Camera recommendations under 500$??

[Tarun10]

I already made a post on this before but now I have a better idea on what I want exactly and with Black Friday deals I'm hoping to get a good value.

 

I'm looking for a mirrorless or a DSLR in this price range. I will mostly use it as an amateur photographer and to take photos and videos on family occasions. I will probably use this for a few years so I would like something that is well future-proofed. Good to decent (as long as its better than a smartphone) video capabilities in poor lighting conditions is a must. I would prefer a decent sensor size due to the poor lighting conditions for photos too. I would like 4K video but I would settle for 1440p if everything else is perfect. 

 

A few people recommended going for something targeted at video but will this mean bad photos or just not as good photos?  One basic kit lens should suffice till I learn a bit more about photography. I don't mind going used if I can better gear. I have been recommended the Lumix G7, the A6300 used and the RX500 series too. I would prefer replaceable lenses so I can upgrade lenses without throwing out the body later down the line.

 

I am not sure if I should get a RX500 now and learn on it and later upgrade to a better mirrorless around 3 years down the line. I'm leaning towards getting a good mirrorless and a cheap lens or a starter kit like the G7. Which version of the RX500 is good value for money but still has most of the important features of later models? I feel DSLRs don't have many advantages except for their prices in the used market. Is there any DSLR that is good with video and offer better value than a mirrorless in the used market?

 

Any slightly more expensive cameras I should look out for on Black Friday deals? And which websites do you recommend? Amazon.com is what I've looked at mostly.

[Firewrath9]

I really like my Olympus OMD EM-5 (the old one, it was a gift), the Mark II seems to be 500$, so I'd recommend that. Great camera, easily outshoots my phone.

 

[YobB1n]

There are a lot of cameras in this price range, I'll limit them to two.

 

For $500 CAD, you can get the nikon D3500. Solid camera, 24.2 MP, and an 18-55mm with decent aperture. 

For a bit more ($550 CAD) you can get the Canon SL2 (I saw it on sale for $500 CAD on amazon.ca yesterday, it may be on sale again for BF). The SL2 is a lot better value, as it has a swivelling touch screen, perfect for videos. I would recommend this for the best value. As you said, it's more or less 'future-proofed', and comes with an OK kit lens.

 

Notice how I didn't talk about mirror less. At this price range, I don't think its that worth it. Both these entry level DSLR's are really small and light, only a bit bigger than some mirror less cameras, in fact. I think your better off with a DSLR that has more room for lenses down the road, and the value is better.

 

Also, you mentioned sensor size. I don't think you can get any new full-frame sensor cameras at this range. That being said, you may be able to find a used old 5d or something, but I don't think it matters much. In terms of video, I don't think any of the above cameras shoot 1440p. I could be wrong tho, but I think its 1080p @ 60fps.

 

Hope this kinda helps...

[Tarun10]

11 hours ago, Yobbin >=D said:

For $500 CAD, you can get the nikon D3500. Solid camera, 24.2 MP, and an 18-55mm with decent aperture. 

For a bit more ($550 CAD) you can get the Canon SL2 (I saw it on sale for $500 CAD on amazon.ca yesterday, it may be on sale again for BF). The SL2 is a lot better value, as it has a swivelling touch screen, perfect for videos. I would recommend this for the best value. As you said, it's more or less 'future-proofed', and comes with an OK kit lens.

 

Notice how I didn't talk about mirror less. At this price range, I don't think its that worth it. Both these entry level DSLR's are really small and light, only a bit bigger than some mirror less cameras, in fact. I think your better off with a DSLR that has more room for lenses down the road, and the value is better.

Those are good values but I really think 4K would be something that would be really helpful. Since I live in India I can't just get any lens whenever I want without paying a hefty price, so the lens advantage is not useful on a DSLR. I don't mind the size or the weight, I have tried out a few DSLRs and they feel right at home.

I presume these are the best value for money DSLRs in this budget? Do any other DSLRs offer 4K video at this price?

[YobB1n]

1 hour ago, Tarun10 said:

Those are good values but I really think 4K would be something that would be really helpful. Since I live in India I can't just get any lens whenever I want without paying a hefty price, so the lens advantage is not useful on a DSLR. I don't mind the size or the weight, I have tried out a few DSLRs and they feel right at home.

I presume these are the best value for money DSLRs in this budget? Do any other DSLRs offer 4K video at this price?

I dont think any DSLRs offer 4k at that price. However, Sony does have some decent mirrorless cameras that have 4k, for a bit more. You should definitely check them out. One specifically is the Sony alpha a6300, which is a few years old, has a 24MP sensor and 4k video. However, I dont know if it's in your price range and if it is available in India.

[Tarun10]

4 minutes ago, Yobbin >=D said:

I dont think any DSLRs offer 4k at that price. However, Sony does have some decent mirrorless cameras that have 4k, for a bit more. You should definitely check them out. One specifically is the Sony alpha a6300, which is a few years old, has a 24MP sensor and 4k video. However, I dont know if it's in your price range and if it is available in India.

A friend is getting the gear for me in US. The A6300 is slightly out of my budget, looking for deals. Where should I look for good Black Friday deals?

If I decide not to go 4K, what is the best DSLR you would recommend with features and image and video quality in mind?? I can stretch till 500$ maybe a bit more with a basic kit lens.

[ThePointblank]

If you are in the US, specifically looking at a Canon, and don't mind refurbished, Canon USA's eStore has a refurbished section:

 

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/cameras/refurbished-eos-interchangeable-lens-cameras

 

Usually some savings can be found there.

[ka_re_t]

On 11/26/2019 at 9:16 AM, Yobbin >=D said:

I dont think any DSLRs offer 4k at that price. However, Sony does have some decent mirrorless cameras that have 4k, for a bit more. You should definitely check them out. One specifically is the Sony alpha a6300, which is a few years old, has a 24MP sensor and 4k video. However, I dont know if it's in your price range and if it is available in India.

Ok, good work reading OP's post.  He was recommended the G7, which has 4k video.  It's not a DSLR and it is not a Sony mirrorless.  I just got the G7, and it's not bad.  Still waiting to test it in broad daylight, but I like it.  Two things I noticed: 

• The lack of OIS makes video atrocious, and it can't be fixed in post.  And since the sensor isn't stabilized, the lenses aren't either
• The kit f/3.5 lens doesn't do well in low light

With that in mind, buying a G85 body and a 25mm prime lens would be really good for video!  But, it's definitely out of your price range, so maybe save up a bit more first.  

 

Sorry that I'm so late, hopefully you haven't made any final decisions.

 

Update: There are some DSLR alternatives that also push your budget.  The Canon SL3 has digital stabilization, which is better than nothing (the G7 has nothing).  It also records at a much higher bit rate.  

 

Unless you go for a full frame camera @Tarun10, I would suggest getting a "Body only" deal and sourcing a so-called "Nifty 50" lens, new or used, for the low light performance.  If you don't care about low light photo/video, the included kit lens is fine.

[Tarun10]

7 hours ago, ka_re_t said:

Ok, good work reading OP's post.  He was recommended the G7, which has 4k video.  It's not a DSLR and it is not a Sony mirrorless.  I just got the G7, and it's not bad.  Still waiting to test it in broad daylight, but I like it.  Two things I noticed: 

• The lack of OIS makes video atrocious, and it can't be fixed in post.  And since the sensor isn't stabilized, the lenses aren't either
• The kit f/3.5 lens doesn't do well in low light

With that in mind, buying a G85 body and a 25mm prime lens would be really good for video!  But, it's definitely out of your price range, so maybe save up a bit more first.  

 

Sorry that I'm so late, hopefully you haven't made any final decisions.

 

Update: There are some DSLR alternatives that also push your budget.  The Canon SL3 has digital stabilization, which is better than nothing (the G7 has nothing).  It also records at a much higher bit rate.  

 

Unless you go for a full frame camera @Tarun10, I would suggest getting a "Body only" deal and sourcing a so-called "Nifty 50" lens, new or used, for the low light performance.  If you don't care about low light photo/video, the included kit lens is fine.

I am looking at a few options now. Expanded my budget to around 750$.

 

The G85 new with a lens (14-42) and accessories for 699 or used with the 14-42 for around 500$. Other options are the A6100 with kit lens (16-50) and accessories for 748$ or the A6300 plus the kit lens used for 625$. I typically do have poor lighting conditions when I take photos and videos but that usually means poor images or video on a smartphone but any real camera is gonna do much better.

 

If I do need one, I can get a prime lens later. DSLRs I looked at don't have good AF from what I read. I looked at X-T20 and X-T30 but it doesn't fit in my budget and X-T20 doesn't have as good AF. The GH4 was also considered but it's bulky and I don't need that level of video quality yet. Olympus has poor AF or I would straight up got the E-M5 II. 

 

Between the three listed above which one would you recommend. The G85 and A6100 do have a touch articulating screen and the A series no doubt has better AF and better image and video quality but not by a lot. Also the A6100 isn't as well built but doesn't make a whole lot of difference. 

[GDRRiley]

Canon SL3 is my pick. body with kit lens is 600$

 

Maybe grab a 35 and 50mm by yongnuo. For some nice fast primes.

50 runs 45$ and the 35mm is 90$ on B&H

 

or get a 75-300 III USM (180) B&H decent telephoto lens.

 

if you can drop 4k video and a little battery life an SL2 would allow for more lens.

[ka_re_t]

11 hours ago, Tarun10 said:

I am looking at a few options now. Expanded my budget to around 750$.

 

The G85 new with a lens (14-42) and accessories for 699 or used with the 14-42 for around 500$. Other options are the A6100 with kit lens (16-50) and accessories for 748$ or the A6300 plus the kit lens used for 625$. I typically do have poor lighting conditions when I take photos and videos but that usually means poor images or video on a smartphone but any real camera is gonna do much better.

 

If I do need one, I can get a prime lens later. DSLRs I looked at don't have good AF from what I read. I looked at X-T20 and X-T30 but it doesn't fit in my budget and X-T20 doesn't have as good AF. The GH4 was also considered but it's bulky and I don't need that level of video quality yet. Olympus has poor AF or I would straight up got the E-M5 II. 

 

Between the three listed above which one would you recommend. The G85 and A6100 do have a touch articulating screen and the A series no doubt has better AF and better image and video quality but not by a lot. Also the A6100 isn't as well built but doesn't make a whole lot of difference. 

Extra budget is good, that makes life easier.  I would strongly recommend starting with a prime lens, actually.  They're cheaper and they are often very fast for the price.  As @GDRRiley mentioned, a Yongnuo lens (make sure it has AF!) is very affordable.  

 

I still think think the G85 is a good buy, but no one offers it as a Body Only deal.  That's a shame, because if they did, I would say that you should take the G85 body and get the Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH. Lens.  That combo would be killer, since you would have AF/MF capabilities, double the light of any other kit lens, and the in-body stabilization from the G85. 

 

And actually, this combo is possible if you buy a used G85 from Adorama (almost as good as B&H).  The used camera comes with a 12-60mm lens for $580, which gives you room to spend $150 on the 25mm lens, and you'd still have $20 to spend on an AmazonBasics Large DSLR Bag (putting you $5 overbudget).  The only concern here is the used camera, but you should be fine since Adorama is trustworthy.

 

@GDRRiley has also given you a really good combo.  Canon has amazing autofocus, and the price allows you to get a lot more lenses.  That being said, I think the G85 body may still be better, when you consider the stabilization.

 

Keep us updated!

[Tarun10]

@GDRRiley @ka_re_t

So Yongnuo primes are good value. If I get two primes, I don't think I will use a telephoto right now, I can just move myself to capture the image instead of changing the focal length right? Am i right in assuming that a fast prime will let in more light for better photos at lower ISOs with less noise?

 

The SL3 seems to be a really good deal. Is the Video quality good enough at 4K? Many reviews claim the controls are really limited. Also I guess Canon does have more lenses available. As long as quality of the AF and video is close to other cameras in this budget, I'm okay with it.

 

The used G85 isn't available. I have seen bodies for 400$ in like new condition on mpb.com. I do have to pay for quick shipping though it still seems to be an okay price. I have noticed a deal for a new G85 12-60 OIS + 45-150 with a free kit for 697. That does leave a bit for a prime. No other mirrorless seems to do everything with good AF in this price point apart from the A6100 but it costs 648 for the body only.

 

Between the G85 and the SL3 could you guys give me a recommendation for lenses and a body under 700$ so I have about 50 left for a spare battery, storage, bag maybe a small tripod. 

 

Sorry it took so long to reply, I was moving and didn't have time to check posts.

[DavePlays]

If you can find it on sale, the Panasonic G7 is an excellent value!

[Tarun10]

1 minute ago, DavePlays said:

If you can find it on sale, the Panasonic G7 is an excellent value!

It is on sale and I was considering it but I think I can do the G85 which is more or less an upgraded version with better AF(don't quote me on that) and low light performance.

[DavePlays]

Just now, Tarun10 said:

It is on sale and I was considering it but I think I can do the G85 which is more or less an upgraded version with better AF(don't quote me on that) and low light performance.

Yeah if you can get a G85 for the right price - go for it! Considering that I still use one of these massive dinosaurs...

 

 

Go for it and enjoy it! Look for bundle deals on eBay or something. Most of the stuff will be junk, but sometimes you can get a bundle with an extra battery, maybe a shotgun mic, etc. 

[Tarun10]

3 minutes ago, DavePlays said:

Yeah if you can get a G85 for the right price - go for it! Considering that I still use one of these massive dinosaurs...

Go for it and enjoy it! Look for bundle deals on eBay or something. Most of the stuff will be junk, but sometimes you can get a bundle with an extra battery, maybe a shotgun mic, etc. 

I live in India and my dad's visitng the US for two weeks so it will be tough for me to go through hundreds of ebay listings and get it delivered to him so I'm sticking to dedicated websites this time. Thanks for the advice. Also, why do people use those big video recorders. I assume they had really good zoom and lenses with a lot of storage and playback features but are they still used like professionally?

[GDRRiley]

so I have a list on B&H.

if you can strech to 750 or so get both prime lens otherwise just get the 50mm.

I currently use these https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DCW592B/ref=sspa_dk_detail_0?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B07DCW592B&pd_rd_w=7Iihi&pf_rd_p=45a72588-80f7-4414-9851-786f6c16d42b&pd_rd_wg=mrtjB&pf_rd_r=53F4MY6P1V04ASMMZV40&pd_rd_r=3aaa6378-6892-42ac-8d6d-f2c102ab70e2&smid=A3EIG96NM0JFU5&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFITkQ3TDJYMkVEVjImZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTA2NTgwMDczNUQ3VzRUVTlZWU5RJmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTA4MTIyODUxQ1c2TE5XMVRGV0szJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfZGV0YWlsJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==

They seem to one of half a dozen or so rebrand of the same thing.

search this up via B&H wish lists 1402658118234

[DavePlays]

Why giant cameras? Manual buttons are a videographer's dream. Digging through menus to change essential functions is unacceptable especially when you're on a shoot and time is of the essence. As for the lens, I'm adapting a broadcast lens onto that camera (the native lens mount is M4/3). That lens has crazy zoom, totally free iris, and is par-focal (keeps its focus while zooming). Totally unnecessary for most people, but I have gear acquisition syndrome and I love it XD

[GDRRiley]

1 minute ago, Tarun10 said:

. Also, why do people use those big video recorders. I assume they had really good zoom and lenses with a lot of storage and playback features but are they still used like professionally?

IO, most use common lens mounts. Storage can be SD cards, Cfast, SSDs or some combination of them.

Also almost every major settings have buttons.

[Tarun10]

Just now, DavePlays said:

Why giant cameras? Manual buttons are a videographer's dream. Digging through menus to change essential functions is unacceptable especially when you're on a shoot and time is of the essence. As for the lens, I'm adapting a broadcast lens onto that camera (the native lens mount is M4/3). That lens has crazy zoom, totally free iris, and is par-focal (keeps its focus while zooming). Totally unnecessary for most people, but I have gear acquisition syndrome and I love it XD

Never thought about that and the sensors on some of those are probably really good too. I probably have Gear acquisition syndrome before even getting any gear. Luckily, India doesn't have cheap gear and I'm just 17 or between guitars and tech, I'd be broke.

[GDRRiley]

1 minute ago, DavePlays said:

Why giant cameras? Manual buttons are a videographer's dream. Digging through menus to change essential functions is unacceptable especially when you're on a shoot and time is of the essence. As for the lens, I'm adapting a broadcast lens onto that camera (the native lens mount is M4/3). That lens has crazy zoom, totally free iris, and is par-focal (keeps its focus while zooming). Totally unnecessary for most people, but I have gear acquisition syndrome and I love it XD

Panasonic makes some decent camcorders/cameras but I wouldn't trade a C100 mk2 or c200 for any of their cameras.

[GDRRiley]

Just now, Tarun10 said:

Never thought about that and the sensors on some of those are probably really good too. I probably have Gear acquisition syndrome before even getting any gear. Luckily, India doesn't have cheap gear and I'm just 17 or between guitars and tech, I'd be broke.

most are from the same cut as any other cameras

[Tarun10]

Just now, GDRRiley said:

Panasonic makes some decent camcorders/cameras but I wouldn't trade a C100 mk2 or c200 for any of their cameras.

Between the G85 and the SL3 which is a better choice overall for nearly equal amounts of photo and video? I figure Canon AF is better while the video is better on the G85 and photos are better on the Canon. Since I might not upgrade for quite a while or find anything used back here in India the mount doesn't matter too much. In the long run the Canon lenses might be a better choice if I go down that path but MFT doesn't seem too bad.

[DavePlays]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

Panasonic makes some decent camcorders/cameras but I wouldn't trade a C100 mk2 or c200 for any of their cameras.

Well this camera isn't in the league of the C100 or C200 considering how old this thing is. The AF100 came out in 2010, 2 years before the C100 Mk 1. Despite the antiquated sensor, it's remarkably sharp. Autofocus is still better than the G7

[GDRRiley]

Just now, DavePlays said:

Well this camera isn't in the league of the C100 or C200 considering how old this thing is. The AF100 came out in 2010, 2 years before the C100 Mk 1. Despite the antiquated sensor, it's remarkably sharp. Autofocus is still better than the G7

if I remember right the C100 isn't all that different from a late 2000s canon dslr.