoding but at higher bit rates, and with a flatter color profile, e.g., something close to S-Log, that will allow you to do 1080p video that is designed for you to then color grade. you will not get the insane dynamic range, but you will get far more quality and dynamic range than with the normal recordings from the stock firmware and settings.

[Bsmith]

 

Roger that (ML)! For the DSLR I'm still not sure, looks like no one suggests Nikon except of Razor512, or Sony or anything else.

 

 

WARNING:

VERY FANBOY LIKE POST INCOMING! VERY BAISED!

 

yes, that is mostly since canon has reputation and is mostly known for video recording a good example is their cinamatic line wich is meant for pro-sumers, but is highly encouraged by profesionals, wich they use them themselves, while they also got options like the black magic and red cinematic camera/dslr brands, wich focus on profesionals only.

Nikon is an other story, they are actually a pretty big name just as canon, but they are more photo orientated, wich is notable by responses form people, the following thing i'm going to say is kinda wrong and based on personal idea's form quite alot of people.

 

canon= recording/cinemaphotography(perfect situation studio photography) and sportphotography(higher quality on lower shuttertimes)

nikon=  alround/hobbyist and always a safe route.

 

Currently canon doesn't take part of the 4k trend yet, like sony and panasonic at the moment, but due to the low amount of 4k users it isn't really needed.

 

and the biggest benefit for canon is ML, wich gives even more control then there already is on it (wich is quite alot already on lower end devices.)

[Walter H.W.]

The D3300 was not a recommendation, it was more of a comparison to canons best aps-c sensor, to the aps-c sensor in nikons cheapest modern DSLR to further show how far behind canon is when it comes to sensors. The D3300 lacks many useful controls, and the D5300 will be a far better choice for basic recording.

 

Overall, canon offers more control.

 

It all depends on what you plan to do with the recorded footage. If you will do color grading  then canon is still the best choice because while you will not get the same noise performance, you will have a lot more control when color grading.

If you have no plans for color grading and the extend of your video production is setting shutter speed, aperture, and ISO, and tweaking the in camera color settings for its built in encoding, then nikon or sony (both companies now use the same sensors), will give you the best overall video quality in terms of low light (as you will likely not be doing every video shoot outdoors during the late morning or early afternoon.

 

With raw video on a canon, you get similar dynamic range to a high end $30,000+ camera

 

The dynamic range is just exponentially higher than the compressed/ encoded video that the camera will normally spit out.

The only issue is that you will need a lot of storage as data rates are just like those camera, you will be writing to the card at nearly 40MB/s for 720p video, and 80MB/s+ for 1080p

 

capabilities of currently supported cameras. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgQ2MOkAZTFHdFFIcFp1d0R5TzVPTVJXOEVyUndteGc#gid=5

 

 

this also means that you will end up recording many terabytes of data when making a short film (though you can throw away the raw files after color grading and exporting to a more reasonable format) (64GB SD card may give you around 25 minutes of raw sub 720p video)

 

if you do not need the max dynamic range of the sensor, you can record using its normal encoding but at higher bit rates, and with a flatter color profile, e.g., something close to S-Log, that will allow you to do 1080p video that is designed for you to then color grade. you will not get the insane dynamic range, but you will get far more quality and dynamic range than with the normal recordings from the stock firmware and settings.

 

Man, you said a lot of useful stuff but I'm not really getting everything nor i'm sure what i really need. I don't know if I wrote it already but I'd like to make videos like unboxings or reviews of something where I show the subject on a desk. So i don't think I need color grading, although I might begin to make different kind of videos with a better camera.

If you could just tell me which camera you think is best for me I'd really appreciate it, the D5300 is good but its a bit too expensive

 

 

 

WARNING:

VERY FANBOY LIKE POST INCOMING! VERY BAISED!

 

yes, that is mostly since canon has reputation and is mostly known for video recording a good example is their cinamatic line wich is meant for pro-sumers, but is highly encouraged by profesionals, wich they use them themselves, while they also got options like the black magic and red cinematic camera/dslr brands, wich focus on profesionals only.

Nikon is an other story, they are actually a pretty big name just as canon, but they are more photo orientated, wich is notable by responses form people, the following thing i'm going to say is kinda wrong and based on personal idea's form quite alot of people.

 

canon= recording/cinemaphotography(perfect situation studio photography) and sportphotography(higher quality on lower shuttertimes)

nikon=  alround/hobbyist and always a safe route.

 

Currently canon doesn't take part of the 4k trend yet, like sony and panasonic at the moment, but due to the low amount of 4k users it isn't really needed.

 

and the biggest benefit for canon is ML, wich gives even more control then there already is on it (wich is quite alot already on lower end devices.)

 

Yeah well, I also like Canon but when it's about quality I don't really care, at the end they're both just companies that want the most profit doing the least, so..I don't really mind what brand it is as long as the video is the best I can get with my budget. 

[Bsmith]

Yeah well, I also like Canon but when it's about quality I don't really care, at the end they're both just companies that want the most profit doing the least, so..I don't really mind what brand it is as long as the video is the best I can get with my budget. 

 

well it's relatively safe to ask compared to GPU's :rolleyes:  but canon it is for video recording.

[Razor512]

If all you want to do are unboxings, then the canon in your price range . Since you will be in a more controlled environment with liekly good lighting where you likely will not be pushing the camera much beyond 800ISO, with either nikon or canon, you will get similar quality.

 

If you can afford to, the canon 650D canon t4i will be good. (will give you support for raw 720p video in case you ever need it, other than that you will have good 1080p 30FPS video that will look great with good lighting (e.g., a desk lamp or something to properly light the work space)

[Walter H.W.]

If all you want to do are unboxings, then the canon in your price range . Since you will be in a more controlled environment with liekly good lighting where you likely will not be pushing the camera much beyond 800ISO, with either nikon or canon, you will get similar quality.

 

If you can afford to, the canon 650D canon t4i will be good. (will give you support for raw 720p video in case you ever need it, other than that you will have good 1080p 30FPS video that will look great with good lighting (e.g., a desk lamp or something to properly light the work space)

 

Some guys have been suggesting me also either a Sony SLT-A58 or a Panasonic G6, because they say these cameras haves better autofocus and video quality. Do you know anything about them?

[Razor512]

I have not researched those cameras much, I will have to look up some test footage in relation to the autofocus, and low light performance.

[Bsmith]

Some guys have been suggesting me also either a Sony SLT-A58 or a Panasonic G6, because they say these cameras haves better autofocus and video quality. Do you know anything about them?

 

note that the panasonic G6 is not DSLR, it has the sensor form it but it is a mirrorless camera

[Walter H.W.]

note that the panasonic G6 is not DSLR, it has the sensor form it but it is a mirrorless camera

 

Yes, I know, it's an MFT camera but people say it makes very good videos.

[Razor512]

From some sample videos, the Panasonic G6 seems to struggle with low light (at ISO 1600, the video has heavy in camera noise reduction which really kills the fine detail. While it has a lot of control in recording, it seems like it will only be great for video in very good lighting conditions. though everything under 1600 ISO looks pretty decent

 

If you do not plan to do low light work, then pick which ever camera has a specific feature you want without worrying about the sensor.

 

MFT camera are generally able to more easily focus because smaller sensors have a larger depth of field, thus the autofocus has more time to react and make corrections before things become too blurry. If you take something like an f1.8 lens and attach it to a MFT, then you will run into auto focus issues again.

 

though if you want some really good video auto focus even with a very wide aperture, then the sony A6000 is very quick as it does not just rely on contrast detect auto focus, though it is likely above your price range.

 

the Sony A58 seems to do pretty well with autofocus though video gets pretty grainy, (for some reason, even more than the panasonic G6

 

Overall, it seems that the t4i may have the better overall quality out of the 3 cameras, but also the slowest auto focus

The sony has a fast AF, but footage gets noisy very quickly, with very noticeable noise at as little as ISO 400

 

For still images, the panasonic G6 will be the worst of the 3, but if you only plan to do video with good lighting, it may be the best camera for the job, everything under 1600 ISO looks pretty good, and auto focus is quick.

 

if you feel that you will need to shoot video at ISO 1600+, then the canon will be your best choice. (skip the sony as its video gets noisy way too soon)

In the case of the canon VS the G6, the canon pretty much gives you a little over 1 stop of ISO performance before noise becomes too much, but on the down side, the t4i's autofocus is significantly slower.

[Walter H.W.]

From some sample videos, the Panasonic G6 seems to struggle with low light (at ISO 1600, the video has heavy in camera noise reduction which really kills the fine detail. While it has a lot of control in recording, it seems like it will only be great for video in very good lighting conditions. though everything under 1600 ISO looks pretty decent

 

If you do not plan to do low light work, then pick which ever camera has a specific feature you want without worrying about the sensor.

 

MFT camera are generally able to more easily focus because smaller sensors have a larger depth of field, thus the autofocus has more time to react and make corrections before things become too blurry. If you take something like an f1.8 lens and attach it to a MFT, then you will run into auto focus issues again.

 

though if you want some really good video auto focus even with a very wide aperture, then the sony A6000 is very quick as it does not just rely on contrast detect auto focus, though it is likely above your price range.

 

the Sony A58 seems to do pretty well with autofocus though video gets pretty grainy, (for some reason, even more than the panasonic G6

 

Overall, it seems that the t4i may have the better overall quality out of the 3 cameras, but also the slowest auto focus

The sony has a fast AF, but footage gets noisy very quickly, with very noticeable noise at as little as ISO 400

 

For still images, the panasonic G6 will be the worst of the 3, but if you only plan to do video with good lighting, it may be the best camera for the job, everything under 1600 ISO looks pretty good, and auto focus is quick.

 

if you feel that you will need to shoot video at ISO 1600+, then the canon will be your best choice. (skip the sony as its video gets noisy way too soon)

In the case of the canon VS the G6, the canon pretty much gives you a little over 1 stop of ISO performance before noise becomes too much, but on the down side, the t4i's autofocus is significantly slower.

 

The t4i is too expensive for me, at this point I think the Sony SLT-A58 or a Panasonic G6 are the best choices for me, although the SLT-A58 is much cheaper and would let me buy a 50mm 1.8 lens with the same money.

 

With low light I'm not so sure about how low it has to be for video to look bad, I usually film in my room in the morning and on sunny days, so I guess there should be enough light? 

 

Also, which one has better and faster autofocus, is it really important? If I want to film something on my desk won't it be fixed anyway? (I really don't know how it works)

 

So.. resuming:

 

Canon t5i body only + 50mm f/1.8 

 

Sony SLT-A58 with kit lens + 50mm f/1.8

 

Panasonic G6 with kit lens

 

Should I add any combo? And which one is the best as of now?

[Omon_Ra]

The t4i is too expensive for me, at this point I think the Sony SLT-A58 or a Panasonic G6 are the best choices for me, although the SLT-A58 is much cheaper and would let me buy a 50mm 1.8 lens with the same money.

 

With low light I'm not so sure about how low it has to be for video to look bad, I usually film in my room in the morning and on sunny days, so I guess there should be enough light? 

 

Also, which one has better and faster autofocus, is it really important? If I want to film something on my desk won't it be fixed anyway? (I really don't know how it works)

 

So.. resuming:

 

Canon t5i body only + 50mm f/1.8 

 

Sony SLT-A58 with kit lens + 50mm f/1.8

 

Panasonic G6 with kit lens

 

Should I add any combo? And which one is the best as of now?

 

If you use a couple other lights (even desk lamps with all of the same color temperature bulb) that will solve any potential low-light issues. Also, all m4/3 cameras start to have issues in low-light, but it's nothing that shocking. 3200, 6400, and even 12800 are usable in the right situation.

 

Autofocus isn't a huge deal, I typically shoot everything manual focus; but it does take some time to get used to your lenses. If you're shooting static objects, autofocus is really only good for killing your battery. The mirrorless DSLR's have some nifty 'zoom' features that let you focus very precisely.

[Walter H.W.]

If you use a couple other lights (even desk lamps with all of the same color temperature bulb) that will solve any potential low-light issues. Also, all m4/3 cameras start to have issues in low-light, but it's nothing that shocking. 3200, 6400, and even 12800 are usable in the right situation.

 

Autofocus isn't a huge deal, I typically shoot everything manual focus; but it does take some time to get used to your lenses. If you're shooting static objects, autofocus is really only good for killing your battery. The mirrorless DSLR's have some nifty 'zoom' features that let you focus very precisely.

 

Ok, so I guess my choice will be the Sony SLT-A58, also cause it's cheaper and lets me buy a 50mm f/1.8 lens plus some money left for a tripod or a mic. What do you think?

[Omon_Ra]

Ok, so I guess my choice will be the Sony SLT-A58, also cause it's cheaper and lets me buy a 50mm f/1.8 lens plus some money left for a tripod or a mic. What do you think?

 

Yeah, if you need extra gear out of that $600 budget, I'd go that way. For now, especially if you're doing static shots, you could get away with a super cheap, basic tripod; then upgrade to a heavier/nicer one down the road. I still use a cheap, light one on simple shoots when I know I won't be doing any camera movements on the tripod. Definitely invest in a mic/external audio recorder. DSLR's have terrible built-in mic's.

[Walter H.W.]

Yeah, if you need extra gear out of that $600 budget, I'd go that way. For now, especially if you're doing static shots, you could get away with a super cheap, basic tripod; then upgrade to a heavier/nicer one down the road. I still use a cheap, light one on simple shoots when I know I won't be doing any camera movements on the tripod. Definitely invest in a mic/external audio recorder. DSLR's have terrible built-in mic's.

 

I actually have a tripod already: http://www.electronicsshenzhen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Smalltripod.jpg , but I think I need an upgrade. Lol. 

 

Now seriously, do you think I can get a cheap tripod for like 20€ ($25) that just works and maybe 1.5m tall and it'll be fine? or do I need to spend more? Also, for mic, is it ok any 20€ ($25) lapel mic or also there I need to spend more? ( this or this )

[Omon_Ra]

I actually have a tripod already: http://www.electronicsshenzhen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Smalltripod.jpg , but I think I need an upgrade. Lol. 

 

Now seriously, do you think I can get a cheap tripod for like 20€ ($25) that just works and maybe 1.5m tall and it'll be fine? or do I need to spend more? Also, for mic, is it ok any 20€ ($25) lapel mic or also there I need to spend more? ( this or this )

 

Haha, well, I've used stacks of books as a 'tripod' before. It all just depends on what you're shooting and what you have. I think you said you were doing a tech-type channel? In that case, especially if it's just you running the camera and talking, a simple tripod will be more than sufficient. You can't very well do pans/tilts when you're talking to the camera.

 

As far as the mics go, I'm not sure of the quality of those cheap lapel mics. If you're going to be close to the camera, it won't matter, but I'd personally rather have a wireless lapel setup. You could go with something like this, which will be a bit more versatile:

http://www.amazon.com/TAKSTAR-Photography-Interview-Microphone-Camcorder/dp/B00E1D2LTA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1415728512&sr=8-2&keywords=shotgun+microphone

 

I personally use a Tascam dr07mkII audio recorder. It does have a microphone input, so I can use an external shotgun mic when I need it. But using the built-in mic's generally works perfectly fine.

[Walter H.W.]

Haha, well, I've used stacks of books as a 'tripod' before. It all just depends on what you're shooting and what you have. I think you said you were doing a tech-type channel? In that case, especially if it's just you running the camera and talking, a simple tripod will be more than sufficient. You can't very well do pans/tilts when you're talking to the camera.

As far as the mics go, I'm not sure of the quality of those cheap lapel mics. If you're going to be close to the camera, it won't matter, but I'd personally rather have a wireless lapel setup. You could go with something like this, which will be a bit more versatile:

http://www.amazon.com/TAKSTAR-Photography-Interview-Microphone-Camcorder/dp/B00E1D2LTA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1415728512&sr=8-2&keywords=shotgun+microphone

I personally use a Tascam dr07mkII audio recorder. It does have a microphone input, so I can use an external shotgun mic when I need it. But using the built-in mic's generally works perfectly fine.

Oh ye I saw those mics but since I'll be behind the camera aren't they the wrong type for me?

[MeepLikesToBuildPc's]

canon is the video boss

[Omon_Ra]

Oh ye I saw those mics but since I'll be behind the camera aren't they the wrong type for me?

 

Not necessarily, you don't HAVE to mount it to the hotshoe. You could use that little tripod you have to setup the mic on your table facing you, out of frame.

[Walter H.W.]

Not necessarily, you don't HAVE to mount it to the hotshoe. You could use that little tripod you have to setup the mic on your table facing you, out of frame.

Oh nice to know, what do you think about this one http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B008H3Y9LS/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1415730623&sr=8-1 (they don't have the one you showed me in my country). This mic looks like to be the same one and rebranded many times.

PS: I don't if you know it already but I just remember that the Sony A58 doesn't have manual sound settings, only AGC so any mic is kinda useless..

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Omon_Ra]

Oh nice to know, what do you think about this one http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B008H3Y9LS/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1415730623&sr=8-1 (they don't have the one you showed me in my country). This mic looks like to be the same one and rebranded many times.

 

It'll probably work just fine. I have a shotgun mic from a thrift store that cost ~$7. Whatever you get, it'll be an improvement over the camera's mic.

[Walter H.W.]

It'll probably work just fine. I have a shotgun mic from a thrift store that cost ~$7. Whatever you get, it'll be an improvement over the camera's mic.

Please check my PS