xQubeZx

It all depends on what you shoot

If you can get a budget of maybe 400US it may be worth. Otherwise I’d probably stick to the phone. You could maybe find an older used dslr for ~300US

I own the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 and I love it. It produces some really great images. However I’m not completley satisfied with the build quality considering mine is in for a repair at the moment. It broke in two pieces at the mount during a fall. Most of the body is in metal on it, but the mount is plastic and is only supported by 3 small screws into some pretty fragile plastic. There is no lens elements in this part, just a cable that provieds the communication between the lens and camera so really it should be an cheap repair I’m hoping. But still, I’m dissapointed they have such a weak spot in the lens and I’d imagine the force to break it as mine does not have to be so large. Will defentivly not trust it to handle as much abuse now atleast. A shame considering its great optical performance.

The Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is perfect for this too if you got an aps-c sensor. The 24mm equivilent is a little on the narrow side but you still get very good results imo, especielly if you stitch together a few shots. I’d also think the Samyang 12mm f/2 to be a good option too.

It should be okay, of course not perfect but it will work. However using proxys could be an idea if it feels to slow to edit 4k and then just export in 4k.

A7iii or A7s ii are two very good options for video and the A7iii is amazing for photos too, the A7s ii is pretty good for photos too. The fujifilm XT3 looks promising too. If you don’t need 4K look at canons options like the 6D mark ii. But if lenses should be in your budget too you should probably look at a body in the 1000$ class like the a6300/a6500, G85 and maybe a used XT-2 or a Canon 80D

What will you shoot? If you are doing sports or action photography the 5D is the obvious choice. But if you are doing landscapes and portrait I’d steer towards the A7 because of the raw image quality and eye af. Either way, both are good cameras, however a little much to ask for them used. The 24-240 lens is said to be decent but nothing amazing really so I’d try to get it without that and get a better lens instead.

Well I assumed the prices of the 6D was kinda similar since the release but considering that price drop its a more compelling option even if I personally might not chose it but for 1000$ I’d probably get it because that is hard to beat. But I was assuming it carried the initial 2000$ pricetag.

Also agrees with the guys above. For your needs the A6500 is not right. I’d look at the A7 mark iii as you seems to have the funds for a 6D mark ii, which I would not reccomend. Sure its a solid camera that wont let you down. But value wise its not a great buy. If you want a traditional DSLR look at a used D810 or a D750, two very solid FF cameras.

The a6000 is pretty good still. The replacement a6300 and a6500 are of course better but they increased the price quite a bit with these with the a6300 going new for 800$ now when the prices have dropped a bit. The a6500 goes for over 1000$ new.

I’d watch a ton of tutorials and not just one. The reason for that is to get to see different workflows and techniques and then chose what suites you most. But one thing can be done in several ways often and most people have a preffered way. So I’d watch hours of different tutorials of basically everything to get a better all round understanding of the softwares, as they are rather complicated. I like AE a lot but it takes some time to get used to. But for starters, watch all of videocopilots tutorials. They are well made and cover a lot of good tips and tricks for AE. For premiere I don’t have a good reccomendation now but just play around and watch all tutorials you find. And remember the usecases of each software. Ae is for compositing and Pr is for general editing and cutting mostly. It is a pain making anything much longer than a few min in Ae, even that is a pain if you use several shots as its very time consuming to line the shots up compared to how the timeline is handled in Pr.

Get the 1 week trial of premiere maybe

If landscapes and portrait is what you will be doing and you won’t do much fast paced sports or such I’d get the 6D. The AF is horrific on everything except the center point, however the image quality is very nice and considering how cheap you can get them used I find it worth it if you don’t need fast AF.

I would talk to the printing service and ask for their reccomendation on what dpi to use. If its not possible I’d probably send them the highest quality file you’ve got. Really its very hard to say whats good if you haven’t made prints that size before. Personally I’ve never made prints larger than 50x40 cm ish and when I did that I let the printing service handle the dpi settings.

I’m not very good at codecs and such at all but wouldn’t an mp4 container combine all audio tracks to a single one, like merging them making it very hard to seperate them after. Kinda like its very hard to remove effects from a video after it has been exported. I may be completley wrong and in that case I’d find a dedicated audio software. Try the trial of adobe audition, personally I have only used it a few times but it seems this issue is something that software could do.

I don’t know what you will be doing but the RX100vi is plenty of camera for most people. However persnally I preffer a changable lens system as that gives you the option to play with speciality lenses and legacy glass which can be fun. But for 1500$ you will maybe get a camera that does most of what you asked for, but then youd have no money left for any lens.

The Sony a6000 is defentivly better than the other options by a fair bit. Especially if you get a better lens for it down the road.

You can not get all that for under 1500$. You can also not achive that zoom range and low aparture with just one lens. You would need several. A Sony RX100vi is probably the one that fits most of what you want. Otherwise a Panasonic GH5 or Sony A6500 or Fuji XT2 is what I would get with 2-3 lenses.

Use your phone. You won’t get any decent camera for 100$, maybe used but thats a big maybe. So use your phone or assign a larger budget. (If you see any camera for less than 100$ its most likley worse than your phone which would mean buying it is a waste of money)

Isnt there an Dell XPS 2:1 too? I say this to so many but I really think Dell’s XPS series is a great option for any kind of Lightroom or Photoshop work.

Thought about renting a DJI ronin or something like that instead of buying a gimbal of your own? 300 is quite low for a gimbal at the moment sadly and if you are only going to use it a few times maybe renting one may be a smarter option as you can get a high end model.

If that is the budget its not really worth buying a new laptop tbh. Just a waste of money at that point as the performance gain will be insignificant most likley. If he does Ps work proffesionally he should save up a budget to get something good.

I’d get either a Dell XPS with the 4k monitor (the 1080 ones are not quite as good) or a Macbook pro

Canon 5D mark iv. It got weather sealing so it can handle quite a bit of rain if used together with an weather sealed lens. But it cant take being submurged ofcorse but regular rain it handles fine. It also got a built in gps to geotag images. Donno if many other cameras would fulfill your whisings other than this. What you want is things most other photographers don’t even care about, to some degree.

For 200US you get nothing worth buying. I’d say a Sony RX100 mark iii or later model from what you describe your usecases. The D500 and D7500 reccomended above are great, but expensive and large and doesn’t sound like the right fit for you. The RX100 does though however. It can be found for $500-600. I would not consider it much worth getting a cheaper model as it will not improve much over your phone unless you go for an entry level dslr but if you do that it gets a lot bigger and you lose a lot of optical quality as the kit lenses are not as sharp as the internal of the RX100.