First Camera dilemma

[Tsagaro]

Recently i've decided to take on cinematography and i am currently looking for a camera that's gonna help me take my first steps towards that. I've been working as a video editor for quite a while and i've heard different opinions about what equipment or brand i should go for. After some searching, i initially decided to buy a canon T7i, due to the fact is noob-friendly, has quite decent overall specs, it has the option of 1080p 60fps , large variety of lenses and for a decent price of 650 euros with the kit lens. However, i was offered to be lent some money to go buy the A7ii, at the price of 1300 euros with the kits lens, hoping i manage to earn money from it and achieve more things, creative wise. What's the best choice in this situation? Is it worth picking A7ii, instead of T7i for this price range? Note the only camera i've used is a HDR-XR150 sony handycam.

[cc143]

You don't get anything apart from the Full frame sensor with the sony, an a7s would be a different story for a videographer, but, the FF sensor alone I believe is trumped by the DPAF and touchscreen of the t7i, those features coupled with the excellent and considerably cheaper lens selection make it optimal for you to go for the t7i instead. 

 

Now if the camera you were considering was something like the a6500, which has a decent enough in video AF system, a touchscreen and 4k recording, its a different story. In fact, it might be best for you to get that instead. 

 

What you should also consider is glass. If you are serious about it and see yourself expanding in the future, Canon's L glass is much more versatile as it can be attached to Canon's cinema line, cheaply adapted to other cameras like the FS7 and mounted on RED etc. So it might be worthwhile getting the Canon just so you can invest in Canon glass for the future if anything, given ofcourse 4k isn't important to you. Note that the same can be done with something like the a6500, which to my knowledge wors fairly well with adapters, and even the a7ii (although adapter performance is quite crap on that). 

 

However, since you aren't getting a touchscreen, 4k, proper AF performance or Dual card slots with the A7ii, and glass is considerably more expensive, I'd go with the Canon over the a7ii (again if an a6500 were in the running its a different story). 

 

The truth of the matter is that the t7i is more camera than most beginners can handle and I don't see a reason why yu should spend any more money on the body. If you do end up getting the loan you mentioned, you are better off spending it on some quality glass instead, like a Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS over the kit lens and get yourself something like a prime (50 1.8) and a 10-22 or something similar, as well as a couple fo accessories like a mic system and a nice tripod. Spending your money there is way more worthwhile than buying an a7ii. 

 

Also keep in mind the a7ii is due for a refresh, which will probably include a larger battery, a touchscreen (albeit probably limited in comparison to the t7i) and 4k recording, so if you can wait for it, although timeline is uncertain, it might be a better option. 

[Tsagaro]

A sony 6500 would be nice, but it goes a little out of budget. Would the sony 6300 be any good as a replacement? I've seen it has almost equal capabilities except the rolling shutter is quite bad.

[cc143]

As I said before, spend less money on the body and invest in glass rather than the opposite, it will give you much more capability than going from a 600d to a RED. Having an expensive camera with a crappy lens (especially that 16-50mm Sony) is much more limited than a good enough camera with good versatile glass. You can buy a new camera once you make some money off this. 

 

Invest in the important stuff first. 

 

The a6300 is fine yes, but if you are then buying the cheapest most crappy lens on the market it makes no difference what sensor its in front of, the rolling shutter will be the least of your problems. 

[Tsagaro]

Alright, thanks a lot for the input.

[D13H4RD]

Second the notion of spending not a lot on the body and focusing on the glass.

 

The glass is what makes that sensor work and it's always worth it to get better quality glass. 

 

Also note that when you're buying a camera system, you'll effectively be locked into that ecosystem if you plan to get new glass and more attachments. Choose wisely.

[AkiraDaarkst]

13 hours ago, Tsagaro said:

A sony 6500 would be nice, but it goes a little out of budget. Would the sony 6300 be any good as a replacement? I've seen it has almost equal capabilities except the rolling shutter is quite bad.

Both the A6500 and A6300 should have similar rolling shutter issues.  The main improvement of the A6500 is the camera setting to change what the camera does when the sensor overheats (i.e. an override to what it does by default in the A6300) and addition of a better implementation of S&Q motion mode.

[xQubeZx]

15 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Both the A6500 and A6300 should have similar rolling shutter issues.  The main improvement of the A6500 is the camera setting to change what the camera does when the sensor overheats (i.e. an override to what it does by default in the A6300) and addition of a better implementation of S&Q motion mode.

I think they added the overheating option in the A6300 via firmware too.