A good $1,000 DSLR for shooting low light video?

[ehzool]

I want to buy a new camera that is good at shooting in low light. I'm making music videos that are kind of like this guy's -

Except my Nikon D3100 isn't anywhere near as good as his camera is.
Are there any good DSLR cameras/lenses I can get that are very good in low light for around $1,000?

 

[robbins.photo]

I want to buy a new camera that is good at shooting in low light. I'm making music videos that are kind of like this guy's -

Except my Nikon D3200 isn't anywhere near as good as his camera is.
Are there any good DSLR cameras/lenses I can get that are very good in low light for around $1,000?

What sort of lens are you using? Thing is that you can get a little bit better low light by upgrading the body, but the differences will be slight at best until you step up to full frame, and those are all going to be above $1000. However you might be able to get significant improvement in your lowlight performance depending on what lens your using by purchasing a faster lens.

 

[ehzool]

I want to buy a new camera that is good at shooting in low light. I'm making music videos that are kind of like this guy's -

Except my Nikon D3200 isn't anywhere near as good as his camera is.
Are there any good DSLR cameras/lenses I can get that are very good in low light for around $1,000?

What sort of lens are you using? Thing is that you can get a little bit better low light by upgrading the body, but the differences will be slight at best until you step up to full frame, and those are all going to be above $1000. However you might be able to get significant improvement in your lowlight performance depending on what lens your using by purchasing a faster lens.

The lens I use is the lens that came with the camera. AF-S NIKKOR 18-55mm
The thing is with my camera, I'm pretty sure when you change the ISO, it doesn't affect the video at all. I took 2 videos in the same lowish kind of light and compared them side by side 100 vs 3200 ISO and there's no difference at all.
Do you think a different lens would help?

 

[RoyalCaptures]

If you have the money, Philip Bloom did a review on this, he says "It's the best low-light video camera on the market right now."

Instagram
Sony Alpha 7 - Price Comparison - Buy Cheap in Australia

 

[KmH]

I took 2 videos in the same lowish kind of light and compared them side by side 100 vs 3200 ISO and there's no difference at all.
Do you think a different lens would help?

What shooting mode was the camera set to?
If you change the ISO but let the camera change the lens aperture you should get a video that has the same exposure..

Yes, a different "faster" lens would help.
A "fast" lens has a wider maximum lens aperture that lets in more light. The extra light allows using a lower ISO and/or a faster frame rate.

When shooting video, the frame rate determines the camera shutter speed.
Movies, shot on film or as video, are a series of still photos shot at and displayed at a frame rate of 25 frames per second (fps) or faster.
The faster the frame rate the faster the shutter speed is.

You'll also want to be aware of if the camera you choose has a rolling shutter or a global shutter if you intend to move the camera as you shoot.
Rolling shutter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You will also need a variety of other camera accessories so you can do follow focus, a rear LCD hood or an external display, a video tripod with a fluid head, a camera slider or 2, etc.

Shooting video is a lot more involved than shooting stills.

But - get a used Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3K 16.05 MP Digital Single Lens Mirrorless Camera with 3-Inch OLED - Body Only (Black)
A used - Sigma 19mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)
And a - Sigma 30mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)

 

[ehzool]

I took 2 videos in the same lowish kind of light and compared them side by side 100 vs 3200 ISO and there's no difference at all.
Do you think a different lens would help?

What shooting mode was the camera set to?
If you change the ISO but let the camera change the lens aperture you should get a video that has the same exposure..

Yes, a different "faster" lens would help.
A "fast" lens has a wider maximum lens aperture that lets in more light. The extra light allows using a lower ISO and/or a faster frame rate.

When shooting video, the frame rate determines the camera shutter speed.
Movies, shot on film or as video, are a series of still photos shot at and displayed at a frame rate of 25 frames per second (fps) or faster.
The faster the frame rate the faster the shutter speed is.

You'll also want to be aware of if the camera you choose has a rolling shutter or a global shutter if you intend to move the camera as you shoot.
Rolling shutter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You will also need a variety of other camera accessories so you can do follow focus, a rear LCD hood or an external display, a video tripod with a fluid head, a camera slider or 2, etc.

Shooting video is a lot more involved than shooting stills.

But - get a used Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3K 16.05 MP Digital Single Lens Mirrorless Camera with 3-Inch OLED - Body Only (Black)
A used - Sigma 19mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)
And a - Sigma 30mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)

I'm on Manual settings and ISO is not set to auto, the video always looks the same. I've looked on YouTube for D3100 video settings videos and everybody in the comments believes ISO does nothing for video too. :\ That really sucks.
So the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3K is good in low light? I've seen some quality tests and it looks amazing in daylight, just curious about low light.

 

[KmH]

As mentioned, for only $1000 you won't get the best low light performance because that requires a full size image sensor.

Full size image sensors cost about 4 times more to make than APS-C size image sensors, because fewer full size image sensors can be made on a wafer of silicon.
Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

 

[ehzool]

As mentioned, for only $1000 you won't get the best low light performance because that requires a full size image sensor.

Full size image sensors cost about 4 times more to make than APS-C size image sensors, because fewer full size image sensors can be made on a wafer of silicon.
Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

Alright. I understand. But that camera you mentioned looks good. The low light quality tests are much better than the one I have now. Especially since you can actually change the ISO for video.

You linked two lenses and put the word "and". Do I need both?

 

[KmH]

Probably.

 

[bif]

When shooting video, the frame rate determines the camera shutter speed.
Movies, shot on film or as video, are a series of still photos shot at and displayed at a frame rate of 25 frames per second (fps) or faster.
The faster the frame rate the faster the shutter speed is.

Not necessarily so. The frame rate may dictate how slow the shutter speed can go, at 25 frames per sec you can't set a shutter speed slower than 1/25th sec, but you can go as high as the shutter can be set. Probably won't look very good as faster shutter speeds will tend to cause action to "strobe" some.

I filmed hummingbirds recently at 24fps, at 1/60th sec motion blur looked very natural, but I was using the same camera to shoot stills where the shutter needed to be at 1/500th for the effect I wanted. Sometimes when switching back to video I forgot to reset the shutter to 1/60th, at 1/500 it partially froze the motion of the wings. Looked far better at 1/60th.

1/60th is somewhat close to the 1/48th film makers used to get with a rotary shutter that had a 180 degree cutout. 1/50th would be almost identical to that 1/48th motion blur but in NTSC regions the power line freq is 60Hz and 1/50 can be enough "out of synch" if artificial lighting is in the scene. Resulting "flicker" and "banding" can ruin a take. It's worse with flourescents and CFLs, it hit me bad on one project.

In PAL regions 1/50th would be the preferred shutter for motion picture work, being in closer synch with 50Hz power line frequency.

You will also need a variety of other camera accessories so you can do follow focus, a rear LCD hood or an external display, a video tripod with a fluid head, a camera slider or 2, etc.

Feasibility of "follow focus" would depend on lenses. Many DSLR lenses are "focus by wire" with no direct mechanical connection, makes use of follow focus gear not consistent. Rear LCD hood or "loupe" with 2.5x magnification could be very useful, tripod with video fluid head might be almost mandatory (good set of carbon fiber legs with something like the Manfrotto 501 or 701 head would work). A camera slider could be added when the need began to establish itself.

Shooting video is a lot more involved than shooting stills.

But - get a used Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3K 16.05 MP Digital Single Lens Mirrorless Camera with 3-Inch OLED - Body Only (Black)
A used - Sigma 19mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)
And a - Sigma 30mm f2.8 DN Lens (Micro FT)

A GH3 body would be an excellent choice, in motion picture mode with exposure mode set to Manual, CONSTANT PREVUE set to ON, and EXPO.METER set to ON he can change all 3 exposure controls (shutter, aperture, and ISO) independent of each other and not only would they each have an effect but CONSTANT PREVUE would show him that effect both in the EVF and on the LCD.

I'm seeing used GH3 bodies for as low as $700 now.

But I would not recommend those Sigma lenses. The Lumix 20mm f1.7 and Olympus 45mm f1.8 would be way far better choices as they are both much, much more superior low light performers.

All that being said, my guess is that a DSLR was not used in the making of that video. The ability of the camera to constantly keep focus while moving, often swiftly, suggests a higher end camcorder. The camera op was doing essentially the same continuous move, circling over and over.

The OP could, with acquired lighting perception, and photography skill duplicate some of the look of that video with something like the GH3 and the right lenses.

I frequently run the ISO on my GH3 at 3200 and 6400. If you get the exposure right you don't see much "noise" even at 6400.

 

[Scatterbrained]

I want to buy a new camera that is good at shooting in low light. I'm making music videos that are kind of like this guy's -

Except my Nikon D3100 isn't anywhere near as good as his camera is.
Are there any good DSLR cameras/lenses I can get that are very good in low light for around $1,000?

The look of that video isn't from having "low" light, it's from how the set is lit. Notice the lamp on the piano, even brightness across the shade with no hotspot. That should tell you that it's not really contributing to the scene. What I'm seeing, just from the opening few seconds, are the floods in the background behind the piano and a larger, softer lightsource camera right by the singer. The lighting has a high contrast ratio, but that doesn't mean it's low light.

 

[runnah]

Lol that was probably shot with a RED camera system which runs in the tens of thousands. not to mention tons of light gear.

When I was learning the thing I was told the most was that the hardest scenes to light were the dark scenes. And counterintuitively they require more lights.

 

[Tailgunner]

I would pick up a 50mm 1.8D for $75-100 and see if that helps first. Obviously it's not a solve all, you really need a full frame sensor body which starts out around $1600 and some lightning equipment but I think you will see some noticeable improvements with the 50mm 1.8D.

 

[unpopular]

Black Magic Pocket Cinema. I have literally no idea why this option is not discussed more frequently. It is far less expensive than a DSLR and is much, much better suited for video. New they run about 1000, used about 800.

If you are interested in only doing video, do not get a DSLR. Rather a dedicated cinema camera that can shoot raw.

 

[JulienMassie]

Lol this video is super light blasted dude, actually to make this you would need to buy light.
Its by the huge contrast of hard light that this style is achieved.