best low light DSLR (for shooting video) to day for under $1500?

K

killmaster

Active member
I've heard talk of the Pentak K5 and gh2 being very good. Also maybe the Nikon D5100?

I want to be able to shoot impromptu interviews in low light and have decent visual quality. Decent meaning without distracting gain. Low light meaning in just average room light or as low as dingy but not too dark bars etc...

thanks for any tips...

Greg K.
 
killmaster said:
I've heard talk of the Pentak K5 and gh2 being very good. Also maybe the Nikon D5100?

I want to be able to shoot impromptu interviews in low light and have decent visual quality. Decent meaning without distracting gain. Low light meaning in just average room light or as low as dingy but not too dark bars etc...

thanks for any tips...

Greg K.
Click to expand...


The GH3 is supposed to have improved low light, but it is just now arriving and it's $1299. I really think most of these cameras are quite capable of doing what you are looking for, but the best thing to do IMHO- Buy the best one you can afford and still have enough money for a couple of fast lenses to allow for better ability to shoot without cranking up the ISO too far. I am looking for something as well for around that price range...
My list includes
1.) The D5100 - Although you have to work with this camera in a different way to get control over the exposure, it is just $464 at Adorama body only, leaving quite a bit of cash for lenses. Also Nikon has a 35mm and 50mm G series for just a couple hundred each- both 1.8. The other pros of the D5100 are that it will shoot video in any mode, it has the articulating screen, and built in time lapse functions. Watch this video for the setting ISO tips..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=o9lx7Hj6dzY
2.) The GH2 - Around $650. Pros include working evf in video mode, articulating screen, very little moire/aliasing, high bit rate hacks available if that's your thing.
Cons might be the gamma shift that happens on the LCD when entering record vs what live view is showing prior. It also is not as sensitive AFIK as the APSC size cams..which makes sense, it's a smaller sensor.(full manual controls)
3.) The T3i - Articulating screen, just $599 body only, some cheap fast lens options readily available. Also the 3x zoom function is WAY more interesting than people give it credit for- way less moire/aliasing in this mode, and at the 3x setting no quality degradation (maybe a touch soft) Meaning...if you go this way, plan on getting an ultra wide in your set of lenses to make the most of the 3x zoom mode....it really is an awesome thing to be able to shoot a scene that could potentially be ruined otherwise. Watch this video for a demo (full manual controls)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=AixwZupTyeA
4.) The NEX 5R - Small, 1080P 60 mode, good in low light, also a very inexpensive option. (full manual controls)
5.) The D7000 - Most expensive on the DSLR list, but it's worth a look- the D5100s video mode without having to do all the tricks...other than setting your aperture before entering live view. Other settings can be dialed in as you please for video
6.) The 60D - Also more expensive than the others...it's got the t3i video mode without the zoom feature, but WITH the 1/3 ISO settings. So worth mentioning.
7.) And last...the GH3- might end up being by far the best of the bunch with high bit rate video options on board, improved DR over the GH2, the HDMI MIGHT be clean....but it's just been released and fairly expensive for body only.

I guess the point would be to price out a whole kit and keep in mind the pros and cons of each and go from there! Decide what your budget can handle vs what you get in return and good luck!
 
thanks pulpfiction! this is very helpful. I was just assuming the T3i would not be good in low light since I have a T2i and it looks terrible in low light. Or I don't know how to set it properly. I do already have several good Canon lenses...

That 3x zoom feature on the T3i looks interesting but I swear I could still see the moire effect even though it was more subtle. In any case, thank you so much for this list and information you've spelled out here. It is a great help.

I just saw a comparison video on the FS100 and Blackmagic. Looks incredible! And another that compared the GH2 with the FS100 and 5D Mark III. GH2 seemed to hold up pretty well up to ISO 3200...
 
You aren't going to get a better low-light camera for under $1500 than the T2i that you already have.
 
thanks nothing. Very good to know! I haven't had very good success in low light so far but maybe I can find a way to improve it. checking out NEX5n....
 
the nex5n does look amazing in low light from what I can see in videos online. Might be just what I need. thanks Cory and pulp fiction007.

trying to see what the diff. is between the NEX-5R and NEX-5N. hmm......
 
back to considering the GH3 at this point. The NEX-5R is very impressive for what I need but if I'm going to be investing in money for lenses for a all new system, I'd going to seriously consider investing int he Panasonic lenses instead. Plus the GH3 seems more mature for video overall...
 
killmaster said:
the nex5n does look amazing in low light from what I can see in videos online. Might be just what I need. thanks Cory and pulp fiction007.

trying to see what the diff. is between the NEX-5R and NEX-5N. hmm......
Click to expand...

The 5r is to the 5n essentially like a t3i is to a t2i. Just a minor upgrade, both should have the same image quality.
 
I have a NEX-5N. At ISO 1600 it looks great. But ISO 3200 is definitely not usable, the noise in the shadows becomes horribly posterized (worse than on any other camera I've seen) and you have to crank up the NR as high as you can in post. Awesome camera, for a very low price, but a 5D3 or D800 (both at 6 times the price) will get you A LOT further for low light (the D800 needs NR in post, but cleans up quite nicely; the 5D3 does the same, but in-camera). I'd try to rent or borrow one of those. Maybe the D600 will be close to the D800?
 
I heavily, heavily suggest neat video for cleaning up noise. Although, if we're talking pushing colors around after the fact, yeah all of the cameras/codecs are going to be tough especially in the shadows. But at least as far as noise removal, neat video can do wonders removing noise. Makes the t2i and others really usable. But the macro blocking and color pushing is still going to be an issue with all these cameras I'm guessing

Of course I'm more of a newb, but I'm just excited I found neat video and am really happy with it :)
 
Invest your $1500 in Neat Video noise reduction and portable lighting rather than yet another camera you will be replacing in a year.
 
David,

Portable lighting probably isn't going to help in the situations the OP described:

"I want to be able to shoot impromptu interviews in low light and have decent visual quality. Decent meaning without distracting gain. Low light meaning in just average room light or as low as dingy but not too dark bars etc..."

But no harm in picking up a copy of Neat Video ;).
 
killmaster said:
thanks pulpfiction! this is very helpful. I was just assuming the T3i would not be good in low light since I have a T2i and it looks terrible in low light. Or I don't know how to set it properly. I do already have several good Canon lenses...
Click to expand...

Be sure you know how to use your camera in low light. Maybe post some test shots including frame rate, ISO, lens, focal length, f stop, etc. Once you're satisfied that you are using the camera to the best of its ability, get a copy of Neat Video and test it out.

If those still don't work, then look at getting a Canon camera with better lowlight capabilities. I emphasized "Canon" b/c you already have some nice Canon lenses, so it would be foolish to change bodies now, esp. since the non-Canon offerings aren't going to have an advantage in low light anyway, LOL!
 
Last edited:
I find M43 cameras have a slight advantage in low light due to the crop, of all things, being able to have very useable DOF at high speed (f0.95, f1.4, etc). If the GH3 cured some of the noise issues at higher ISO, it will be something to see.

Frankly any one of the cameras mentioned would do a fine job in your scenario, though.
 
The NR software I use is Magic Bullet Denoiser 2. Cheaper than Neat Video, and it works too. Version 1 was an absolute nightmare (constant crashes), but 2 hasn't given me any issues so far.
 
It's weird to me that nobody has mentioned lenses. For better or best low-light performance, you got to have a great lens for use in low light.

For the purpose below

killmaster said:
I want to be able to shoot impromptu interviews in low light and have decent visual quality. Decent meaning without distracting gain. Low light meaning in just average room light or as low as dingy but not too dark bars etc...
Click to expand...

any Canon camera (t2i etc, not to mention 5D2) plus a f1.2 or f1.4 lens will be able to get the job done. Regular room/street lights are typically pretty bright for a f1.2/1.4 lens that you should rarely need to go over ISO 1600. As for distracting noise, if you don't go over ISO 1600, you'll rarely have to worry about it. If you start with footage with reasonably low noise, you don't need to invest in a noise reduction specialty software.

My suggestion is to invest in a fastest lens to take care of your low-light scenarios.

Additionally, if you eventually get a camera with great performance at extra high ISO settings such as today's 5D3 (or a future rebel model):
5D3 + f1.2/f1.4 lens => shoot everything visible in the dark. And if you don't care too much about noise, they can capture more than eyes can see in darkness.


Digital cameras come and go. Software constantly becomes obsolete. But a great lens remains great even after many years' service down the road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top