Good camera

[orangebeaver45]

I'm in the I wanna be a youtube vlogger phase and I have 400-600 dollars to tastefully spend "waste" can you recommend a good camera with a flip screen and the ability to attach a shotgun mic

 

[Daniel Z.]

I think that the D3400 has one, T5i is nice too

[TubsAlwaysWins]

Do you have a channel yet?

[orangebeaver45]

11 minutes ago, TubsAlwaysWins said:

Do you have a channel yet?

yes

 

[xQubeZx]

Panasonic G7 or the best Canon Rebel camera you can afford. 

[orangebeaver45]

3 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

Panasonic G7 or the best Canon Rebel camera you can afford. 

thats what im dong i underestimated the amount of money i would be making i plan on getting a cannon t7i when it comes out but what lens should i get ive heard good things about 50mm but should i get 10-18 that's what Casey Neistat uses, i plan on vlogging and and want a really wide angle 

[xQubeZx]

9 hours ago, orangebeaver45 said:

thats what im dong i underestimated the amount of money i would be making i plan on getting a cannon t7i when it comes out but what lens should i get ive heard good things about 50mm but should i get 10-18 that's what Casey Neistat uses, i plan on vlogging and and want a really wide angle 

For vloggin the 10-18 is a good cheap wide angle. The 50 is of course good but personally I find a 35 more usedful, especially on the cropped body. 

[cc143]

12 hours ago, orangebeaver45 said:

thats what im dong i underestimated the amount of money i would be making i plan on getting a cannon t7i when it comes out but what lens should i get ive heard good things about 50mm but should i get 10-18 that's what Casey Neistat uses, i plan on vlogging and and want a really wide angle 

Neistat used the 10-22mm, its a much sharper lens, but that is reflected on the price tag. The 10-18mm looks like a good choice for a starter. The 50mm 1.8 STM is also quite nice for the price, amazing actually given the price. 

 

Is the t7i an 800d in european? I don't think that would be in your budget...

[xQubeZx]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

Neistat used the 10-22mm, its a much sharper lens, but that is reflected on the price tag. The 10-18mm looks like a good choice for a starter. The 50mm 1.8 STM is also quite nice for the price, amazing actually given the price. 

 

Is the t7i an 800d in european? I don't think that would be in your budget...

He said he was going to spend more, or that is how I read it. 

 

And imo the 35 1.8 is a better choice for a cropped sensor. The 50 is slughtly to short for a good portrait and too narrow for walk around on an aps-c body in my opinion. 

[cc143]

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

He said he was going to spend more, or that is how I read it. 

 

And imo the 35 1.8 is a better choice for a cropped sensor. The 50 is slughtly to short for a good portrait and too narrow for walk around on an aps-c body in my opinion. 

agreed, however you can get 4 50mms for the price of the 35mm f/2 IS and still have some change left over. 

 

A 50mm is too tight for a walk around even on FF imo. I believe the 35mm equivalent is best, but there's a reason its called the nifty fifty. Only difference is, the new one is actually quite well made. 

 

OP, you could still do what you need with a 750d if you dont want to spend that much. 

[xQubeZx]

3 hours ago, cc143 said:

agreed, however you can get 4 50mms for the price of the 35mm f/2 IS and still have some change left over. 

 

A 50mm is too tight for a walk around even on FF imo. I believe the 35mm equivalent is best, but there's a reason its called the nifty fifty. Only difference is, the new one is actually quite well made. 

 

OP, you could still do what you need with a 750d if you dont want to spend that much. 

Did not realise the 35mm's for Canon was that expensive. In that case I would get the Sigma ART 35mm if you are spending that much. Which makes the 50 1.8 more compelling for its price and solid performance. Maybe look into the 24mm instead. Its really hard to tell unless we have a slightly more solid budget and usecase. Since if he plans to do portraits I'd strongly reccomend a slight longer lens instead of a general purpose one. And for street stuff I'd reccomend a slighty wider one. (If we are talking primes)

[cc143]

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

Did not realise the 35mm's for Canon was that expensive. In that case I would get the Sigma ART 35mm if you are spending that much. Which makes the 50 1.8 more compelling for its price and solid performance. Maybe look into the 24mm instead. Its really hard to tell unless we have a slightly more solid budget and usecase. Since if he plans to do portraits I'd strongly reccomend a slight longer lens instead of a general purpose one. And for street stuff I'd reccomend a slighty wider one. (If we are talking primes)

Yep the sigma art lens is amazing value, its only about £150 more than the Canon 35mm f/2.0 and you can get 3 for what you'd spend on a 35mm 1.4L II.  The 50mm is an exception to the rule, they make cheaper 50mm because they sell well. Nikon I think do a 35mm thats cheaper for DX bodies. 

[xQubeZx]

Just now, cc143 said:

Yep the sigma art lens is amazing value, its only about £150 more than the Canon 35mm f/2.0 and you can get 3 for what you'd spend on a 35mm 1.4L II.  The 50mm is an exception to the rule, they make cheaper 50mm because they sell well. Nikon I think do a 35mm thats cheaper for DX bodies. 

Yea. Both Sony and Nikons 35mm are cheaper. Sure a lot of people think the 35mm for Sony E is expensive but compared to this its not, like at all. 

[mcladrifter]

For vlogs, you're better off using a smartphone or an action camera, Mirrorless/DSLRs aren't made for long video use, also most AF systems suck in video.

[cc143]

1 hour ago, mcladrifter said:

For vlogs, you're better off using a smartphone or an action camera, Mirrorless/DSLRs aren't made for long video use, also most AF systems suck in video.

Canon's APS-C cameras are known to have pretty impressive in video AF, even before the dual pixrl AF that can be found on the 80d/m5 and 5d4. 

 

Also, with some dslr's or cscs you do have the benefit of being able to see at your frame if the screen articulates, You could do that filming on a phone's selfie camera, but you get quite a quality drop from that. Finally, sound recording options are more scarce and usually worse on phones and action cams. Manufacturers have managed to get wind of the video capabilities of dslrs and cscs as well, the a7s is made with video in mind for instance. 

 

A phone or action cam is certainly a less expensive and even more practical option, but, dslr and csc video has taken tremendous strides and unless you are focused in high end video production, the amazing stills capabilities make them a no brainer these days.  

[orangebeaver45]

5 hours ago, mcladrifter said:

For vlogs, you're better off using a smartphone or an action camera, Mirrorless/DSLRs aren't made for long video use, also most AF systems suck in video.

 

4 hours ago, cc143 said:

Canon's APS-C cameras are known to have pretty impressive in video AF, even before the dual pixrl AF that can be found on the 80d/m5 and 5d4. 

 

Also, with some dslr's or cscs you do have the benefit of being able to see at your frame if the screen articulates, You could do that filming on a phone's selfie camera, but you get quite a quality drop from that. Finally, sound recording options are more scarce and usually worse on phones and action cams. Manufacturers have managed to get wind of the video capabilities of dslrs and cscs as well, the a7s is made with video in mind for instance. 

 

A phone or action cam is certainly a less expensive and even more practical option, but, dslr and csc video has taken tremendous strides and unless you are focused in high end video production, the amazing stills capabilities make them a no brainer these days.  

I want to see my self in the lcd and have a shotgun mic  and I do want to do some light photography(one of my family members has made it as an photographer) . And I would pimp out my 6s but it has only 3gb of usable space to record with and the battery only lasts for 45-60 minutes for recording, so i have to bring a portable charger where ever I go. And action camera videos are really hard to watch because of the distortion on the edges.  My big question right now is to get a g7 and ignore the 30 min record cut off and get it for the 4k option or get the t6i rebel which doesnt have 4k but can record as long as i want    

[cc143]

2 minutes ago, orangebeaver45 said:

 

I want to see my self in the lcd and have a shotgun mic  and I do want to do some light photography(one of my family members has made it as an photographer) . And I would pimp out my 6s but it has only 3gb of usable space to record with and the battery only lasts for 45-60 minutes for recording, so i have to bring a portable charger where ever I go. And action camera videos are really hard to watch because of the distortion on the edges.  My big question right now is to get a g7 and ignore the 30 min record cut off and get it for the 4k option or get the t6i rebel which doesnt have 4k but can record as long as i want    

I am under the impression, though I could be mistaken, all video recording on dslrs and cscs have a 29min59sec record time since if they didn't they would be classified as video cameras. So the recording cap should be the same for both.

[orangebeaver45]

Just now, cc143 said:

I am under the impression, though I could be mistaken, all video recording on dslrs and cscs have a 29min59sec record time since if they didn't they would be classified as video cameras. So the recording cap should be the same for both.

i actually just read something and it said that on the g7 the video would cut on uhd but it would take a camera pro to notice it 

[xQubeZx]

6 hours ago, orangebeaver45 said:

i actually just read something and it said that on the g7 the video would cut on uhd but it would take a camera pro to notice it 

I know that at least on some of Panasonics cameras they have managed to get around the 30 min recording. Don't know if it is so for the G7 but it may well be so

[Spawn0202]

Hey

I am canon shooter (5Dmk4 stills)

Canon is not the best in low light situations if you pull up the ISO graining will appear

Sony and Nikon cams are better in low light situations.

Glass is important you have to think about what you want to do ok vlog

But at home or outside light is the factor. Small apertures = low light = low depth of field

I do agree for example the canon EF 50mm F1.8 is not a wide angel lens if you have it on a cropped sensor ( actual it is 50*1,6= 80mm lens ).

I think 35mm is better for you

Think about the weight and the volume of the DSLR a Mirrorless might be a bit more expensive but less weight and volume 

[orangebeaver45]

7 hours ago, Spawn0202 said:

Hey

 

I am canon shooter (5Dmk4 stills)

 

Canon is not the best in low light situations if you pull up the ISO graining will appear

 

Sony and Nikon cams are better in low light situations.

 

Glass is important you have to think about what you want to do ok vlog

 

But at home or outside light is the factor. Small apertures = low light = low depth of field

 

I do agree for example the canon EF 50mm F1.8 is not a wide angel lens if you have it on a cropped sensor ( actual it is 50*1,6= 80mm lens ).

 

I think 35mm is better for you

 

Think about the weight and the volume of the DSLR a Mirrorless might be a bit more expensive but less weight and volume 

 

I have decided on the Panasonic g7 because videos are a higher priority than stills and I have heard that the g7 has phenomenal low light performance    

[Spawn0202]

9 minutes ago, orangebeaver45 said:

I have decided on the Panasonic g7 because videos are a higher priority than stills and I have heard that the g7 has phenomenal low light performance    

That is good let us know how it works for you

[orangebeaver45]

8 hours ago, Spawn0202 said:

That is good let us know how it works for you

I wont be getting it for a few months, but as soon as i get it, will do!