Under 1,000 Dollars

[TECamp]

I am starting Youtube Video's and I am building a workstation computer/area for Livestreaming. I will be making frequent videos so I was wondering what the best video camera was to get for under 1,000 dollars with accessories?

[bob345]

I am starting Youtube Video's and I am building a workstation computer/area for Livestreaming. I will be making frequent videos so I was wondering what the best video camera was to get for under 1,000 dollars with accessories?

do you care about having interchangeable lens's? There are a good few options in that range.

[TECamp]

do you care about having interchangeable lens's? There are a good few options in that range.

I was looking at the Nikkon D5300 pack here http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-Camera-18-55mm-55-200mm/dp/B00KVO93IK/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443819393&sr=1-2&keywords=Nikkon+d5300

 

Do you think that would be worth it and would it record good youtube videos for me of me?

[bob345]

I was looking at the Nikkon D5300 pack here http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-Camera-18-55mm-55-200mm/dp/B00KVO93IK/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443819393&sr=1-2&keywords=Nikkon+d5300

 

Do you think that would be worth it and would it record good youtube videos for me of me?

if you are going the dslr route for video, i would go with a canon equivilant as they have better features when it comes to video. You can use a firmware like magic lantern and get many extra features like raw recording , zebras, and focus peaking. I would recommend a bundle like this with a good mic as good audio is almost even more of a necessity than good video.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Creator-18-55mm-VIDEOMIC-Sandisk/dp/B0125UM58C/ref=sr_1_9?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443821045&sr=1-9&keywords=canon+t5i

for support i would go with a tripod like this one

http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-67-Inch-Video-Camera-Tripod/dp/B00CEH7VG8/ref=sr_1_3?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443821267&sr=1-3&keywords=amazon+basics+video+tripod

 

If you can afford it and want a very nice all in one option, this sony camcorder could be a very good option too as it has outstanding image stabilization and 4k video.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Recording-FDRAX33-Handycam-Camcorder/dp/B00R5LH9G0/ref=sr_1_11?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443820513&sr=1-11&keywords=sony+camcorder

[ALwin]

if you are going the dslr route for video, i would go with a canon equivilant as they have better features when it comes to video. You can use a firmware like magic lantern and get many extra features like raw recording , zebras, and focus peaking. I would recommend a bundle like this with a good mic as good audio is almost even more of a necessity than good video.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Creator-18-55mm-VIDEOMIC-Sandisk/dp/B0125UM58C/ref=sr_1_9?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443821045&sr=1-9&keywords=canon+t5i

for support i would go with a tripod like this one

http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-67-Inch-Video-Camera-Tripod/dp/B00CEH7VG8/ref=sr_1_3?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443821267&sr=1-3&keywords=amazon+basics+video+tripod

 

If you can afford it and want a very nice all in one option, this sony camcorder could be a very good option too as it has outstanding image stabilization and 4k video.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Recording-FDRAX33-Handycam-Camcorder/dp/B00R5LH9G0/ref=sr_1_11?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1443820513&sr=1-11&keywords=sony+camcorder

 

Canon not only has better implementation of video compared to Nikon, Canon lenses are also cross compatible with other non-Canon cameras that use EF-mount if one day you want to switch or upgrade.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/459993-looking-for-a-dslr-under-750/?p=6176106

 

Now I'm not saying Nikon cameras are bad for video, the latest models are a big improvement over the older models.  But Nikon has been known to be inconsistent with the quality of their videos while Canon tries to keep the user experience more or less consistent.  Additionally Canon has a few third-party "add-ons" like Magic Lantern and keeps their system relatively open compared to Nikon which is very closed.  But yes, you can also record good video with Nikon.

 

Put it this way:

• Nikon is good enough if you don't plan to accessorize too much or have friends who also have Nikon gear you can trade/share
• Canon is better for people who plan to expand later on

Either of them or other cameras like Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc. are good enough if all you need is a camera body, lens and microphone to record video.  However if you're thinking about become a professional video producer, choose your gear carefully. But of course you also need to learn a lot of other things besides gear to become such a professional.

 

And many Sony or Canon camcorders are good, you can save yourself a lot of money if you go this route.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Camcorders/ci/1871/N/4294548093

 

I am starting Youtube Video's and I am building a workstation computer/area for Livestreaming. I will be making frequent videos so I was wondering what the best video camera was to get for under 1,000 dollars with accessories?

 

There is however two important things you need to consider for your intended use of video:

• battery life
• recording limits

Photo cameras do not come with an AC adapter, while video cameras do.  So if you plan to record or even do a live broadcast (e.g. live broadcasting an MMO tournament that lasts like 2 hours) that will last a couple of hours, the battery that comes with a photo camera may not be sufficient.  So it will be better to power the camera via an AC adapter, and photo camera AC adapters can be expensive.

 

Additionally, a Nikon or Canon DSLR has to have video mode/live view activated to be recording or previewing video.  The cameras have a power save feature built in and after a certain number of minutes that mode will turn off automatically.  Recording video internally onto the memory card you will face file size limits and possible recording time limits (mainly due to EU tax regarding video cameras), so if you are planning to record or do a live broadcast of some event that lasts sometime and you cannot afford to pause every 20 or so odd minutes to start recording again, a camcorder is a better choice as it is is designed to be primarily a video camera and will keep recording as long as the memory card has space and the camera has power.

[Dw136]

Video doesn't matter as long as it's 1080p and lite well. Your phone + a 3 point lighting set up will give you a better video than a DSLR that's blowing out the window and crushing the shadows on your face. Invest in lights! 

EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, invest in a good audio solution. People can tolerate a video shot on a potato. If there is hissing, popping, and clipping in your audio people will immediately turn it off. Good audio is WAY more important for live streaming and YT videos than the image. Invest in a good cardioid mic, a pop filter, good pre-amps, and deadening material to cancel out echos and outside noise. 

 

Please don't rely on the craptastic mic built into the camera you're just setting yourself up for failure. Bad audio is one of the easiest ways to see who know's what they're doing or doesn't. I'm not going to watch you if you sound terrible. 

[Captain_Slow]

Panasonic GH3

 

get one used.

[Lockless]

Go for a Canon rebel series and invest on audio like what @Dw136 said. You can have some of them most pixelated video around, but if it sounds like I can just listen to it like a podcast, then thats what I'm bound to stay in. But thats just me.

[Texhnlyze]

I am starting Youtube Video's and I am building a workstation computer/area for Livestreaming. I will be making frequent videos so I was wondering what the best video camera was to get for under 1,000 dollars with accessories?

 

Are you only going to use the camera inside your house? or are you also going to be doing outdoor filming?

 

Are also going to be extensively editing your videos? Because if not, then I would get a cheaper body then get a good lens like a 35mm f1.8 or 50mm. I don't like using Kit lenses because it's actually not sharp. For example, you get a d5300 with a 18-35mm kit lens, your camera might be 24mp but with a kit lens, it will only be 9mp-10mp. The quality of your video actually depends on your lens and editing skills and not with the body. The rest, I would spend on lights, a good wireless and wired external mic, tripod, ND filters, software and many more.

 

I have nothing against Magic lantern but I had a friend that broke his 5DMkiii. I guess he was just very unfortunate. But only 1-5% gets that.

[bob345]

 I don't like using Kit lenses because it's actually not sharp. For example, you get a d5300 with a 18-35mm kit lens, your camera might be 24mp but with a kit lens, it will only be 9mp-10mp.

Not true with modern lenses. Most modern lenses even kit lenses are incredibly sharp.

 here is an example

 

This photo was taken with my canon 24-105 f4 L lens on a t5i.

White Huracan by Tauss ., on Flickr

 

And this was taken with my 18-55 kit lens on the same t5i.

 

corvette z06 2 by Tauss ., on Flickr

 

Both are quite sharp and one costs 4x more

[Texhnlyze]

Not true with modern lenses. Most modern lenses even kit lenses are incredibly sharp.

 here is an example

 

This photo was taken with my canon 24-105 f4 L lens on a t5i.

White Huracan by Tauss ., on Flickr

 

And this was taken with my 18-55 kit lens on the same t5i.

 

corvette z06 2 by Tauss ., on Flickr

 

Both are quite sharp and one costs 4x more

 

How about taking the same subject with those lens to have a real comparison? Your kit lens is not even comparable to your 24-105mm but it looks like it's comparable to you.

[bob345]

How about taking the same subject with those lens to have a real comparison? Your kit lens is not even comparable to your 24-105mm but it looks like it's comparable to you.

You would be surprised how close they are in image quality. Since you dont seem to believe me, tell me which one of these was taken on my kit lens and which one was taken on my 24-105 l lens and why you think so. identical settings on both shots. 

 

 

[ALwin]

snip

 

snip

Both of you are in your own ways more or less correct.

 

If you go to a website like DXO Mark which does a lot of complex tests to give people a good idea of the quality of a lens and camera, you can see that their measurements indicate that the sharpness of a lens is not always equal to the MP count of a camera sensor.  And this has to do with the quality of the glass used in the lens, the nano coatings applied by the manufacturer, the accuracy in polishing and shaping the lens, etc.

 

Some examples: various 50mm lens on a 36MP Nikon D800E

Sigma: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sigma/50mm-F1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Nikon-mounted-on-Nikon-D800E__814

Nikon: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4G-mounted-on-Nikon-D800E__814

Zeiss: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Carl-Zeiss/Carl-Zeiss-Macro-Planar-2-50mm-ZF2-Nikon-mounted-on-Nikon-D800E__814

You can see that while the D800E has a 36MP sensor, DXOMark gives these lenses a sharpness value equivalent to 21-23 megapixels.

 

Sharpness is a subjective quality attribute of an image or a lens. Sharpness indicates the visually perceived quality of details of an image or details reproduced by a lens. It is associated with both resolution and contrast of reproduced details (within an image or by a lens).

The DxOMark score for Sharpness is based on the Perceptual Megapixel (P-Mpix) concept that weights the Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) of the lens with the human visual acuity. Read more about Perceptual Megapixels.

 

However in what I call "real world usage" do we really share full 36MP size photos (if you have a camera with such a high MP sensor) on the web when you post on (e.g.) Flickr, Facebook, email attachments, etc.?  Are you actually looking at the photo on a display that has a full 36MP resolution?  Most people have 1080P monitors which are roughly 2MP, some of 1440P and 4K monitors that have at most a resolution of roughly 8MP.  And it was only within the past couple of years have we seen displays on the market that are termed "retina displays" or "HiDPI" with higher pixel density than normal making it harder to notice the individual pixels on the monitor.  (E.g. I have a 24" 1920x1200 monitor at home, and I can easily notice the jaggedness of individual pixels when I draw certain shapes in a software such as Corel Painter).

 

While I think what DXO Mark does in testing all the cameras and lenses that they can get their hands on is a wonderful thing, I also think it makes people worry too much about these technical details and can prevent them from being creative.