dslr for beginner

[ConradM]

DSLR cameras that can do video lack some of the important features need to do video well.

Since video is your intended main use, expect to spend extra $$$'s up to a couple of thousand $$$'s on video accessories that you will need to add to whatever DSLR you get.

I mentioned the same thing in my first post. I think the OP may be a bit misguided and being led a bit too far by the Canon and Nikon marketing department. It takes a ton of skill and a lot of extra equipment to use a DSLR to produce good video results.

Here is an example for the OP... Top 5 “Must Have” DSLR Gear for Shooting Video - NextWaveDV

But if you just google "Dslr video must have" you will find tons of information. Basically, the summary is takes thousands of dollars in gear and a ton of experience to make DSLR video work well. For most, a Sony Handycam will do a lot better.

My advice, buy a video camera for video and a camera for stills. FWIW, you can take a still photo with a video camera. It just won't be as good as a dslr can do. On the flip side, you 'can' take video with a DSLR...it just won't be as good as a video camera can do.

Normal video cameras have nothing listed in that link. Just saying.

edit: I think you guys are taking things out of context. The OP simply wants a device that will produce both stills and videos... Working with the OP's budget I would take a DSLR because it will produce better video than a video camera would stills.

 

[Kerbouchard]

DSLR cameras that can do video lack some of the important features need to do video well.

Since video is your intended main use, expect to spend extra $$$'s up to a couple of thousand $$$'s on video accessories that you will need to add to whatever DSLR you get.

I mentioned the same thing in my first post. I think the OP may be a bit misguided and being led a bit too far by the Canon and Nikon marketing department. It takes a ton of skill and a lot of extra equipment to use a DSLR to produce good video results.

Here is an example for the OP... Top 5 “Must Have” DSLR Gear for Shooting Video - NextWaveDV

But if you just google "Dslr video must have" you will find tons of information. Basically, the summary is takes thousands of dollars in gear and a ton of experience to make DSLR video work well. For most, a Sony Handycam will do a lot better.

My advice, buy a video camera for video and a camera for stills. FWIW, you can take a still photo with a video camera. It just won't be as good as a dslr can do. On the flip side, you 'can' take video with a DSLR...it just won't be as good as a video camera can do.

Normal video cameras have nothing listed in that link. Just saying.

edit: I think you guys are taking things out of context. The OP simply wants a device that will produce both stills and videos... Working with the OP's budget I would take a DSLR because it will produce better video than a video camera would stills.

No, that link didn't have anything to do with normal video cameras. It had to do with shooting video with a DSLR and what was required to do it well.

Personally, I don't think I am taking anything out of context. For somebody on a limited budget to purchase a DSLR so they can shoot video is a bad idea. It is a marketing gimmick. The original poster seems to be more concerned about video than he is about photography. With that being the case, I suggest a video camera. If the original poster is more interested in photos, I would suggest a DSLR. There isn't much to be taken out of context. It's more about recommending the right tool for the job.

Personally, I hate video. I can't stand how much the editing software costs. Can't stand how much work is involved in it. Can't stand their stupid little continuous lights. Heck, I shoot next to some of the top videographers in the DFW area just about every weekend. I know what it takes to do good video. A budget and a DSLR are not the right combination.

 

[ConradM]

I mentioned the same thing in my first post. I think the OP may be a bit misguided and being led a bit too far by the Canon and Nikon marketing department. It takes a ton of skill and a lot of extra equipment to use a DSLR to produce good video results.

Here is an example for the OP... Top 5 “Must Have” DSLR Gear for Shooting Video - NextWaveDV

But if you just google "Dslr video must have" you will find tons of information. Basically, the summary is takes thousands of dollars in gear and a ton of experience to make DSLR video work well. For most, a Sony Handycam will do a lot better.

My advice, buy a video camera for video and a camera for stills. FWIW, you can take a still photo with a video camera. It just won't be as good as a dslr can do. On the flip side, you 'can' take video with a DSLR...it just won't be as good as a video camera can do.

Normal video cameras have nothing listed in that link. Just saying.

edit: I think you guys are taking things out of context. The OP simply wants a device that will produce both stills and videos... Working with the OP's budget I would take a DSLR because it will produce better video than a video camera would stills.

No, that link didn't have anything to do with normal video cameras. It had to do with shooting video with a DSLR and what was required to do it well.

Personally, I don't think I am taking anything out of context. For somebody on a limited budget to purchase a DSLR so they can shoot video is a bad idea. It is a marketing gimmick. The original poster seems to be more concerned about video than he is about photography. With that being the case, I suggest a video camera. If the original poster is more interested in photos, I would suggest a DSLR. There isn't much to be taken out of context. It's more about recommending the right tool for the job.

Personally, I hate video. I can't stand how much the editing software costs. Can't stand how much work is involved in it. Can't stand their stupid little continuous lights. Heck, I shoot next to some of the top videographers in the DFW area just about every weekend. I know what it takes to do good video. A budget and a DSLR are not the right combination.

What makes you guys think the OP wants to win an indie film award? :lmao:

 

[Kerbouchard]

What makes you guys think the OP wants to win an indie film award? :lmao:

Sorry, my advice is always based on the assumption that whoever is asking the question wishes to achieve the best results possible, unless stated otherwise.

I hold myself to pretty high standards and whenever I get into something, I want to do it at the very highest level I can.

My advice is predicated on the fact that, if I were interested in video, I would go with a video camera instead of a DSLR.

BTW, I find it amusing that in your signature you list both a DSLR that is capable of video and a video camera. Seems like, based upon your advice, that is a bit redundant?

 

[ConradM]

What makes you guys think the OP wants to win an indie film award? :lmao:

Sorry, my advice is always based on the assumption that whoever is asking the question wishes to achieve the best results possible, unless stated otherwise.

I hold myself to pretty high standards and whenever I get into something, I want to do it at the very highest level I can.

My advice is predicated on the fact that, if I were interested in video, I would go with a video camera instead of a DSLR.

BTW, I find it amusing that in your signature you list both a DSLR that is capable of video and a video camera. Seems like, based upon your advice, that is a bit redundant?

I got the p&s first, then the video camera, long before I got the DSLR. If my sony gives my video camera a run for it's money then it might be going bye-bye.

 

[etnad0]

To the OP, there is one way to solve the video debate. Go to YouTube and watch videos shot on T2i and T3i. They are 1080p which is the highest quality a TV can handle at the moment. Even if you were to buy a Red Epic or the new Canon video camera that shoots 2k-4k (depending on which you get), you would have to downgrade the video to 1080p. I mess around with video as well and you don't need thousands of dollars in equipment as some people keep claiming.

Much like photography, lighting is the key to making great video. Post production is pretty much the next thing. In addition to my T2i, I also have a Panasonic DVX100B which films in SD. Depending on who is using it, it can look like crap or it can look great. The better you have your set lit, the better it will look. Let me also point out that the DVX was the standard for many TV shows until HD started to gain momentum. It was the first SD camera under $5,000 that shot in 24p and my T2i without any editing shoots better video.

If you want both video and photo, go with T2i or T3i, but be aware that there is a 12-15 minute limit. I keep hearing different times, but I've never needed to push it to the limit. Most times in video, your takes will be less than 5 minutes, so it's not a big deal.

 

[ConradM]

Here's a youtube video showing what the sony a33 does for video and specifically it showcases the sony's ability to autofocus while filming.

 

[cepwin]

The Canon T2i is a fine camera. However, I'd also look at the Nikon D3100. It's Nikon's answer to the T2i. I was going to get the T2i but the Nikon just fit my hands better so I went Nikon. You really can't go wrong with either of them. Remember though you're buying into a system as all your lenses, etc. will be for the one your get so when you upgrade you'll likely continue with the brand you start. Some other lessons I learned: SD cards are usually cheaper on-line., Buy a bigger bag than you think you need for the equipment you get....you'll need the extra space for other stuff later on, don't bother with filters at first but always have your lens cap on if you're not shooting and use a lens hood...the kit lens may not come with it but my telephoto lens did. Hope this helps

 

[Ch4ng3]

Thanks everybody. I'm really happy I found this forum, because you are really helping me Thanks everybody.
And sorry for late reply. Busy with the exams ...

I'll check out all the things you mentioned and will let you know how I decided. And if you have any other suggestions or anything that would help, please let me know

 

[etnad0]

I was just looking at the link to the Top 5 Must Haves DSLR Gear and it's kinda funny. I have the LCD viewer and it's not necessary to make a video. It does make the viewfinder much bigger though and they also make those for standard video cameras. Tripod, shoulder rig, LCD monitor, and a run and gun audio recorder such as Zoom are standard on a set regardless of using DSLR or camcorder. The bigger the budget the better the equipment, but everyone agrees that whether it is a camcorder or DSLR the on board sound is not as good as sound recorded separately which is why you see the black and white clapper board when they say action. For my Panasonic DVX, I record with a Sennheiser Mic and a Tascam Mixing Board directly to laptop. I don't record any sound onto the camera accept for the purpose of lining it up later. In fact, you actually need more equipment to record video with a camcorder than a DSLR. One thing you absolutely need with a camcorder is a Redrock Lens adapter which costs several hundred dollars. What do you need it for? You need it to attach camera lenses so you can get DOF. Either way you go, you're going to end up buying camera lenses. A DSLR comes with that built in since it's already a camera. You can just buy lenses if you go DSLR but you will have to spend at least $400 on the Redrock adapter to make a professional looking film with a camcorder. Just figured I'd toss that in there since I know more about making video than I do photography.

 

[Kerbouchard]

I'm definitely not a video guy so I appreciate, and the OP should appreciate your feedback.

I've done a few with my D90, but they were nothing to write home about. Really, only enough to realize how difficult good video is to do with a DSLR.

The only reason I posted that link was because when somebody on a budget is buying a DSLR for video, I think they should know about the other accessories that go with it. There are too many times that the marketing department of camera manufacturers promise the moon and I think sometimes people go into it with too high of expectations without really knowing what they are getting into.

FWIW, I feel the same way about still photography.

I was just looking at the link to the Top 5 Must Haves DSLR Gear and it's kinda funny. I have the LCD viewer and it's not necessary to make a video. It does make the viewfinder much bigger though and they also make those for standard video cameras. Tripod, shoulder rig, LCD monitor, and a run and gun audio recorder such as Zoom are standard on a set regardless of using DSLR or camcorder. The bigger the budget the better the equipment, but everyone agrees that whether it is a camcorder or DSLR the on board sound is not as good as sound recorded separately which is why you see the black and white clapper board when they say action. For my Panasonic DVX, I record with a Sennheiser Mic and a Tascam Mixing Board directly to laptop. I don't record any sound onto the camera accept for the purpose of lining it up later. In fact, you actually need more equipment to record video with a camcorder than a DSLR. One thing you absolutely need with a camcorder is a Redrock Lens adapter which costs several hundred dollars. What do you need it for? You need it to attach camera lenses so you can get DOF. Either way you go, you're going to end up buying camera lenses. A DSLR comes with that built in since it's already a camera. You can just buy lenses if you go DSLR but you will have to spend at least $400 on the Redrock adapter to make a professional looking film with a camcorder. Just figured I'd toss that in there since I know more about making video than I do photography.

 

[tinman84]

Nikon D5100 DX-format Factory Refurbished Digital SLR Camera w/18-55mm VR Lens - 25478B - RitzCamera.comeals for D5100 Nikon

cupon gets this at 618

During checkout, apply 5% off coupon code ETRC25​

 

[manaheim]

I would recommend the camera and lenses that I own because I am emotionally wrapped up in my own choices and you choosing something other than what I have will shatter my fragile ego.

 

[etnad0]

I'm definitely not a video guy so I appreciate, and the OP should appreciate your feedback.

I've done a few with my D90, but they were nothing to write home about. Really, only enough to realize how difficult good video is to do with a DSLR.

The only reason I posted that link was because when somebody on a budget is buying a DSLR for video, I think they should know about the other accessories that go with it. There are too many times that the marketing department of camera manufacturers promise the moon and I think sometimes people go into it with too high of expectations without really knowing what they are getting into.

FWIW, I feel the same way about still photography.

I was just looking at the link to the Top 5 Must Haves DSLR Gear and it's kinda funny. I have the LCD viewer and it's not necessary to make a video. It does make the viewfinder much bigger though and they also make those for standard video cameras. Tripod, shoulder rig, LCD monitor, and a run and gun audio recorder such as Zoom are standard on a set regardless of using DSLR or camcorder. The bigger the budget the better the equipment, but everyone agrees that whether it is a camcorder or DSLR the on board sound is not as good as sound recorded separately which is why you see the black and white clapper board when they say action. For my Panasonic DVX, I record with a Sennheiser Mic and a Tascam Mixing Board directly to laptop. I don't record any sound onto the camera accept for the purpose of lining it up later. In fact, you actually need more equipment to record video with a camcorder than a DSLR. One thing you absolutely need with a camcorder is a Redrock Lens adapter which costs several hundred dollars. What do you need it for? You need it to attach camera lenses so you can get DOF. Either way you go, you're going to end up buying camera lenses. A DSLR comes with that built in since it's already a camera. You can just buy lenses if you go DSLR but you will have to spend at least $400 on the Redrock adapter to make a professional looking film with a camcorder. Just figured I'd toss that in there since I know more about making video than I do photography.

I get it, but honestly, it costs more to shoot with a camcorder. There are tons of accessories out there for camcorders. Just as many, if not more. People on a budget shouldn't be trying to shoot a video until they get everything they need. Look up the "Lovers and Friends Show" first season. That's the perfect example of someone with a camcorder, no mic, bad acting, etc. making a movie on a budget. The script was awesome though lol.

 

[Ch4ng3]

I watched few videos shot on Nikon/Canon/Sony and I'm not really impressed by auto focusing ... I also thought about buying a camera, but although I'd like to make videos, shooting pictures is important too. So first I need dslr to begin with and maybe later, I'll buy a camcorder