Camera recommendations around 500$??

[Tarun10]

I'm looking for a camera around this budget. My family would use it for taking photos on special occasions and also take videos of some events (like music gigs).

 

I also want to learn a bit more about photography and videography. I'm an amateur and I know a decent bit about how to configure setting like exposure and ISO to take decent photos. But I don't have a lot of practice.We currently use pretty cheap smartphone cameras and our old 2MP Sony Handycam and Cybershot weren't cutting it anymore so I sold them.

 

I think a good mirrorless camera is a good option or a DSLR with good video capabilities. Since I don't even know what type of camera to go for, I thought somebody could point me in the right direction with a recommendation or two?? Future-proofing is a must as we'll probably use this for a long time. Is it possible to get good 4K video at this price?

 

Also what is the best online store or retail store in terms of price in the US??

[Evolution.]

7 minutes ago, Tarun10 said:

Is it possible to get good 4K video at this price?

Lumix G7. 

[Tarun10]

11 minutes ago, VenomZ_ said:

Lumix G7. 

Seems like a good value. Is a mirrorless a better option in the long run for an amateur photographer like me? Just getting into camera gear.

 

Is it worth paying a bit more for a better camera that will give me great photos and videos longer?

Reselling cameras in India is tough and not many buyers. And if I wanted to upgrade, I'd be paying a lot of import tax on higher end cameras. If I got it in Decemeber when my Dad visits the US it would be significantly cheaper.

[nick name]

It was on sale with a two lens bundle yesterday on Amazon.  Hopefully you didn't look into this too late.  

 

Edit:

Yeah, you missed it.  

[SupaKomputa]

G7 is a good camera for videography. For photography is not bad, but i hate the high iso performance.

If you're main focus is photography, better get a bigger sensor like APS-C or 35mm.

For $500 you should look into a used Sony A6300 or Canon 80D or even the 1st gen A7.

 

[Radium_Angel]

3 hours ago, Tarun10 said:

give me great photos

"The single most important part of a camera, is the twelve inches behind it." - Ansel Adams

The vast majority of cameras that exist today, are far and away overkill for a new photographer, like buying a Maserati for your first car.

The best camera for you is the one you want to use. If it's awkward ergonomically, or too small/large for your hands, you won't want to use it or enjoy the hobby very much.

 

Visit a camera/tech shop, play with what they have in stock, see what brand works best for your hands (Nikon for me, for example, though I've used Canons, it's not nearly as intuitive as a Nikon...again, for me) and then concentrate on narrowing down the model lineup from there.

 

 

[Tarun10]

8 hours ago, nick name said:

It was on sale with a two lens bundle yesterday on Amazon.  Hopefully you didn't look into this too late.  

 

Edit:

Yeah, you missed it.  

My dad's visiting the US on a business tour in December so that;s when he's getting it.

8 hours ago, SupaKomputa said:

G7 is a good camera for videography. For photography is not bad, but i hate the high iso performance.

If you're main focus is photography, better get a bigger sensor like APS-C or 35mm.

For $500 you should look into a used Sony A6300 or Canon 80D or even the 1st gen A7.

 

I don't have a main focus , it would be for both but I do intend to maybe start making YouTube videos for fun and also delve into pro photography in college next year.

Going used is a great idea in a lot of hobbies but how do I know if I'm getting a good unit that's not too bad? Also any particular stores or websites that offer a good value and that I can trust for used camera gear?

6 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

"The single most important part of a camera, is the twelve inches behind it." - Ansel Adams

The vast majority of cameras that exist today, are far and away overkill for a new photographer, like buying a Maserati for your first car.

The best camera for you is the one you want to use. If it's awkward ergonomically, or too small/large for your hands, you won't want to use it or enjoy the hobby very much.

 

Visit a camera/tech shop, play with what they have in stock, see what brand works best for your hands (Nikon for me, for example, though I've used Canons, it's not nearly as intuitive as a Nikon...again, for me) and then concentrate on narrowing down the model lineup from there.

 

 

That makes sense. Even on guitar they recommend you get a cheap but decent guitar and get used to it then splurge on a more expensive model. The only problem is that there aren't a lot of camera shops in India where they let me hold the gear and try it out. And of the few, they usually stock older models and DSLRs only. I'll still give it a try though.

[harryk]

9 minutes ago, Tarun10 said:

Going used is a great idea in a lot of hobbies but how do I know if I'm getting a good unit that's not too bad? Also any particular stores or websites that offer a good value and that I can trust for used camera gear?

B&H and Adorama have excellent reputations and both sell used gear, though its not always the best deal. Many local camera shops also sell used gear but the stock will obviously be limited.

 

Either mirrorless or DSLR would be great. One thing to consider though. DSLR's (and SLR's) have been around longer so you can easily find good deals on older cameras and lenses. If you go mirrorless you'll be stuck paying for newer lenses; furthermore many mirrorless lenses are also more expensive than similar DSLR lenses.

[Zodiark1593]

6 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

"The single most important part of a camera, is the twelve inches behind it." - Ansel Adams

The vast majority of cameras that exist today, are far and away overkill for a new photographer, like buying a Maserati for your first car.

The best camera for you is the one you want to use. If it's awkward ergonomically, or too small/large for your hands, you won't want to use it or enjoy the hobby very much.

 

Visit a camera/tech shop, play with what they have in stock, see what brand works best for your hands (Nikon for me, for example, though I've used Canons, it's not nearly as intuitive as a Nikon...again, for me) and then concentrate on narrowing down the model lineup from there.

 

 

Amusingly, I'd never even shot a DSLR or mirrorless. Every camera I'd ever owned can fit in my pocket, all the way back to my 110 format toy camera. I'll have to step up to something bigger eventually, though I find DSLRs to be pretty awkward to hold. A mirrorless m4/3 will probably be a logical next steI, though I find medium format film to be appealing too.

Use my 1" (16mm) compact for most general shooting, and break out the medium format for those really special or (if I'm good enough to do this) paid shots.

[SupaKomputa]

1 hour ago, Tarun10 said:

My dad's visiting the US on a business tour in December so that;s when he's getting it.

I don't have a main focus , it would be for both but I do intend to maybe start making YouTube videos for fun and also delve into pro photography in college next year.

Going used is a great idea in a lot of hobbies but how do I know if I'm getting a good unit that's not too bad? Also any particular stores or websites that offer a good value and that I can trust for used camera gear?

That makes sense. Even on guitar they recommend you get a cheap but decent guitar and get used to it then splurge on a more expensive model. The only problem is that there aren't a lot of camera shops in India where they let me hold the gear and try it out. And of the few, they usually stock older models and DSLRs only. I'll still give it a try though.

Fortunately for you, Sony and Canon cameras have a shot counter (how many shot it's been used), under 5k should be good as new. Make sure all buttons an dials are good, for body don't bother with scratches, it doesn't effect the performance.

 

39 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Amusingly, I'd never even shot a DSLR or mirrorless. Every camera I'd ever owned can fit in my pocket, all the way back to my 110 format toy camera. I'll have to step up to something bigger eventually, though I find DSLRs to be pretty awkward to hold. A mirrorless m4/3 will probably be a logical next steI, though I find medium format film to be appealing too.

Use my 1" (16mm) compact for most general shooting, and break out the medium format for those really special or (if I'm good enough to do this) paid shots.

This is also a good alternative to learn how to shoot. Go with a semi-professional pocket camera like the Sony RX100 series, it shares a lot of features with the mirrorless siblings (minus the replaceable lenses). I started shooting with this camera and highly recommend it.

[Zodiark1593]

35 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

 

 

This is also a good alternative to learn how to shoot. Go with a semi-professional pocket camera like the Sony RX100 series, it shares a lot of features with the mirrorless siblings (minus the replaceable lenses). I started shooting with this camera and highly recommend it.

Pretty much, I shoot with thw Canon G7X mkii, though it shares enough in common with the RX100 (sensor included) that I call them siblings.

 

As a plus, the RX100 series are likely the very best cameras you're likely to get past concert security without a media pass on hand, if you like that sort of thing.

 

Kind of off topic, but wouldn't it be great if a very small interchangeable lens camera system could be made (body and lenses) almost entirely of plastic, ceramic and glass. Imagine carrying camera and lenses in your pockets, and not tripping metal detectors. The possibilities...

 

[SupaKomputa]

20 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

As a plus, the RX100 series are likely the very best cameras you're likely to get past concert security without a media pass on hand, if you like that sort of thing.

 

Yes, as a matter of facts i shot events, in times when i don't have a media pass, i'll just go regular and bypass the security and still gets a decent shots. And 80% of the times i just shoot with it, came out just as good as my lumix g85. I only used my mirrorless for tele shot or high iso, with a good light, the RX is simply amazing.

[Tarun10]

7 hours ago, SupaKomputa said:

Fortunately for you, Sony and Canon cameras have a shot counter (how many shot it's been used), under 5k should be good as new. Make sure all buttons an dials are good, for body don't bother with scratches, it doesn't effect the performance.

 

This is also a good alternative to learn how to shoot. Go with a semi-professional pocket camera like the Sony RX100 series, it shares a lot of features with the mirrorless siblings (minus the replaceable lenses). I started shooting with this camera and highly recommend it.

As long as the lens and the sensor seem clean and dials and buttons work, I can get a used camera right? I understand bigger sensors offer more f-stops and light sensitivity for photos, what about for videos? And what is the minimum ISO range and number of autofocus points would you recommend or does it not matter that much? And does the quality of the sensors vary significantly between cheaper mirrorless, DLSRs and the RX-100?

 

Getting a smaller camera seems like a good idea but I do know most of the basics on shooting as I have learned a bit on my friend's DSLR. Is it worth paying a bit more for a slightly better mirrorless or DSLR and get lenses as I get better now? Which model in the RX-100 series would you recommend if I needed 4K video?

 

8 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Use my 1" (16mm) compact for most general shooting, and break out the medium format for those really special or (if I'm good enough to do this) paid shots.

Does a 16mm compact have good light sensitivity? Also, the aperture of a lens represented by f/x is constant for a lens and does the light let into the sensor depend only on this aperture or on the physical size of the front of the lens too? How comfortable are compact cameras like the RX-100? I don't like the feel of older Cybershots and they feel tough to stabilise.

 

8 hours ago, harryk said:

Either mirrorless or DSLR would be great. One thing to consider though. DSLR's (and SLR's) have been around longer so you can easily find good deals on older cameras and lenses. If you go mirrorless you'll be stuck paying for newer lenses; furthermore many mirrorless lenses are also more expensive than similar DSLR lenses.

But are there good DSLRs in my price range that shoot 4K video?

 

Thanks a lot for all the replies. At this point, I should probably go out and try a few different cameras and have a feel. I'm leaning towards a mirrorless or a DSLR with good 4K and probably going used. I'll look into the RX-100 but even if I might not use some other features immediately, a camera with replaceable lenses seems like a better idea in the long run since size doesn't matter much to me.

[SupaKomputa]

If you aiming for 4k and video in general, Lumix g7 is the better choice, because its either absence on the sony or canon or it doesn't have all the features in the lumix. For $500 you can get it new. But with lumix you'll have difficult time with proper lens selections.

 

But RX100 is the middle ground here, great photos and videos in a smaller package. If you want 4k better get the mark IV, it has a solid magnesium body and pretty durable. If you mastered it, you can easily moved to the mirrorless line. The drawbacks are ISO performance and limited video recording durations (up to 5min roughly).

 

The mirrorless Sony that i can recommend is A6300, it does 4K with a recording limit. You can get it used for $500 body only if you're lucky.

For canon, forget about 4k, no support, but if you're fine with 1080p, then the 80d is a beast video camera, many famous youtubers started with this camera. For me stay away from DSLR, the format is on it's way out.

[Tarun10]

21 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

If you aiming for 4k and video in general, Lumix g7 is the better choice, because its either absence on the sony or canon or it doesn't have all the features in the lumix. For $500 you can get it new. But with lumix you'll have difficult time with proper lens selections.

 

But RX100 is the middle ground here, great photos and videos in a smaller package. If you want 4k better get the mark IV, it has a solid magnesium body and pretty durable. If you mastered it, you can easily moved to the mirrorless line. The drawbacks are ISO performance and limited video recording durations (up to 5min roughly).

 

The mirrorless Sony that i can recommend is A6300, it does 4K with a recording limit. You can get it used for $500 body only if you're lucky.

For canon, forget about 4k, no support, but if you're fine with 1080p, then the 80d is a beast video camera, many famous youtubers started with this camera. For me stay away from DSLR, the format is on it's way out.

A quick search on the internet shows hacks to extend recording time. Is it worth trying these out?

 

Will the G7 take better photos than the RX-100? Is the RX-100 the best non-replaceable lens camera and how comfortable is it? Does the G85 have better lens selection than the G7? What about lens adapters, go or no-go? 

 

I think a used A6300 or similar mirrorless will be a better balance between video and photo and also I could reuse lenses if I upgrade. What lens is a good balance for an amateur? Any other models I should look out for in specific in the mirrorless segment? I understand your view point on DSLRs and good mirrorless cameras and lenses aren't much more expensive even used now.

 

Does having a large native ISO range and number of autofocus points matter a lot? Any other brand specific features I should look out for? Also what about color accuracy, is it based on editing or the type of sensor used? And is it worth going larger than ASP-C or ASP-H for my use?

 

Thanks a lot for you advice. It's great to have someone to help while getting into gear.

[nick name]

If you're dad is gonna travel to get the camera and it's going to be new then you wanna look at if that warranty will work in your country.  Some manufacturers (Nikon) have region specific warranties.  It was a something I had to look at when shopping for my Nikon D7100 because I was getting it used and had to make sure I got a US model so I wouldn't lose the warranty it had remaining.  

 

A used D7200 is something that I'd recommend looking at if you aren't set on going mirrorless.  

[Tarun10]

Just now, nick name said:

If you're dad is gonna travel to get the camera and it's going to be new then you wanna look at if that warranty will work in your country.  Some manufacturers (Nikon) have region specific warranties.  It was a something I had to look at when shopping for my Nikon D7100 because I was getting it used and had to make sure I got a US model so I wouldn't lose the warranty it had remaining.  

 

A used D7200 is something that I'd recommend looking at if you aren't set on going mirrorless.  

Yeah I will look that up before I buy new or used. But if a camera is well taken care of, it won't fail unless there's a faulty component right?

[nick name]

1 minute ago, Tarun10 said:

Yeah I will look that up before I buy new or used. But if a camera is well taken care of, it won't fail unless there's a faulty component right?

One would hope, but that's when the warranty would actually be useful.  If it's your fault it breaks then the warranty wouldn't apply.  

[nick name]

Don't forget that the other expensive part (sometimes more expensive depending on how serious you are) is buying glass/lenses.  That's where a lot of the heavy lifting can come from when taking photos.  Some shots you can never obtain if you don't have the right lens.  

[Tarun10]

2 minutes ago, nick name said:

Don't forget that the other expensive part (sometimes more expensive depending on how serious you are) is buying glass/lenses.  That's where a lot of the heavy lifting can come from when taking photos.  Some shots you can never obtain if you don't have the right lens.  

Yeah I know that but one or two lenses should get me by for a year or to and once I start trying more unique shots I could pay more for lenses. I'd like to improve on my skills and also editing video and photos before I spend a lot.

[nick name]

7 minutes ago, Tarun10 said:

Yeah I know that but one or two lenses should get me by for a year or to and once I start trying more unique shots I could pay more for lenses. I'd like to improve on my skills and also editing video and photos before I spend a lot.

Yeah, I only have a f1.8 50mm prime and an 11-16mm wide.  I use the prime for people and the wide for places.  

[Tarun10]

Just now, nick name said:

Yeah, I only have a f1.8 50mm prime and an 11-16mm wide.  I use the prime for people and the wide for places.  

It would be really helpful if you could answer my questions in this post.

 

32 minutes ago, Tarun10 said:

Does having a large native ISO range and number of autofocus points matter a lot? Any other brand specific features I should look out for? Also what about color accuracy, is it based on editing or the type of sensor used? And is it worth going larger than ASP-C or ASP-H for my use?

 

Thanks a lot for you advice. It's great to have someone to help while getting into gear.

Do large sensors affect video as much as they do photos? And how do you feel about lens adapters?

[SupaKomputa]

1 hour ago, Tarun10 said:

A quick search on the internet shows hacks to extend recording time. Is it worth trying these out?

 

Will the G7 take better photos than the RX-100? Is the RX-100 the best non-replaceable lens camera and how comfortable is it? Does the G85 have better lens selection than the G7? What about lens adapters, go or no-go? 

 

In general the G7 will take photos better than RX, the sensor size is bigger, hence better picture capture. The bigger the sensor more light data will be captured. ISO performance is 1 stops better, so if the RX gets smuggy over 800, the G7 will start to get smuggy in 1600.

So in theory bigger sensor will have better ISO performance. Most camera today is pretty good in daylight, even smartphone camera is DSLR quality, but once the lights are dimmed, it's shows the performance of the sensor. RX 100 have 1 inch size when compared to the MFT sensor it is really not that bad if you consider it's total body size. Many professional video (only) camera use only 1 inch sensor.

 

G85 and G7 have the same body format and come in the same generation. Both are MFT, so the lens selection are the same. You can have any lens adapted to MFT, but you will loose some of it's native features like autofocus and in lens stabilization. If you wanna go non-native, MFT is great, since it can use a bigger lens, like from sony or canon, cannot say the same in the opposite.

 

Quote

I think a used A6300 or similar mirrorless will be a better balance between video and photo and also I could reuse lenses if I upgrade. What lens is a good balance for an amateur? Any other models I should look out for in specific in the mirrorless segment? I understand your view point on DSLRs and good mirrorless cameras and lenses aren't much more expensive even used now.

 

A used A6300 is great, but since you cap your budget at $500 i can't recommend it, since you also need to buy the lens. To start you ideally only need 50mm 1.8 (for portrait) and 70-200mm for telephoto.

 

Quote

Does having a large native ISO range and number of autofocus points matter a lot? Any other brand specific features I should look out for? Also what about color accuracy, is it based on editing or the type of sensor used? And is it worth going larger than ASP-C or ASP-H for my use?

NO, wide ISO selections will matter if you shoot a lot in the dark, in a good lighting you won't even use more than 400. Autofocus is important if you need to catch fast moving objects or in videos where the object is constantly moving. Color accuracy is sensor dependent, each brand have it's own color palette, which you can edit in post anyway. Sony usually produced vivid colors and Canon usually more natural, really it's just a matter of taste. For your current state, it's best just go with APS-C, full frame lenses are very expensive and heavy.

[Zodiark1593]

4 hours ago, Tarun10 said:

 

 

Does a 16mm compact have good light sensitivity? Also, the aperture of a lens represented by f/x is constant for a lens and does the light let into the sensor depend only on this aperture or on the physical size of the front of the lens too? How comfortable are compact cameras like the RX-100? I don't like the feel of older Cybershots and they feel tough to stabilise.

 

 

I had a way bigger post before, but the foeums ate it.. 

 

The shot below was taken at 8.8mm, 1/250, 3200 ISO and f1.8. Further, it was cropped in a lot. .

 

 

[Tarun10]

35 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

A used A6300 is great, but since you cap your budget at $500 i can't recommend it, since you also need to buy the lens. To start you ideally only need 50mm 1.8 (for portrait) and 70-200mm for telephoto.

I think I could stretch my budget if I saved up a bit more till December. Any other mirrorless cameras from other brands you'd recommend?  I think I'll go look at cameras in a store and decide between RX-100, G7 or A6300. And I should get Sony branded lenses right?

Thanks a lot for the help, again.

 

6 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

The shot below was taken at 8.8mm, 1/250, 3200 ISO and f1.8. Further, it was cropped in a lot.

So that was shot in really low light? And 1/250 is shutter speed?