What camera should i get?

[MrOptimistic]

So i'm planning to buy my first camera, purpose is to create travel video blog for youtube and take still at the same to upload on instagram so more likely 50/50. Budget will be $1000 USD my choices are canon 80d and sony a6300.

 

The only thing that hold me back for canon 80d is that it can't shoot slow motion at 120fps while on sony a6300 it doesn't have touch auto focus.

 

Articulating screen is not a big deal to me same with the battery cause i can buy extra in the future.

 

For now i will use kit lens then buy new one for all around lens budget will be $400 in the future.

 

Can anyone enlighten me what should i choose slow motion or touch auto focus or maybe wait until i can get sony a6500 by december? Thanks guys!

[mjc4wilton]

I personally always go for manual focus so touch AF wouldn't be that big of a deal. For slow motion, again, for travel vlogs I can't imagine it being that important. Most time effects you would do would be timelapses. I would go for the 80D but would also consider with that kind of a budget going for something similar but lower end and spend the extra on a nice lens. I would prioritize AF over 120FPS for travel vlogs if both are that important.

[bob345]

I would definitely go for the a6300. It is by FAR the better camera in pretty much every way.

[xQubeZx]

Personally I'd go with the Sony. It sucks to lug around a heavy camera in your hand luggage on airports or when you are out walking around in cities. (I have a Sony mirrorless system (4 lenses) and that already weights plenty, especially with a tripod.) And if we are talking video features the Sony is the better option if you can work around the overheating and rolling shutter. (Which is entirely possible) 

 

Also if you are planning to get a gimbal you can get a more lightweight one for the Sony. Thats a major benefit imo, size. 

[cc143]

9 hours ago, mjc4wilton said:

I personally always go for manual focus so touch AF wouldn't be that big of a deal. For slow motion, again, for travel vlogs I can't imagine it being that important. Most time effects you would do would be timelapses. I would go for the 80D but would also consider with that kind of a budget going for something similar but lower end and spend the extra on a nice lens. I would prioritize AF over 120FPS for travel vlogs if both are that important.

AF capability isn't important, unless you are in front of the camera, when MF becomes impossible. also, the slow motion can be helpful to add broll to your vlogs and make them more interesting (although most vloggers I've seen tend to overuse the thing.) 

8 hours ago, bob345 said:

I would definitely go for the a6300. It is by FAR the better camera in pretty much every way.

That is too definitive a statement, in the real world nothing is that simple. The 80d has many advantages over the a6300, both on paper and the real world, as does the a6300 over the 80d. Certainly, neither is by far better or worse than the other. 

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

Personally I'd go with the Sony. It sucks to lug around a heavy camera in your hand luggage on airports or when you are out walking around in cities. (I have a Sony mirrorless system (4 lenses) and that already weights plenty, especially with a tripod.) And if we are talking video features the Sony is the better option if you can work around the overheating and rolling shutter. (Which is entirely possible) 

 

Also if you are planning to get a gimbal you can get a more lightweight one for the Sony. Thats a major benefit imo, size. 

The tradeoff is between the two issues you have mentioned, as well as the battery life, lens availability and cost and AF capabilities vs. the 4k and 120p capabilities of the a6300.

 

The weight issue is obviously a clear win for the sony, unless for some reason you need to compensate for the battery life with additional batteries. The 80d is also a better stills camera. The Sony also has zebra and peaking (which could potentially be added with ML in the future to the Canon though.

 

OP: The case for the Sony has obviously been made above, although only 1 person has actually given viable advantages. I will add adapting lenses 

 

The truth is the choice isn't that simple. I'll make the case for DLSRs, not the 80d though.  I would rather go with the cheaper and very capable 800d (the 80d is only marginally better at this point.) I would spend the savings on a used 17-50mm f/2.8 from sigma or tamron and get the 10-18mm as well, which is the better focal length for vlogging. 

 

Allow me to elaborate: 

1. Glass Glass Glass, on the canon side its cheaper, there's more choice and there is a viable used market. 

2. Battery life, the Sony can charge over usb (i.e. battery bank). However, you still have to have a battery in camera and there are scenarios where being tethered even to a battery bank is not possible. With the Canon you can have only one additional battery rather than carry and individually charge 3-4 which is impossible when travelling. 

3. The weight and size issue is quite mitigated with the 800d, since its only 150g more than the sony and aps-c glass is not that heavy unless you go crazy. 

4. Touch articulating screen, you won't think of how useful it is when vlogging until you actually get it.

 5. It's better value for money.

6. No overheating issues.

7. More reliable/ durable. If you are travelling with it a lot, that's quite important. DSLRs can take much more of a beating than cscs. 

8. The Canon smartphone app is amazing, gives you loads of capability and is much less of a hustle than the Sony's (I used to have the a6000). It allows you to control everything form the app! 

 

Another thing, don't invest in the camera body invest in the system. Camera technology changes all the time, lenses, flashes and anything else you might need that is specific to your camera. The Sony ecosystem has come a long way, but I don't think its there yet. Canon's ecosystem has been here for years, it gives you way more choice and capability at this time. Sony will probably improve, but you are buying now, not in 2-4 years. If your budget was higher and you were looking at the a6500, perhaps this would be a different conversation. 

[MrOptimistic]

10 hours ago, mjc4wilton said:

I personally always go for manual focus so touch AF wouldn't be that big of a deal. For slow motion, again, for travel vlogs I can't imagine it being that important. Most time effects you would do would be timelapses. I would go for the 80D but would also consider with that kind of a budget going for something similar but lower end and spend the extra on a nice lens. I would prioritize AF over 120FPS for travel vlogs if both are that important.

 

9 hours ago, bob345 said:

I would definitely go for the a6300. It is by FAR the better camera in pretty much every way.

 

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

Personally I'd go with the Sony. It sucks to lug around a heavy camera in your hand luggage on airports or when you are out walking around in cities. (I have a Sony mirrorless system (4 lenses) and that already weights plenty, especially with a tripod.) And if we are talking video features the Sony is the better option if you can work around the overheating and rolling shutter. (Which is entirely possible) 

 

Also if you are planning to get a gimbal you can get a more lightweight one for the Sony. Thats a major benefit imo, size. 

 

thanks for the feedback guys!

 

i tried both camera yesterday and sony win's my heart no doubt when i compared it side by side or maybe a6500 will see if budget permits lol

[MrOptimistic]

10 minutes ago, cc143 said:

AF capability isn't important, unless you are in front of the camera, when MF becomes impossible. also, the slow motion can be helpful to add broll to your vlogs and make them more interesting (although most vloggers I've seen tend to overuse the thing.) 

That is too definitive a statement, in the real world nothing is that simple. The 80d has many advantages over the a6300, both on paper and the real world, as does the a6300 over the 80d. Certainly, neither is by far better or worse than the other. 

The tradeoff is between the two issues you have mentioned, as well as the battery life, lens availability and cost and AF capabilities vs. the 4k and 120p capabilities of the a6300.

 

The weight issue is obviously a clear win for the sony, unless for some reason you need to compensate for the battery life with additional batteries. The 80d is also a better stills camera. The Sony also has zebra and peaking (which could potentially be added with ML in the future to the Canon though.

 

OP: The case for the Sony has obviously been made above, although only 1 person has actually given viable advantages. I will add adapting lenses 

 

The truth is the choice isn't that simple. I'll make the case for DLSRs, not the 80d though.  I would rather go with the cheaper and very capable 800d (the 80d is only marginally better at this point.) I would spend the savings on a used 17-50mm f/2.8 from sigma or tamron and get the 10-18mm as well, which is the better focal length for vlogging. 

 

Allow me to elaborate: 

1. Glass Glass Glass, on the canon side its cheaper, there's more choice and there is a viable used market. 

2. Battery life, the Sony can charge over usb (i.e. battery bank). However, you still have to have a battery in camera and there are scenarios where being tethered even to a battery bank is not possible. With the Canon you can have only one additional battery rather than carry and individually charge 3-4 which is impossible when travelling. 

3. The weight and size issue is quite mitigated with the 800d, since its only 150g more than the sony and aps-c glass is not that heavy unless you go crazy. 

4. Touch articulating screen, you won't think of how useful it is when vlogging until you actually get it.

 5. It's better value for money.

6. No overheating issues.

7. More reliable/ durable. If you are travelling with it a lot, that's quite important. DSLRs can take much more of a beating than cscs. 

8. The Canon smartphone app is amazing, gives you loads of capability and is much less of a hustle than the Sony's (I used to have the a6000). It allows you to control everything form the app! 

 

Another thing, don't invest in the camera body invest in the system. Camera technology changes all the time, lenses, flashes and anything else you might need that is specific to your camera. The Sony ecosystem has come a long way, but I don't think its there yet. Canon's ecosystem has been here for years, it gives you way more choice and capability at this time. Sony will probably improve, but you are buying now, not in 2-4 years. If your budget was higher and you were looking at the a6500, perhaps this would be a different conversation. 

very well explained my friend thanks for the time writing those but for now i think i will stick to sony a6300 the articulating isn't much a big deal to me cause i will do mostly short film not vlogging sorry if i got you confused, i prefer the weight of the mirrorless considering my gf will use it also and lastly i think the 35mm 1.8 oss can satisfy my needs for now.

 

i just hope my budget permits the a6500 so problem solved ahaha.

 

 

[cc143]

4 hours ago, MrOptimistic said:

very well explained my friend thanks for the time writing those but for now i think i will stick to sony a6300 the articulating isn't much a big deal to me cause i will do mostly short film not vlogging sorry if i got you confused, i prefer the weight of the mirrorless considering my gf will use it also and lastly i think the 35mm 1.8 oss can satisfy my needs for now.

 

i just hope my budget permits the a6500 so problem solved ahaha.

 

 

At that point I would also look at the fuji x-t2 and x-t20, I find they way more compelling than the sony lineup at this point and much more enjoyable to shoot. 

[xQubeZx]

5 hours ago, MrOptimistic said:

very well explained my friend thanks for the time writing those but for now i think i will stick to sony a6300 the articulating isn't much a big deal to me cause i will do mostly short film not vlogging sorry if i got you confused, i prefer the weight of the mirrorless considering my gf will use it also and lastly i think the 35mm 1.8 oss can satisfy my needs for now.

 

i just hope my budget permits the a6500 so problem solved ahaha.

 

 

Really if you are happy thats probably good. How you use the camera will be more important than what camera you have. If the Sony fits thats good. (The 35 1.8 is said to be a very nice lens)