Should i buy a DSLR or a MIRRORLESS for better VIDEO features?

[runnah]

Things like zebra bars, focus peaking and false color are things that I do wish were included from Canon but by adding magic lantern I was able to get those things.

Thus confirming exactly what I'm saying. Using Magic Lantern is not exactly what I would qualify as "easy" for a beginner...

Most entry level video cameras have none of those features.

 

[waday]

I've just drawn his attention to the fact that shooting video on a photo camera is harder than with a real video camera.

Sounds good. I hope that's helpful for the OP.

 

[table1349]

6 Famous Examples of the DSLR Canon 5D Mark II in Hollywood Tales From The Argo

 

[Microbois]

Boo, DSLR video is great and gets better every generation. I disagree with everything you said.

I don't mean to be critical Runnah, but before snapping my rear at the first occasion, maybe you should take your time and read all my responses in the light of the OP's initial request.

When I said DSLR video is not that great compared to a real video camera, some of the problems I've mentioned plague all the DSLR, but obviously, I was looking at the bottom end of the spectrum to be in-line with the OP's budget. If the OP had mentioned having between 5K$ to 10$K to blow in his camera/video gear, then sure, we could find him some high-end DSLR gear that minimizes the issues associated with DSLR videography. I never said DSLR videography is impossible or sucks at the quality, I just said it was more complicated to shoot video on a DSLR than on a real video camera. Once again, think about a beginner, not a guy who spent his life shooting with video cameras and moving to DSLR videography. Who can prove me wrong on this affirmation? Heck, let's cite myself :

You may also want to know that DSLRs aren't video cameras. They sure shoot video, but it's pretty obvious that this function is an aftertought more than anything else. In video mode on a DSLR, the AF is hesitant and noisy, and worst, some cameras won't even let you change aperture while you are filming. Sound recording on a DSLR often results in crappy results too, so you will need a separate sound recorder if you want high quality. Filming with a DSLR is a lot of hard work, and far from easy. Be ready to pull focus manually and cut your scenes in short sequences. I don't want to burst your bubble, but just want to let you know that the best video camera remains a native video camera.

Is there anything in there, considering a 600$US DSLR that is not accurate?

If you want the best of both worlds for a low budget I would strongly suggest the Canon 70d.

The OP has a budget of 500$-750$AU which is not even 600$US. You propose the Canon 70D which sells for about 950$US body only, and with no lens.

6 Famous Examples of the DSLR Canon 5D Mark II in Hollywood Tales From The Argo

Now gryphonslair99 adds to the mix with a link that would prove that I'm wrong. I never said you cannot shoot films on a DSLR, I'm well aware of all those examples cited in the link. The Canon 5DMk II has an extensive list or movies, TV shows, and documentary where it's been used. It's beside the point. Please remember the OP has less than 600$US to invest in the "best option for take excellent quality PHOTO and VIDEO". The Canon 5D MkIII cost 2.5K$ alone with no lens.

With such totally off topic contributions, not to mention being flamed by people who just can't put things into context, I'm not surprised newbies come here, ask a question, see all this rooster fighting, then say : "oh, those guys are sick, I'm out of here...". Come back on Earth and keep the OP's request in the back of your mind at all time when you are replying. If you feel 600$ is not enough of a budget, then tell him, but gheez, don't flame me for responding to his questions. If you want to flame me, or teach me how wrong I am, well, open up a new discussion, and put all your bashing in there. Don't worry, with over 30 years of experience in the field, both film and digital, magazine writer and photographer, I can take it, and it's not a few fanboys with their toys who will make me flinch.

I'm just trying to be helpful here and give back a little bit to those who are trying to get into this hobby and don't know where to start. I posted over 160 messages so far, and they were all responses to messages being asked. I contribute here. I'm used to the BS going on in discussion forums, as I've been member of forum long before people knew about the Internet (early 90's actually), but it looks like this place here is not any different.

 

[astroNikon]

Aren't DSLRs and Mirrorless still limited to 20 minutes for video, compared to a video camera which isn't ? I haven't kept up with that, but something the OP may want to know about as it requires some forethought on shooting video.

 

[runnah]

Aren't DSLRs and Mirrorless still limited to 20 minutes for video, compared to a video camera which isn't ? I haven't kept up with that, but something the OP may want to know about as it requires some forethought on shooting video.

Basically if it can record more than 29mins at a clip it's considered a video camera and faces higher import taxes. Silly really.

 

[runnah]

Boo, DSLR video is great and gets better every generation. I disagree with everything you said.

I don't mean to be critical Runnah, but before snapping my rear at the first occasion, maybe you should take your time and read all my responses in the light of the OP's initial request.

When I said DSLR video is not that great compared to a real video camera, some of the problems I've mentioned plague all the DSLR, but obviously, I was looking at the bottom end of the spectrum to be in-line with the OP's budget. If the OP had mentioned having between 5K$ to 10$K to blow in his camera/video gear, then sure, we could find him some high-end DSLR gear that minimizes the issues associated with DSLR videography. I never said DSLR videography is impossible or sucks at the quality, I just said it was more complicated to shoot video on a DSLR than on a real video camera. Once again, think about a beginner, not a guy who spent his life shooting with video cameras and moving to DSLR videography. Who can prove me wrong on this affirmation? Heck, let's cite myself :

You may also want to know that DSLRs aren't video cameras. They sure shoot video, but it's pretty obvious that this function is an aftertought more than anything else. In video mode on a DSLR, the AF is hesitant and noisy, and worst, some cameras won't even let you change aperture while you are filming. Sound recording on a DSLR often results in crappy results too, so you will need a separate sound recorder if you want high quality. Filming with a DSLR is a lot of hard work, and far from easy. Be ready to pull focus manually and cut your scenes in short sequences. I don't want to burst your bubble, but just want to let you know that the best video camera remains a native video camera.

Is there anything in there, considering a 600$US DSLR that is not accurate?

If you want the best of both worlds for a low budget I would strongly suggest the Canon 70d.

The OP has a budget of 500$-750$AU which is not even 600$US. You propose the Canon 70D which sells for about 950$US body only, and with no lens.

6 Famous Examples of the DSLR Canon 5D Mark II in Hollywood Tales From The Argo

Now gryphonslair99 adds to the mix with a link that would prove that I'm wrong. I never said you cannot shoot films on a DSLR, I'm well aware of all those examples cited in the link. The Canon 5DMk II has an extensive list or movies, TV shows, and documentary where it's been used. It's beside the point. Please remember the OP has less than 600$US to invest in the "best option for take excellent quality PHOTO and VIDEO". The Canon 5D MkIII cost 2.5K$ alone with no lens.

With such totally off topic contributions, not to mention being flamed by people who just can't put things into context, I'm not surprised newbies come here, ask a question, see all this rooster fighting, then say : "oh, those guys are sick, I'm out of here...". Come back on Earth and keep the OP's request in the back of your mind at all time when you are replying. If you feel 600$ is not enough of a budget, then tell him, but gheez, don't flame me for responding to his questions. If you want to flame me, or teach me how wrong I am, well, open up a new discussion, and put all your bashing in there. Don't worry, with over 30 years of experience in the field, both film and digital, magazine writer and photographer, I can take it, and it's not a few fanboys with their toys who will make me flinch.

I'm just trying to be helpful here and give back a little bit to those who are trying to get into this hobby and don't know where to start. I posted over 160 messages so far, and they were all responses to messages being asked. I contribute here. I'm used to the BS going on in discussion forums, as I've been member of forum long before people knew about the Internet (early 90's actually), but it looks like this place here is not any different.

Fine I will call off the dogs, but next time don't make such sweeping generalizations.

 

[Tinderbox (UK)]

I have the Nikon 1 V2, I can Take 1080p video and full 14mp photos at the same time, and a max shutter speed of 1/16000s , It only has an 1" sensor but i love it.

John.

 

[ruanitto__]

Well, i've used couple of really good camcorders in the faculty and for sure they're the best option. My budget though doesn't allow me to purchase one, AND i would like to have a versatile camera that shot both still and video, because i will take stills too for professional use and for fun. That being said, i won't mind to sacrifice some features like zebra, ergonomy or variable zoom for a very good compact and versatile camera that allows me to make everything i need for my indie films/documentaries plus take some awesome still images.

Also, I've been thinking about the future, and maybe i won't stick to DSLRs because my idea is to work more towards video. I think mirrorless is my thing, don't know if i'll change my mind later though...

The a6000 looks awesome for me, and by what i've read it performs everything i need. I think i'll purchase it and later i can upgrade to a top one such as the A7 or A7s, investing in the long term too in matter of lenses, acessories etc. I think for my future indie films it should be a good bet, plus i can get very good stills when i need too. Do you agree with it or no? Any warnings?

 

[ruanitto__]

Also, any reccomendations of other mirrorlesses that can compete with the a6000? I've seen that the Samsung NX500 is awesome too and can shot 4k at 24fps. It's a little out of my budget, but do you think it worth a look?


And geez.. chill out guys! hahaha

 

[Microbois]

I'll repeat myself again, but considering your small budget, the Sony a6000 is the best camera you can get for the money.

Don't get too carried away with 4K video though. It's still too early in the market, and few people have 4K TVs or 4K players, let alone the fact that it takes a good computer to edit 4K footage. By the time you reach a point where you can sell your work in 4K, it will be a couple years from now, and by then, you will have dropped the Sony a6000 long ago. I wouldn't bother with 4K at all. If you just buy the Sony a6000 and make do with the kit lens, then it's very little money invested in a system. Later on, once you gain more experience and camera makers come out with more products, you will still be in a position to change brand without losing on the gear already acquired. Consider your small budget as a first step in photography and videography, just to get your feet wet, and don't lock yourself up into a system.

 

[ruanitto__]

And

I'll repeat myself again, but considering your small budget, the Sony a6000 is the best camera you can get for the money.

Don't get too carried away with 4K video though. It's still too early in the market, and few people have 4K TVs or 4K players, let alone the fact that it takes a good computer to edit 4K footage. By the time you reach a point where you can sell your work in 4K, it will be a couple years from now, and by then, you will have dropped the Sony a6000 long ago. I wouldn't bother with 4K at all. If you just buy the Sony a6000 and make do with the kit lens, then it's very little money invested in a system. Later on, once you gain more experience and camera makers come out with more products, you will still be in a position to change brand without losing on the gear already acquired. Consider your small budget as a first step in photography and videography, just to get your feet wet, and don't lock yourself up into a system.

That's exaclty what i thought about 4k man. Too early for me and in a way, for the world
I'm sticking to the a6000, i'm quite sure this is the best option for what i'm looking for.
Thanks everybody for the precious advice!!

Also, one last question: Would you recommend any lenses or acessories to get along with the camera?

 

[Microbois]

Also, one last question: Would you recommend any lenses or acessories to get along with the camera?

In terms of lenses, only you knows. If you will be shooting landscape, interviews, portrait, interiors, and such, then the kit lens may be enough. It's your needs that will dictate which lens to buy. As far as accessories, aside from the obvious (memory card, camera bag, cleaning material, tripod, etc.), once again, only you can tell us. You may want to add flashes, softboxes, or video lamps for video, then that will add to the cost. Only your needs can dictate what you need to buy, but you need to identify your needs first! If you don't know what to buy, you probably don't need it!

 

[ruanitto__]

Got it. I'll get the camera and have a go with it. I'll probably find what i really enjoy shooting at a point in my way. Thanks a lot!

 

[Tinderbox (UK)]

I had the A6000 and had problem getting the evf and lcd to show the same brightness and colour level, also i found the auto focus not to be as good as other people have said for moving targets, I have seen reviews and a lot of photo taken in high speed continues mode are out of focus.

Also the built in flash blows out portrait/people photo`s so try not to use it, or dial down the power manually.

I will keep my Nikon V2

John.