Which camera/s should I buy for travel vlogging? 750D / G7 X Mark II / others?

[Visual Hudson]

I currently have an ancient Panasonic Lumix TZ10.

 

In the family we also have a Nikon D5200 with an 18 - 55mm kit lens. I can usually take this away with me when / if I go away for a day or two, however I'm about to go on an 8 week trip over to the US and so I don't really want to borrow someone else's camera for that length of time.

 

I had ordered a DJI Mavic Pro from Jessops (here in the UK) on finance, however I have since managed to purchase one from a different retailer. Jessops have told me that I can either cancel the finance, or use different a item/s in it's place. So I've been thinking of using the outstanding finance to purchase a new camera for myself.

 

I usually use my TZ10 when attending shows (sports and otherwise) and concerts, as it's got a decent zoom, it's small and compact.

 

I usually take the D5200 when going practically anywhere else, as the quality is far superior in all aspects. I've just never attempted to take a DSLR into a concert / show because I've read about the unlikelihood of being allowed to take them in.

 

So I would like a small compact camera, good in low light, good with fast action, good zoom, whilst obviously also high quality. Portability is also big factor to take into consideration because we are going to be travelling, with that a flip-out screen would be handy but I suppose not a necessity. Video recording is something I also want to be able to do well. 

 

However I also would like the sheer quality that comes from a DSLR, it's versatility; ability to use external microphones, video recording (again), landscape photography, timelapse, etc. I'd love for this to have a better zoom than the D5200 we already have, and that brings me to the point, that if I was to get a camera of my own I'd probably like to get one that's better than the D5200. Don't really see the point in getting two of the same camera. 

 

So after days and days of research and working myself up, I had come to the conclusion it was between these cameras:

Canon EOS 750D (T6I) with a 18 - 135mm IS STM lens at £799.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-750d-digital-slr-18-135mm-is-stm-lens-95334/show.html

 

Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II at £549.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/powershot-g7-x-mark-ii-digital-camera-97892/show.html

 

I had also noticed / was considering:

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ100 at £549.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/panasonic/lumix-dmc-tz100-camera-in-black-97614/show.html

 

Panasonic Lumix DMC- FZ1000 at £589.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/panasonic/lumix-dmc-fz1000-digital-bridge-camera-93162/show.html

 

Canon PowerShot G5 X at £613.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/powershot-g5-x-compact-camera-97413/show.html

 

Nikon D7100 with 18-105mm lens at £899.00:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/nikon/d7100-digital-slr-with-18-105mm-lens-88945/show.html

 

Now my drone was £1359, so I've got that amount to play with. With that amount I could indeed purchase both the 750D & the G7 X but then I wouldn't be able to purchase any accessories to go with the cameras which would be a basic necessity, such as a camera bag, SD cards, an SLR Gorillapod, a Rode mic, a deadcat, etc. I can go slightly over and pay in cash, but I don't really want to go much over if at all. I also can't purchase from any other stores other than Jessops.com, or at least that's the only place I can use to fulfill my finance allowance. 

 

I can't decide which route to take, which camera or cameras to get, if they're even the best deals I can get, are they the best fit for purpose. I know a little bit about photography, video editting and cameras but not enough to make an informed decision. I've already got a Go Pro Hero 5 Black, as well as my Mavic Pro, a OnePlus 3T (which my girlfriend thinks I should use instead of a compact camera, and I'm slightly kiiind-of inclined to agree), and ideally I'd love to have both a compact and a DSLR camera but I just need some help figuring out what on earth to do in this situation and I do need to make a decision in the next few days as I set off in a couple of weeks. 

 

Please help?!

[19_blackie_73]

you could get another lens and take the 5200 with you? what about that route?

and the 750d might have a slightly better af in video, but overall picture quality is inferior to the nikons and the d5200. I'd just get another lens for the nikon, such as the 18-105 or the 18-140mm from nikon, or from sigma/tamron sth.

don't have much experience with the other cameras, so I can't help you on them without research.

[Visual Hudson]

I don't really want to take the D5200 with me. I don't really want to be taking someone else's camera away with me for such a long time, leaving them completely camera-less in the meantime. 

[xQubeZx]

Firstly I would mention the Sony RX100, whichever model you can afford. 

 

If not that one there are a few others I would mention. 

 

• Panasonic G85
• Panasonic G7
• Sony A6300 (may be too expensive, it depends)
• Canon 80D
• Canon 77D
• Canon 760D (I would personally chose this one over the 750D)

These are the DSLR's and mirrorless I would include on this list. I know some are at the top of the budget, it depends on what accessories you want. SD cards are quite cheap but get 2 16gb or 32gb for starters. (Why not larger is that it sucks if you have a card fail with lots of data on it.) 

 

Which I would consider best of the ones above is probably the a6300 and the G85. They both have advanved video features that some of the others may lack. (Flat color profiles which are good for grading, 4k internal, 120fps 1080 and things like that. Quite sure you can tweak how the AF works in video on the A6300 too, dont know about the others) However Canon have however made the 80D and the new 77D very capable. 

 

For low light the a6300 is best, with the canons after I'm quite sure as Panasonic uses m4/3 sensors. For action the a6300 and 80D is the ones that stands out. The a6300 is very compact but its flip out screen is not amazing but you can get an external 5" monitor for example to mount in the hotshoe. 

 

Now, what lenses do you want really? For vloggin most reccomend a wideangle zoom. In that case you won't get much tele. Personally I would probably go with a 24mm equivilent (zoom or not doesnt really matter) and then a fast 35mm or 50mm prime for photos and/or more creative filming. But you could also have a wide angle zoom + a longer lens which gives you some reach. Really, lenses are hard to reccomend without some more guidance on what you want. 

 

Feel free to ask anymore questions about what I wrote as it may be a bit flummy. 

[xQubeZx]

Just checked the price of the a6300 on jessops. Tbh if your accessories will be in the 300 margin I would go with the a6300 hands down. You can either get it with the kit zoom (not that amazing but gets the job done) or another lens that may fit better. However if you don't intend to ever invest in more glass I wouldn't buy the Sony. (Because it will come alive for real when you add better glass down the road.) 

[cc143]

750D (Body only):http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-750d-digital-slr-body-95333/show.html

EF 10-18mm: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/ef-s-10-18mm-f-4-5-5-6-is-stm-lens-90964/show.html

Rode mic: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/rode/videomic-with-rycote-lyre-suspension-system-microphone-98086/show.html

Deadcat: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/rode/deadcat-go-wind-cover-98078/show.html 

Gorillapod: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/joby/gorillapod-slr-zoom-48432/show.html

 

That all comes in to ~£900, I wouldn't get an 18-55 new, its not worth it, a used one is like ~£50 from cex, get one from there with IS. 

 

With the remaining 459, you could either get the g7x and pay a bit more or maybe get a gopro kit? 

 

I also feel I should mention a sony a7 goes for £999 with the 28-70mm at jessops, which always seemed like a steal for a FF camera to me, but the a7ii is considerably better. 

 

Also, for future reference, slrhut I found out today is anywhere from 10-25% cheaper than Jessops, wex etc. they are ridiculously cheaper in comparison actually. a 5d4 in slr hut costs ~as much as a 5d3 in jessops. 

[Visual Hudson]

2 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

Firstly I would mention the Sony RX100, whichever model you can afford. 

 

If not that one there are a few others I would mention. 

 

• Panasonic G85
• Panasonic G7
• Sony A6300 (may be too expensive, it depends)
• Canon 80D
• Canon 77D
• Canon 760D (I would personally chose this one over the 750D)

These are the DSLR's and mirrorless I would include on this list. I know some are at the top of the budget, it depends on what accessories you want. SD cards are quite cheap but get 2 16gb or 32gb for starters. (Why not larger is that it sucks if you have a card fail with lots of data on it.) 

 

Which I would consider best of the ones above is probably the a6300 and the G85. They both have advanved video features that some of the others may lack. (Flat color profiles which are good for grading, 4k internal, 120fps 1080 and things like that. Quite sure you can tweak how the AF works in video on the A6300 too, dont know about the others) However Canon have however made the 80D and the new 77D very capable. 

 

For low light the a6300 is best, with the canons after I'm quite sure as Panasonic uses m4/3 sensors. For action the a6300 and 80D is the ones that stands out. The a6300 is very compact but its flip out screen is not amazing but you can get an external 5" monitor for example to mount in the hotshoe. 

 

Now, what lenses do you want really? For vloggin most reccomend a wideangle zoom. In that case you won't get much tele. Personally I would probably go with a 24mm equivilent (zoom or not doesnt really matter) and then a fast 35mm or 50mm prime for photos and/or more creative filming. But you could also have a wide angle zoom + a longer lens which gives you some reach. Really, lenses are hard to reccomend without some more guidance on what you want. 

 

Feel free to ask anymore questions about what I wrote as it may be a bit flummy. 

 

2 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

Just checked the price of the a6300 on jessops. Tbh if your accessories will be in the 300 margin I would go with the a6300 hands down. You can either get it with the kit zoom (not that amazing but gets the job done) or another lens that may fit better. However if you don't intend to ever invest in more glass I wouldn't buy the Sony. (Because it will come alive for real when you add better glass down the road.) 

 

I've read a few people generally also suggesting the RX100 but it doesn't include a hot shoe for an external microphone I don't believe, nor does it have much in the way of zoom capabilities. I know the G7X doesn't zoom much either, but it does moreso than the RX100 I believe? How does it compare to the A6300?

 

After doing a little bit of research, although I will have to do more, I do quite like the look of the Sony A6300. However I believe it doesn't have any image stabilization in the camera or the lens, which is a slight concern. In my price range, I can afford to get either the 16-50mm kit or the 55-210mm kit, so either a standard or zoom lens. Which I do suppose would be very similar to the D5200 I'm already used to, with the 18 - 55mm lens it has. I was just hoping to be able to zoom more without carrying / purchasing a 2nd lens (which at this price I couldn't afford). On the plus side it does seem more compact than a DSLR, meaning I imagine I would be more likely to get it into events even though it does actually have a changeable lens, Therefore making it a good all-round camera, although I'm not sure how it fares with landscapes as that is something I do definitely like to photograph?

 

You mention it's flip out screen is not very good, why's that? It is a shame it doesn't flip out fully, ie so you can see the screen when looking at the lens.

 

I definitely would be open to purchasing more lenses in the future, however I'd want something to produce quality videos / still whilst I'm away. I do intend to do selfie-style vlogging, as well as tri-pod mounted. I would also like to do timelapses, and as I've said landscape / city-scape photography. I would like to be able to zoom for when we're out doing nature trails or other things that I might not be able to get up close to. I've heard quite a lot saying to get wide-angle for vlogging. I know you say that lenses can be hard to recommend, but how can I help you recommend some? If I can afford some I'm open to having multiple lenses, but with travelling and limited space a jack-of-all-trades would be ideal. 

 

If I got it Body Only, is there maybe any lenses you would recommend?

 

Sorry I need to be running off to work shortly, so I'm going to have to be a bit brief here on out. Please excuse me. 

 

The G85 is not available on the Jessops website. Considering you list it as one of the best options, could you possibly find it? 

 

The G7 I need to look into.

 

The 80D I can get with either the 18-55m kit lens for £1029 or 18-135mm for £1219 leaving me just a little tiny of money for accessories, but I'm definitely open to this suggestion. However after being introduced to the A6300, it's hard to see reason to go for a full size SLR. Particularly as low light is indeed better on the A6300, something which I imagine will help when attending concerts, shows, wrestling, etc. A quick video comparison I found on YouTube did show that the 80D was better for action, but if I can't take it in to a show, it's no good at all is it. 

 

The 77D is on pre-order which is no good to me I'm afraid. 

 

The 760D was also something I had been considering, but didn't know if it was worth the extra expense over the 750D? How about compared to the other options you've listed?

 

Lastly, how do these all compare to the G7X and the 750D? Like why do recommend all these other ones over these two? 

 

2 hours ago, cc143 said:

750D (Body only):http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-750d-digital-slr-body-95333/show.html

EF 10-18mm: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/ef-s-10-18mm-f-4-5-5-6-is-stm-lens-90964/show.html

Rode mic: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/rode/videomic-with-rycote-lyre-suspension-system-microphone-98086/show.html

Deadcat: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/rode/deadcat-go-wind-cover-98078/show.html 

Gorillapod: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/joby/gorillapod-slr-zoom-48432/show.html

 

That all comes in to ~£900, I wouldn't get an 18-55 new, its not worth it, a used one is like ~£50 from cex, get one from there with IS. 

 

With the remaining 459, you could either get the g7x and pay a bit more or maybe get a gopro kit? 

 

I also feel I should mention a sony a7 goes for £999 with the 28-70mm at jessops, which always seemed like a steal for a FF camera to me, but the a7ii is considerably better. 

 

Also, for future reference, slrhut I found out today is anywhere from 10-25% cheaper than Jessops, wex etc. they are ridiculously cheaper in comparison actually. a 5d4 in slr hut costs ~as much as a 5d3 in jessops. 

 

Why do you recommend getting a 10-18mm? That's probably a lot smaller than I was thinking. Would be great for macros, I'm sure, but even with a 18-55 I wouldn't be zooming much at all. Or am I completely wrong?

I'm also skeptical of buying used. If I'm spending all this money, I'd rather buy brand new. Why do you not recommend buying it new? 

 

I do already have a Go Pro Hero 5 Black. Is there any other kit that you're on about that I've maybe missed?

 

Oh now I see what you're saying, I could still get the G7X. Now that is indeed very very tempting!

 

(Edit: I wouldn't be able to get the G7X for 459 unfortunately, as it's £549 not £459. Bummer. Unless I put the extra cash towards it?)

 

Similarly to the A6300 above, I do very much like the look of the A7 and I have heard great things about it. The Mark II would unfortunately be way out of my price range. Is the Mark I that much worse? How does it compare against the A6300? Or how about some of the other suggestions for yourself and xQubeZx?

 

If I had the luxury of shopping elsewhere, I most certainly would. Ideally, as much as I hate laptops, if for instance I had the outstanding finance with Currys or something I'd purchase myself a new laptop to takeaway with me, however this is the only shop I can spend it at. However definitely thank you for that information, and I'll definitely keep it in mind for future purchases as you recommend!

[cc143]

1 minute ago, Visual Hudson said:

 

 

 

I wouldn't personally go with the a6300 due to a number of issues I have read online such as overheating etc. Additionally, I know that sony cameras have appauling battery life and I don't think that would be ideal when travelling. Additionally, the 750d has a flipout touchscreen better in video AF, has a lot more options for lenses, that are considerably cheaper than sony's, especially when used.

 

The 10-18mm is a wideangle and more useful mostly for vlogging since it allows you to capture more of the background and what's going on around you. Casey neistat's go to for instance was the 10-22mm, a more expensive wideanlge. an by the way, no it would be horrible for macro, what you need there is a longer, wide aperture lens with a close minimum focal distance. I also find that most of my images are taken at lower than 50mm on FF and that 24-35mm is mostly what I use when I use my 24-105L and ~20-30mm when using my 17-40mm L. Bottom line is, you can crop into most pictures today without sacrificing so much quality,  you can't always step back though. Also, longer focal lengths are used once or twice in a batch of images unless you shoot sports or wildlife, or in some rare cases portaraits, and for the latter, the 18-55mm would still get the job done. 

 

The 18-55mm is basically the worst lens Canon make. it is versatile, but I always recommend people get a 17-55mm f2.8 instead on APSC, but that is too expensive at this point. Given it's a lens you will shortly want to upgrade and is significantly cheaper used, I like to save the money instead. Now granted, if you buy the thing as a kit, it only costs £60, but its an option. If that's the case, maybe look at this bundle:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-750d-digital-slr-body-18-55mm-is-stm-10-18mm-is-stm-lens-97754/show.html 

 

it includes both lenses at some sort of discount I suppose, or else it wouldn't be bundled I guess. 

 

Some additional advice, don't be afraid to buy used lenses, especially more expensive ones. They are usually built like tanks e.g. 24-70mm, 70-200mm or wideangles mostly used for landscapes e.g. 17-40mm or 16-35mm and you can get then at a good discount usually. This is a good site if you ever need one: https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/ they list each individual offering's specific condition, which is great and they also have shutter counts for camera bodies which is amazing. 

[xQubeZx]

20 minutes ago, Visual Hudson said:

 

 

I've read a few people generally also suggesting the RX100 but it doesn't include a hot shoe for an external microphone I don't believe, nor does it have much in the way of zoom capabilities. I know the G7X doesn't zoom much either, but it does moreso than the RX100 I believe? How does it compare to the A6300?

 

After doing a little bit of research, although I will have to do more, I do quite like the look of the Sony A6300. However I believe it doesn't have any image stabilization in the camera or the lens, which is a slight concern. In my price range, I can afford to get either the 16-50mm kit or the 55-210mm kit, so either a standard or zoom lens. Which I do suppose would be very similar to the D5200 I'm already used to, with the 18 - 55mm lens it has. I was just hoping to be able to zoom more without carrying / purchasing a 2nd lens (which at this price I couldn't afford). On the plus side it does seem more compact than a DSLR, meaning I imagine I would be more likely to get it into events even though it does actually have a changeable lens, Therefore making it a good all-round camera, although I'm not sure how it fares with landscapes as that is something I do definitely like to photograph?

 

You mention it's flip out screen is not very good, why's that? It is a shame it doesn't flip out fully, ie so you can see the screen when looking at the lens.

 

I definitely would be open to purchasing more lenses in the future, however I'd want something to produce quality videos / still whilst I'm away. I do intend to do selfie-style vlogging, as well as tri-pod mounted. I would also like to do timelapses, and as I've said landscape / city-scape photography. I would like to be able to zoom for when we're out doing nature trails or other things that I might not be able to get up close to. I've heard quite a lot saying to get wide-angle for vlogging. I know you say that lenses can be hard to recommend, but how can I help you recommend some? If I can afford some I'm open to having multiple lenses, but with travelling and limited space a jack-of-all-trades would be ideal. 

 

If I got it Body Only, is there maybe any lenses you would recommend?

 

Sorry I need to be running off to work shortly, so I'm going to have to be a bit brief here on out. Please excuse me. 

 

The G85 is not available on the Jessops website. Considering you list it as one of the best options, could you possibly find it? 

 

The G7 I need to look into.

 

The 80D I can get with either the 18-55m kit lens for £1029 or 18-135mm for £1219 leaving me just a little tiny of money for accessories, but I'm definitely open to this suggestion. However after being introduced to the A6300, it's hard to see reason to go for a full size SLR. Particularly as low light is indeed better on the A6300, something which I imagine will help when attending concerts, shows, wrestling, etc. A quick video comparison I found on YouTube did show that the 80D was better for action, but if I can't take it in to a show, it's no good at all is it. 

 

The 77D is on pre-order which is no good to me I'm afraid. 

 

The 760D was also something I had been considering, but didn't know if it was worth the extra expense over the 750D? How about compared to the other options you've listed?

 

Lastly, how do these all compare to the G7X and the 750D? Like why do recommend all these other ones over these two? 

 

 

Why do you recommend getting a 10-18mm? That's probably a lot smaller than I was thinking. Would be great for macros, I'm sure, but even with a 18-55 I wouldn't be zooming much at all. Or am I completely wrong?

I'm also skeptical of buying used. If I'm spending all this money, I'd rather buy brand new. Why do you not recommend buying it new? 

 

I do already have a Go Pro Hero 5 Black. Is there any other kit that you're on about that I've maybe missed?

 

Oh now I see what you're saying, I could still get the G7X. Now that is indeed very very tempting!

 

(Edit: I wouldn't be able to get the G7X for 459 unfortunately, as it's £549 not £459. Bummer. Unless I put the extra cash towards it?)

 

Similarly to the A6300 above, I do very much like the look of the A7 and I have heard great things about it. The Mark II would unfortunately be way out of my price range. Is the Mark I that much worse? How does it compare against the A6300? Or how about some of the other suggestions for yourself and xQubeZx?

 

If I had the luxury of shopping elsewhere, I most certainly would. Ideally, as much as I hate laptops, if for instance I had the outstanding finance with Currys or something I'd purchase myself a new laptop to takeaway with me, however this is the only shop I can spend it at. However definitely thank you for that information, and I'll definitely keep it in mind for future purchases as you recommend!

Okey, firstly I think its best for you to carry two lenses. A lens with a longer zoom is generally a lot larger and has a significant disadvantage in image quality. However there is some options but they often cost a bit more too. 

 

I don't reccomend the A7, it lacks in video features over all the others. Its benefit is the Full frame sensor and better low light but really the A6300 is not that far away in that aspect. The A7ii would be the way to go imo but that is out of the budget. 

 

The A6300's 16-50 kit zoom has OSS (Optical image stabilization) the panasonics are the only ones in this price range that has inbody stabilisation. 

 

I saw @cc143 mentioned a few flaws of the A6300 I forgot to mention. The battery issue is imo not that problematic, just carry two batteries and a large powerbank as you can charge over USB while using the camera. (so just plug in a 10,000 mah powerbank and you have the power of like 8 sony stock batteries) 

 

The overheating is of course a point that should be brought up. What I have heard its occuring when shooting 4K for longer periods of time. But if you don't shoot too many segments longer than 10min in 4K I don't think it is a problem. (during warm weather, I doubt the overheating is as much of a problem during a day with 10 degrees out but)

 

While we are at it, it can get a kind of jello effect at 4K when doing quick pans but that is also something you can work around. Really all cameras will have some kinks and downsides. You will just have to decide what feels best for you and if you can live with them. I personally belive the A6300 is the one that has best image quality but its up to you to decide what flaws you can live with or if you rather go with a Canon. 

 

For action I think the 80D and A6300 will perform very similarly. The flip out screen doesn't go so you can see yourself which is a major downside which may make say an 80D or 760D better. 

 

The difference between the 750D and 760D is that the 760D has more manual controls as buttons and scrolls. Personally I see that as a huge benefit well worht the slightly higher price. If you go with the 760D you can afford some nicer glass which is well worth to consider. What feels more important now, really good body and decent glass/not that much glass, or slightly more simple body with expensive glass. 

 

Lenses are always hard to reccomend but here are a few and why I would chose them. (Both for Canon and Sony)

• Sony 18-105 f/4 (It has good zoom range, relativly sharp, constant aparture of f/4 isn't too large)
• Sigma 30 f/1.4 for Sony E (One of the sharpest lenses you can buy for Sony E, has a very fast aparture of 1.4 that will give you wonderful out of focus, its small and very well priced)
• Sony 10-18 f/4 (Constant aparture, super wide angle, sharp enough, quite small. Quite overpriced though so kinda don't want to reccomend it but its the only wide angle zoom)
• Canon 17-40L f/4 (Constant aparture, nice zoom range on APS-C body, L glass = very well built, can take a beating)
• Canon 10-18 (Cheaper alternative but not as good as the 17-40, native for APS-C bodies)
• Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 (Great lens overall, fast constan aparture, loved by tons of people, quite cheap for what you get)
• Any Sigma ART series lens for Canon (Very sharp, affordable for what you get, often not so large)

There are a few, now I haven't listed any longer zooms since I only know the Sony ones and in that case I would want to reccomend the 70-200 but that ones is waaay to expensive. These lenses are however just some suggestions, most relativly wide or normal zooms that don't have too much tele. 

 

But as I see it now it seems like you are looking at these:

• Canon 80D
• Canon 760D
• Sony A6300

 

[xQubeZx]

34 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I wouldn't personally go with the a6300 due to a number of issues I have read online such as overheating etc. Additionally, I know that sony cameras have appauling battery life and I don't think that would be ideal when travelling. Additionally, the 750d has a flipout touchscreen better in video AF, has a lot more options for lenses, that are considerably cheaper than sony's, especially when used.

 

The 10-18mm is a wideangle and more useful mostly for vlogging since it allows you to capture more of the background and what's going on around you. Casey neistat's go to for instance was the 10-22mm, a more expensive wideanlge. an by the way, no it would be horrible for macro, what you need there is a longer, wide aperture lens with a close minimum focal distance. I also find that most of my images are taken at lower than 50mm on FF and that 24-35mm is mostly what I use when I use my 24-105L and ~20-30mm when using my 17-40mm L. Bottom line is, you can crop into most pictures today without sacrificing so much quality,  you can't always step back though. Also, longer focal lengths are used once or twice in a batch of images unless you shoot sports or wildlife, or in some rare cases portaraits, and for the latter, the 18-55mm would still get the job done. 

 

The 18-55mm is basically the worst lens Canon make. it is versatile, but I always recommend people get a 17-55mm f2.8 instead on APSC, but that is too expensive at this point. Given it's a lens you will shortly want to upgrade and is significantly cheaper used, I like to save the money instead. Now granted, if you buy the thing as a kit, it only costs £60, but its an option. If that's the case, maybe look at this bundle:

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-750d-digital-slr-body-18-55mm-is-stm-10-18mm-is-stm-lens-97754/show.html 

 

it includes both lenses at some sort of discount I suppose, or else it wouldn't be bundled I guess. 

 

Some additional advice, don't be afraid to buy used lenses, especially more expensive ones. They are usually built like tanks e.g. 24-70mm, 70-200mm or wideangles mostly used for landscapes e.g. 17-40mm or 16-35mm and you can get then at a good discount usually. This is a good site if you ever need one: https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/ they list each individual offering's specific condition, which is great and they also have shutter counts for camera bodies which is amazing. 

Agree that the wide angles are nice for vloggin and I do also personally use wide angles a lot. However I love my 60 2.8 (90mm equivilent) for portraits and some landscape stuff. But then I'd say get a wide angle zoom like the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and a 85 1.4 and you are all set. (These are expensive but you can think for the future)

[cc143]

34 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Okey, firstly I think its best for you to carry two lenses. A lens with a longer zoom is generally a lot larger and has a significant disadvantage in image quality. However there is some options but they often cost a bit more too. 

 

I don't reccomend the A7, it lacks in video features over all the others. Its benefit is the Full frame sensor and better low light but really the A6300 is not that far away in that aspect. The A7ii would be the way to go imo but that is out of the budget. 

 

The A6300's 16-50 kit zoom has OSS (Optical image stabilization) the panasonics are the only ones in this price range that has inbody stabilisation. 

 

I saw @cc143 mentioned a few flaws of the A6300 I forgot to mention. The battery issue is imo not that problematic, just carry two batteries and a large powerbank as you can charge over USB while using the camera. (so just plug in a 10,000 mah powerbank and you have the power of like 8 sony stock batteries) 

 

The overheating is of course a point that should be brought up. What I have heard its occuring when shooting 4K for longer periods of time. But if you don't shoot too many segments longer than 10min in 4K I don't think it is a problem. (during warm weather, I doubt the overheating is as much of a problem during a day with 10 degrees out but)

 

While we are at it, it can get a kind of jello effect at 4K when doing quick pans but that is also something you can work around. Really all cameras will have some kinks and downsides. You will just have to decide what feels best for you and if you can live with them. I personally belive the A6300 is the one that has best image quality but its up to you to decide what flaws you can live with or if you rather go with a Canon. 

 

For action I think the 80D and A6300 will perform very similarly. The flip out screen doesn't go so you can see yourself which is a major downside which may make say an 80D or 760D better. 

 

The difference between the 750D and 760D is that the 760D has more manual controls as buttons and scrolls. Personally I see that as a huge benefit well worht the slightly higher price. If you go with the 760D you can afford some nicer glass which is well worth to consider. What feels more important now, really good body and decent glass/not that much glass, or slightly more simple body with expensive glass. 

 

Lenses are always hard to reccomend but here are a few and why I would chose them. (Both for Canon and Sony)

• Sony 18-105 f/4 (It has good zoom range, relativly sharp, constant aparture of f/4 isn't too large)
• Sigma 30 f/1.4 for Sony E (One of the sharpest lenses you can buy for Sony E, has a very fast aparture of 1.4 that will give you wonderful out of focus, its small and very well priced)
• Sony 10-18 f/4 (Constant aparture, super wide angle, sharp enough, quite small. Quite overpriced though so kinda don't want to reccomend it but its the only wide angle zoom)
• Canon 17-40L f/4 (Constant aparture, nice zoom range on APS-C body, L glass = very well built, can take a beating)
• Canon 10-18 (Cheaper alternative but not as good as the 17-40, native for APS-C bodies)
• Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 (Great lens overall, fast constan aparture, loved by tons of people, quite cheap for what you get)
• Any Sigma ART series lens for Canon (Very sharp, affordable for what you get, often not so large)

There are a few, now I haven't listed any longer zooms since I only know the Sony ones and in that case I would want to reccomend the 70-200 but that ones is waaay to expensive. These lenses are however just some suggestions, most relativly wide or normal zooms that don't have too much tele. 

 

But as I see it now it seems like you are looking at these:

• Canon 80D
• Canon 760D
• Sony A6300

 

I'd go with the 760d as well, but its the same camera with a top lcd and scroll wheel, I wouldn't get it if it was my first camera i.e. I'd never used a better camera before and if it was much more expensive. Now, after 8 years with the 50d I wouldn't even look at a camera without them, unless size was an important issue. 

 

Thje 17-40 on APSC is great as an all rounder, an alternative to the 18-55, not so good for a wideangle. I think the 10-18mm is a safer choice. 

 

You can get extra batteries, you can get power banks, it doesn't mean you can always keep them charged when travelling, my anker needs about 5-6 hours to get to 50%, which is half the capacity. Also, if you do carry 8 extra batteries (~equivalent of 3 DSLR batteries) and a power bank, haven't you forgone the size benefit? Compare that to my 5d (same battery as in the 80d) which can take 1100 shots on one charge and basically go through a 3 day trip with 1 charge, maybe needed. 

 

The 750d and similar dslrs are similarly sized to cscs and have many things going for them. If we were talking going FF for travel, then yes I'd probably say go Sony, but the 750d is better for OPs needs imo, and the cheaper lens aspect is also very important at this point. Don't forget in video AF. 80d takes up too much of the budget and with the 77d and 800d out, there's no point in getting one. the 800d offers much better value, so does the 77d. 

 

Also, and this is just personal opinion, the a6300 form factor makes it a pain to shoot for longer periods, a dslr is much more ergonomic, and that buffer is hell!, take 5 shots continuously and you can't use the camera for over 30 secs afterwards, it makes a huge difference! 

 

EDIT: looking at prices for the 800d and 760d, the 760d is only £20 more than the 750d, I thought it'd be more, in that case get whichever you prefer. 

 

The 800d is quite expensive right now, no doubt because it just came out. I don't think it's worth that much over the 750/60d. 

 

A gopro hero 5 session is ~£300  if you'd like to get that as well. That means you have evrything covered and could get a bag, battery and a couple of sd cards as well, maybe even a travel tripod? 

[xQubeZx]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

You can get extra batteries, you can get power banks, it doesn't mean you can always keep them charged when travelling, my anker needs about 5-6 hours to get to 50%, which is half the capacity. Also, if you do carry 8 extra batteries (~equivalent of 3 DSLR batteries) and a power bank, haven't you forgone the size benefit? Compare that to my 5d (same battery as in the 80d) which can take 1100 shots on one charge and basically go through a 3 day trip with 1 charge, maybe needed. 

 

The 750d and similar dslrs are similarly sized to cscs and have many things going for them. If we were talking going FF for travel, then yes I'd probably say go Sony, but the 750d is better for OPs needs imo, and the cheaper lens aspect is also very important at this point. Don't forget in video AF. 80d takes up too much of the budget and with the 77d and 800d out, there's no point in getting one. the 800d offers much better value, so does the 77d. 

 

Also, and this is just personal opinion, the a6300 form factor makes it a pain to shoot for longer periods, a dslr is much more ergonomic, and that buffer is hell!, take 5 shots continuously and you can't use the camera for over 30 secs afterwards, it makes a huge difference! 

As you said, its personal preference. I personally preffer the A6300, I have small hands too so I think it fits quite nice in the hand. Battery is also very dependent on how you do and travel. You will get like 400 shots out of the Sony. I feel usally its quite fine with batteries but sure, is he heading somewhere where he won't have electricity for several days it may not be so good with that smaller battery. 

 

Oh, I did mention that a powerbank could be equal to 8 batteries, no sane person carries 8 batteries. We are talking more like 2 or 3 + powerbank and they are tiny. And the size benefit is still there, its tiny. 

 

But lets help this dude now then. I think the 760D + good lenses is the most sensible Canon kit. The extra dials and top LCD on the 760D is well worth the extra. And since he can't get a hand on the 77D or the 800D those are out even though they may have been ideal. 

 

I'm still kinda weak for the Sony but it may be better have some more lenses that he would get with the Canon. (As the A6300 is 850 without lens, 150 cheaper than in Sweden  I should order mine from the UK...)

 

But in that case I would like to say something like this:

• 760D + Sigma 18-35 1.8
• 760D + 10-18 + portrait or tele lens

[cc143]

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

As you said, its personal preference. I personally preffer the A6300, I have small hands too so I think it fits quite nice in the hand. Battery is also very dependent on how you do and travel. You will get like 400 shots out of the Sony. I feel usally its quite fine with batteries but sure, is he heading somewhere where he won't have electricity for several days it may not be so good with that smaller battery. 

 

Oh, I did mention that a powerbank could be equal to 8 batteries, no sane person carries 8 batteries. We are talking more like 2 or 3 + powerbank and they are tiny. And the size benefit is still there, its tiny. 

 

But lets help this dude now then. I think the 760D + good lenses is the most sensible Canon kit. The extra dials and top LCD on the 760D is well worth the extra. And since he can't get a hand on the 77D or the 800D those are out even though they may have been ideal. 

 

I'm still kinda weak for the Sony but it may be better have some more lenses that he would get with the Canon. (As the A6300 is 850 without lens, 150 cheaper than in Sweden  I should order mine from the UK...)

 

But in that case I would like to say something like this:

• 760D + Sigma 18-35 1.8
• 760D + 10-18 + portrait or tele lens

Even if there is electricity where you are going there are other issues with csc's battery life. they eat up more when on standby, I said 8 to roughly get the same battery life as with an 80d with 3 batteries. (My 5d3 will get 1100 on a single battery!). The truth is that if you are out shooting for a day, with a csc, you end up needing 8 batteries, even if you take 400 shots, standby time kills you. A dslr on the other hand, you keep it on and basically takes no battery while you are out and gets 2 times the shots anyway. I love the form factor of the a7 for travel (the a6x00 isn't my bag of tea) and hate the fact that my camera takes up half my suitcase and 3/4 of my weight allowance at best, but in this case, a csc will probably not be suited. 

 

The issue I find with the 760d over the 750d is its £20 mor if you buy the body only version (from jessops). If you went with the bundle I mentioned above, with a 760d you spend £1011.99, while ~£890 with the 750d. I don't think the top lcd and a scroll wheel are worth the extra £120. 

 

Now the 18-35mm is not that versatile, its expensive, a great lens, but not right for someone like OP, 18 is not wide enough for vlogging and 35 not tele enough for anything other than some street stuff. 

 

The 800d can be gotten and is listed at £890, which is too much imo.

 

I'm given to understand the a6500 improved on very important faults of the a6300 as well, some are fairly minor, like the touchscreen, but that thimble sized buffer is a huge deal breaker! 

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

I'm given to understand the a6500 improved on very important faults of the a6300 as well, some are fairly minor, like the touchscreen, but that thimble sized buffer is a huge deal breaker! 

The main things are the 5-axis stabilization, larger buffer size and better implementation of S&Q (slow and quick motion).  Still the same sensor as the A6300, still the same rolling shutter issue so if you want to film while panning the camera or with lots of horizontal movement I suggest filming in a higher frame rate and do some framerate and time remap manipulation in post to reduce the effect of rolling shutter.

[Visual Hudson]

Wow guys, there's a lot here to take in but thanks ever so much for all of your help. I don't even know where to begin haha...

 

I find it funny that I left this thread thinking the A6300 was going to be the camera I would go for, now I've come back and it seems like you guys now don't recommend that I do.

 

I find it interesting also that there has been little, or possibly even no, mention of any Nikons in this entire thread. Not sure whether or not that means anything, but just something that I had noticed. 

 

One of the things I was looking up the other day talked about the overheating on the A6x00 cameras, but "confirmed" that whilst the A6000 did overheat when shooting 4k for long periods, the A6300 did not have this same overheating problem. It appears as though both @cc143 & @xQubeZx however believe that this still is an issue on this newer model. Are you guys saying the source I found was incorrect in it's findings? Guess it's something I should look into myself.

Carrying a powerbank around is something we do anyway, we've got a few of them and we're likely going to have them with us at most times during our travels. We are mostly going to be around technology, but there will be a few days where we will mostly be without so that is something I do need to take into consideration. Charging by USB from a powerbank is a great feature, I love the sound of that. But that being said, if the DLSR batteries last longer anyway than that's even better. 

I do like the idea of carrying around a somewhat smaller camera, as the A6300 appears to be in comparison to a 750D / 760D / etc and I imagine that due to it being smaller, it would also be more likely allowed into shows whereas a DSLR might be considered a "professional camera" which often aren't allowed. Which is kind of why I wanted to get a compact-ish camera and DSLR, but this isn't really the biggest problem in the world. know that I'm fully well going to have to make some sacrifices here, as I don't have all the time in the world nor all of the money in the world. I need to make a decision rather quickly really.

I do like the sound of that deal @cc143 posted with the 750D and two lenses for about £866, especially if you guys believe the 10 - 18mm (or one similar to that) is so important, and I do similarly agree that I probably can't justify spending the extra £121ish pound to get the 760D just because of the top screen and dials. Are they really going to be a big benefit to me? Maybe in the long run, but are they something I can live without? I'm thinking I probably can?

Actually, just throwing it out there, if I did get this particular deal I could still get a G7X Mark II as well... well, for an extra £56. Although it's currently showing as out of stock for home delivery, but "collect at store available, however then when I check for local stores it says:

"Home delivery only - the Item may be in stock in other stores. Please try a New search or look for stores a little further away. "

 

So who knows what's going on with that. Plus, if I did do that, I'd still then be stuck without balance left over for the tripod, extra batteries, memory cards, microphone, case etc. I'd be eating into quite a bit more cash then which I don't really want to do. 

 

My other issue than with carrying a full size DSLR is the amount of storage space required when transporting it from one country to the other; I'm not bothered when I'm in one country, it's just with limited space in luggage / carry on's / etc. But as I've said, that's something that can be easily worked around. It's really a non-issue. It's just something that you have to deal with if this is something you want to do. I accept that. 

The "jello effect" you mention, @xQubeZx, on the A6300 I believe I've heard was also described as the "rolling shutter effect" or something like that. I'm not really sure if that's going to be a huge problem for me. I just watched this video for instance, and I can barely tell notice the problem. Maybe to the trained eye it's more noticable, but I don't think it's something I'm going to lose sleep over. Especially not in comparison to my old TZ10 with this horribly annoying issue when faced with direct sunlight (as can be seen from about 7 minutes, 5 seconds in to the video if the link doesn't work properly).

One of yous do mention that the A6300 is better for smaller hands, which I do kind-of have, but then I've never had any issue whatsoever handling any other DSLRs so I don't really think that's something I'm too worried about. 

One of yous also mention about a Go Pro Hero 5 Session. As I've said, I do already have a Hero 5 Black. I'd thought about getting a 2nd Go Pro but have ultimately decided to spend the cash on getting more feature-filled, better quality camera equipment. 

Sorry I'm getting confused now, but one of you also say that the A7 also lacks in video features in comparison to the A6300. Such as what, if you don't mind me asking? Out of interest really, would it be that much worse? 

 

I was about to ask whether the A6500 that you two described, @cc143 & @AkiraDaarkst, was worth throwing into the mix but having looked at the prices on Jessops' website it is also well and above my price range. £1500 body only, or £2200 with a 16-70mm lens... Yeah not a chance I can afford that unfortunately. 

So all in all, it looks like we're probably down to the 750D or the A6300. If I got the 750D I could get a couple of lenses, whereas if I got the A6300 I'd only be able to get the one 16-50 lens unless I purchased it Body Only and bought a lens separately? 750D gives me more spare cash for accessories, whereas the A6300 gives more spare space when transporting. The 750D is bulkier, but the A6300 has numerous hardware issues...

It's a tough decision to make!

[cc143]

@Visual Hudson 

 

1.       I know for a fact that the a6000 does not shoot 4k, which leads me to believe a typo was made somewhere and the a6300 was confused with a6500 and so on. The truth is that sony cameras all suffer from overheating when shooting video, my a6000 was okish up to 10 minutes, I never filmed anything longer than that. Its battery would probably die before I got to the half hour mark anyway;P

 

2.        I agree, over usb charging is a game changer, and sony have done well to include it, but I still prefer individual longevity of a dslr battery, I just carry an extra wherever I go and have one back where I am staying charging.

 

3.        As I said before, I am spoiled for the past 8 years to have a top screen and dedicated aperture wheel, so I couldn't live without those but if you've never had them its not like you will miss them.

 

4.        The shows issue is a concern, but I hardly think a mirrorless, especially the a6300 would be allowed in just like that either. in that case the g7x should be a better solution. As far as space and weight go, the 750d isn't that big a camera anyway, it is larger than the a6300+16-50mmPZ to be sure but you won't use up half your luggage as I do with the 5d at this point. 

[xQubeZx]

5 hours ago, Visual Hudson said:

Wow guys, there's a lot here to take in but thanks ever so much for all of your help. I don't even know where to begin haha...

 

I find it funny that I left this thread thinking the A6300 was going to be the camera I would go for, now I've come back and it seems like you guys now don't recommend that I do.

 

I find it interesting also that there has been little, or possibly even no, mention of any Nikons in this entire thread. Not sure whether or not that means anything, but just something that I had noticed. 

 

One of the things I was looking up the other day talked about the overheating on the A6x00 cameras, but "confirmed" that whilst the A6000 did overheat when shooting 4k for long periods, the A6300 did not have this same overheating problem. It appears as though both @cc143 & @xQubeZx however believe that this still is an issue on this newer model. Are you guys saying the source I found was incorrect in it's findings? Guess it's something I should look into myself.

Carrying a powerbank around is something we do anyway, we've got a few of them and we're likely going to have them with us at most times during our travels. We are mostly going to be around technology, but there will be a few days where we will mostly be without so that is something I do need to take into consideration. Charging by USB from a powerbank is a great feature, I love the sound of that. But that being said, if the DLSR batteries last longer anyway than that's even better. 

I do like the idea of carrying around a somewhat smaller camera, as the A6300 appears to be in comparison to a 750D / 760D / etc and I imagine that due to it being smaller, it would also be more likely allowed into shows whereas a DSLR might be considered a "professional camera" which often aren't allowed. Which is kind of why I wanted to get a compact-ish camera and DSLR, but this isn't really the biggest problem in the world. know that I'm fully well going to have to make some sacrifices here, as I don't have all the time in the world nor all of the money in the world. I need to make a decision rather quickly really.

I do like the sound of that deal @cc143 posted with the 750D and two lenses for about £866, especially if you guys believe the 10 - 18mm (or one similar to that) is so important, and I do similarly agree that I probably can't justify spending the extra £121ish pound to get the 760D just because of the top screen and dials. Are they really going to be a big benefit to me? Maybe in the long run, but are they something I can live without? I'm thinking I probably can?

Actually, just throwing it out there, if I did get this particular deal I could still get a G7X Mark II as well... well, for an extra £56. Although it's currently showing as out of stock for home delivery, but "collect at store available, however then when I check for local stores it says:

"Home delivery only - the Item may be in stock in other stores. Please try a New search or look for stores a little further away. "

 

So who knows what's going on with that. Plus, if I did do that, I'd still then be stuck without balance left over for the tripod, extra batteries, memory cards, microphone, case etc. I'd be eating into quite a bit more cash then which I don't really want to do. 

 

My other issue than with carrying a full size DSLR is the amount of storage space required when transporting it from one country to the other; I'm not bothered when I'm in one country, it's just with limited space in luggage / carry on's / etc. But as I've said, that's something that can be easily worked around. It's really a non-issue. It's just something that you have to deal with if this is something you want to do. I accept that. 

The "jello effect" you mention, @xQubeZx, on the A6300 I believe I've heard was also described as the "rolling shutter effect" or something like that. I'm not really sure if that's going to be a huge problem for me. I just watched this video for instance, and I can barely tell notice the problem. Maybe to the trained eye it's more noticable, but I don't think it's something I'm going to lose sleep over. Especially not in comparison to my old TZ10 with this horribly annoying issue when faced with direct sunlight (as can be seen from about 7 minutes, 5 seconds in to the video if the link doesn't work properly).

One of yous do mention that the A6300 is better for smaller hands, which I do kind-of have, but then I've never had any issue whatsoever handling any other DSLRs so I don't really think that's something I'm too worried about. 

One of yous also mention about a Go Pro Hero 5 Session. As I've said, I do already have a Hero 5 Black. I'd thought about getting a 2nd Go Pro but have ultimately decided to spend the cash on getting more feature-filled, better quality camera equipment. 

Sorry I'm getting confused now, but one of you also say that the A7 also lacks in video features in comparison to the A6300. Such as what, if you don't mind me asking? Out of interest really, would it be that much worse? 

 

I was about to ask whether the A6500 that you two described, @cc143 & @AkiraDaarkst, was worth throwing into the mix but having looked at the prices on Jessops' website it is also well and above my price range. £1500 body only, or £2200 with a 16-70mm lens... Yeah not a chance I can afford that unfortunately. 

So all in all, it looks like we're probably down to the 750D or the A6300. If I got the 750D I could get a couple of lenses, whereas if I got the A6300 I'd only be able to get the one 16-50 lens unless I purchased it Body Only and bought a lens separately? 750D gives me more spare cash for accessories, whereas the A6300 gives more spare space when transporting. The 750D is bulkier, but the A6300 has numerous hardware issues...

It's a tough decision to make!

I still find the A6300 a good choice, but it is more expensive defentivly. And yes, the "jello effect" is called rolling shutter. Usally most people won't mind but there is some cases where it will be distrubing as in quick pans and so. 

 

And i think that your source about the overheating had messed up and actually meant to compare the a6300 and a6500 as the older a6000 doesn't shoot 4k and haven't had any overheating issues what I have heard of. 

 

Why Nikon isn't mentioned is probably because they aren't as suited for video as either Sony or Canon imo, I also find it better to invest in Canon glass as you can more easily adapt that to different systems. 

 

Video features the original A7 lacks are for example, 4K, 1080 120fps quite sure you won't have any S-log or color profiles and so. So really if going Sony its either A6300, A6500 and the A7s ii for video. 

 

 

But if you can I would suggest to just go to a store in your town and compare the a6300 and the 750D. I think that will help you decide. I think its always a lot easier when having it in your hands. And remeber specs isn't all. How you use it matters a lot more so I don't think you will go wrong with whichever one you choose. 

 

And if you go to a store, I suggest looking at two Sony lenses. The 18-105 and the 16mm 2.8. Why these? Well the 18-105 is a quite nice normal zoom good for general stuff. The 16mm prime is nice as it gives you the wide angle for Vloggin, and its super compact. Can almost garantuee you will get in everywhere with that. 

 

I've used my a5000, a little bit smaller though, almost everywhere on shows and all. I even used a tripod at the top of rockefeller center in NY...got told of though but I snagged my shot before they saw me hehe. 

 

 

 

[xQubeZx]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

@Visual Hudson 

 

 

1.       I know for a fact that the a6000 does not shoot 4k, which leads me to believe a typo was made somewhere and the a6300 was confused with a6500 and so on. The truth is that sony cameras all suffer from overheating when shooting video, my a6000 was okish up to 10 minutes, I never filmed anything longer than that. Its battery would probably die before I got to the half hour mark anyway;P

 

 

 

2.        I agree, over usb charging is a game changer, and sony have done well to include it, but I still prefer individual longevity of a dslr battery, I just carry an extra wherever I go and have one back where I am staying charging.

 

 

 

3.        As I said before, I am spoiled for the past 8 years to have a top screen and dedicated aperture wheel, so I couldn't live without those but if you've never had them its not like you will miss them.

 

 

 

4.        The shows issue is a concern, but I hardly think a mirrorless, especially the a6300 would be allowed in just like that either. in that case the g7x should be a better solution. As far as space and weight go, the 750d isn't that big a camera anyway, it is larger than the a6300+16-50mmPZ to be sure but you won't use up half your luggage as I do with the 5d at this point. 

 

I think you wont have troubles walking in almost everwhere with the a6300 tbh. Just don't show it around to everyone and you will be fine. May even get in with a 750 and a small prime on a lot of places. 

[cc143]

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

I think you wont have troubles walking in almost everwhere with the a6300 tbh. Just don't show it around to everyone and you will be fine. May even get in with a 750 and a small prime on a lot of places. 

maybe a pancake, and tbh, that 24mm stm is pretty nice, I never expected to hope lenses for APS-C were also made for FF. 

 

The a6300 is a small camera given its capabilities, but in concerts etc. most people are "body searched" in the UK at least, so I might be able to get a point and shoot in, but mostly I just use my phone. They might be more lenient than if you carried a bigger dslr, but I think the 750d and the a6300 would be frowned upon the same in that setting. 

[xQubeZx]

3 hours ago, cc143 said:

maybe a pancake, and tbh, that 24mm stm is pretty nice, I never expected to hope lenses for APS-C were also made for FF. 

 

The a6300 is a small camera given its capabilities, but in concerts etc. most people are "body searched" in the UK at least, so I might be able to get a point and shoot in, but mostly I just use my phone. They might be more lenient than if you carried a bigger dslr, but I think the 750d and the a6300 would be frowned upon the same in that setting. 

Yea I donno really. I have managed to get my a5000 in on a lot of places with a pancacke lens but haven't really taken in to a concert but a lot of other more skethy places. The a6300 will be easier but maybe not that much easier. Maybe with a real small pancake lens (or maybe a beautiful Leica lens) and remove the "hood" for the EVF so it looks more like it doesn't have one of those or at least look more like a range finder camera. 

 

And I do agree that that 24 stm lens looks pretty sweet. However the 24 1.4 L lens for Canon. Damn that one looks amazing. 

[cc143]

51 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Yea I donno really. I have managed to get my a5000 in on a lot of places with a pancacke lens but haven't really taken in to a concert but a lot of other more skethy places. The a6300 will be easier but maybe not that much easier. Maybe with a real small pancake lens (or maybe a beautiful Leica lens) and remove the "hood" for the EVF so it looks more like it doesn't have one of those or at least look more like a range finder camera. 

 

And I do agree that that 24 stm lens looks pretty sweet. However the 24 1.4 L lens for Canon. Damn that one looks amazing. 

The EVF is another issue I should mention when doing concert and that sort of photography where lighting is not constant, at some point uou learn how to take your shot despite the fact that your lightmeter is at -3, that is because the ovf has no refresh rate, so you learn to keep up with shifting lighting etc., even in lower ISOs. With an EVF or liveview, that is much harder to do, because you basically have nothing to look at the light through. 

 

I'm starting to be convinced by sigma at this point tbh. the 35mm 1.4 is well praised and their 12-24mm f4 is less than half the price of the Canon 11-24mm f4L! Also, I don't use Sony, but I can see the benefit of a csc, especially for travel and even though Canon should be gracing us with a FF csc in the next 2 years, at the same time, till then a used a7ii would cost what ~£400? The Mc-11 adapter makes sigma a much better value proposition than Canon to people who want to own both systems or are possibly switching in the future.  Only issue I have is they aren't available used, but that 35mm and 12-24mm are amazing for their price, and if they keep this up, the new 24-70mm f2.8 with IS is going to be a game changer. 

[xQubeZx]

4 minutes ago, cc143 said:

The EVF is another issue I should mention when doing concert and that sort of photography where lighting is not constant, at some point uou learn how to take your shot despite the fact that your lightmeter is at -3, that is because the ovf has no refresh rate, so you learn to keep up with shifting lighting etc., even in lower ISOs. With an EVF or liveview, that is much harder to do, because you basically have nothing to look at the light through. 

 

I'm starting to be convinced by sigma at this point tbh. the 35mm 1.4 is well praised and their 12-24mm f4 is less than half the price of the Canon 11-24mm f4L! Also, I don't use Sony, but I can see the benefit of a csc, especially for travel and even though Canon should be gracing us with a FF csc in the next 2 years, at the same time, till then a used a7ii would cost what ~£400? The Mc-11 adapter makes sigma a much better value proposition than Canon to people who want to own both systems or are possibly switching in the future.  Only issue I have is they aren't available online, but that 35mm and 12-24mm are amazing for their price, and if they keep this up, the new 24-70mm f2.8 with IS is going to be a game changer. 

Yup, I just wish Sigma would do more native E mount lenses. They have four so far. I just wish they could make the ART series compatible. However I wouldn't wish too much on Canons FF mirrorless. Not only may it take more time but it will most likley be far beind Sony and Fujifilm at that point. I'm expecting a lot of the gen iii of A7's. We can probably expect dual SD card slots with UHS-II too. The EVF's quality of the A6500 and A6300 with their 120fps refresh and high res. Maybe even better. We can also hope for even more proffesional build quality even though I feel the A7ii's are quite well built already. (But nothing like a 5D IV or D810) 

 

We can probably also expect more "budget" oriented lenses for Sony E. They have covered a lot of the pro glass already now so they just need to fill the budget options as they did with the 85 1.8 recently. Thats where Canon lacks I've heard. Read some reviews of the M5 and they said the main problem is there is no native lenses. You pretty much need to adapt EF glass. That may however change if they make the FF model use EF glass native. Also heard some bad things about build quality, it was said to be more like earlier Sony models with a lot of plastic and less metals and so. 

 

I really think that if you want a good mirrorless now and in the coming years Sony and Fujifilm (With their beautiful X-series lineup with amazing glass. Tbh if I wasn't bought into Sony I would want a XT-2 or XT-1) is the way to go. 

[cc143]

16 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

 

I hardly think its necessary given the MC-11 adaptor gives you all functionality anyway and any E mount lens would be more expensive than EF due to manufacturing processes at this point, and possibly optically worse.

 

Listen the truth is that I am a big fan of the M5, and so is everyone I have seen who has done a hands on review on it. I think its exactly where it needs to be and the screen issue I understand why they did it. In fact, I would argue that a FF M5 would be a slum dunk, I don't know if it would sell well, but I'm sure it would be much better than what people expect, think about it, an a7ii+metabones IV adapter costs what? $1,700? more? You still don't get 4k, no touch screen, the adapter only works half the time, its a smaller sensor so no 42mp a7rii madness and with the exception of the FF sensor and over usb charging, in most cases the m5 is better. add those 2 you have the perfect csc to replace something like the 6d, and even priced at $2,000+$100 EF-EFM adapter (that actually works!), its better value than the a7.  

 

They physically can't make an EF mount csc, its just a stupid rumor, there are actual physical engineering constraints, or else, Canon would just do that years ago with EF-S and beat every other manufacturer with the m3, a much worse camera solely because they have good cheap glass available. 

 

Should we start something like an OT for these discussions? I really enjoy them but we always get off the current topic on a crazy tangent about gear. 

[xQubeZx]

3 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I hardly think its necessary given the MC-11 adaptor gives you all functionality anyway and any E mount lens would be more expensive than EF due to manufacturing processes at this point, and possibly optically worse.

 

Listen the truth is that I am a big fan of the M5, and so is everyone I have seen who has done a hands on review on it. I think its exactly where it needs to be and the screen issue I understand why they did it. In fact, I would argue that a FF M5 would be a slum dunk, I don't know if it would sell well, but I'm sure it would be much better than what people expect, think about it, an a7ii+metabones IV adapter costs what? $1,700? more? You still don't get 4k, no touch screen, the adapter only works half the time, its a smaller sensor so no 42mp a7rii madness and with the exception of the FF sensor and over usb charging, in most cases the m5 is better. add those 2 you have the perfect csc to replace something like the 6d, and even priced at $2,000+$100 EF-EFM adapter (that actually works!), its better value than the a7.  

 

They physically can't make an EF mount csc, its just a stupid rumor, there are actual physical engineering constraints, or else, Canon would just do that years ago with EF-S and beat every other manufacturer with the m3, a much worse camera solely because they have good cheap glass available. 

 

Should we start something like an OT for these discussions? I really enjoy them but we always get off the current topic on a crazy tangent about gear. 

Yup, defentivly going off topic now hah. There is a lot you can discuss about this, defentivly, we just have to remember the images we create is the most important in the end  But gear is also fun, I think so at least but that may because I'm a bit of a tech nerd in all areas. 

[Visual Hudson]

This was the video (from TheCameraStoreTV on YouTube) I found that stated there was no overheating issues with the A6300, but a quick Google search does in fact bring up quite a few people saying it does in fact overheat so you guys must be right there!

@xQubeZx you bring up a good point about going into a store to try and handle them for myself. It's a bit awkward as I work long-night shifts at the moment, but it's definitely something I'm going to see if I can fit in within the next couple of days if any of my local stores have both of them in stock.

It doesn't look like Jessops stock the Sony 16mm 2.8 lens, but they stock the 18 - 105 at £469. So if I got the Body Only at £849, that brings me to the top end of my budget at £1318 which I suppose is do-able although would limit me on accessories. And If I was just to get just one lens like this, why wouldn't I instead go for the 750D with 18 - 135 kit at £799? Would save me £400 right off the bat!

 

Yeah I imagine a 750D would definitely be frowned upon in a standing concert, but I suppose I can try to get away with it at a seated show...

Now you guys are mentioning possibly using a pancake lens? This is completely new to me. What are these? Why would you recommend them? I assume they're small and flat, but what's the difference / benefit over the 10 - 18mm for instance? 

I also don't see this Canon 24mm 1.4 L lens on Jessops website either, I'm afraid.

 

15 hours ago, cc143 said:

The EVF is another issue I should mention when doing concert and that sort of photography where lighting is not constant, at some point uou learn how to take your shot despite the fact that your lightmeter is at -3, that is because the ovf has no refresh rate, so you learn to keep up with shifting lighting etc., even in lower ISOs. With an EVF or liveview, that is much harder to do, because you basically have nothing to look at the light through. 

 

I'm starting to be convinced by sigma at this point tbh. the 35mm 1.4 is well praised and their 12-24mm f4 is less than half the price of the Canon 11-24mm f4L! Also, I don't use Sony, but I can see the benefit of a csc, especially for travel and even though Canon should be gracing us with a FF csc in the next 2 years, at the same time, till then a used a7ii would cost what ~£400? The Mc-11 adapter makes sigma a much better value proposition than Canon to people who want to own both systems or are possibly switching in the future.  Only issue I have is they aren't available used, but that 35mm and 12-24mm are amazing for their price, and if they keep this up, the new 24-70mm f2.8 with IS is going to be a game changer. 

Yeah from here on out you've both totally lost me I'm afraid. I can only understand like every third or so of what you're talking about. Sorry!