Best "practice" camera to buy NOW

D

davidil

Member
Hello,

I'm planning to get a Scarlet when it's out. I'm interested to buy a DSLR camera to shoot motion as "practice" until then.

Whats the "best" camera out there at the moment right now in terms of value / picture quality, something which includes everything you need (or most of it) to shoot out of the box?

Also it's important for me to have DOF as close as possible to 35mm film, so I guess this gets down to sensor size.

Any recommendations? 7D? D90? What cameras should I look into? Is there a clear answer here?

I would add that I want to keep it under $1000... so I think 7D is out.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
davidil said:
Hello,

I'm planning to get a Scarlet when it's out. I'm interested to buy a DSLR camera to shoot motion as "practice" until then.
Click to expand...

The "Scarlet" may not ever be out. I propose you buy the best camera you can afford. If the Scarlet does come out, you will have been producing high quality work.

davidil said:
Whats the "best" camera out there at the moment right now in terms of value / picture quality, something which includes everything you need (or most of it) to shoot out of the box?
Click to expand...

There is no "best". There are only various compromises in "good".

davidil said:
Also it's important for me to have DOF as close as possible to 35mm film, so I guess this gets down to sensor size.
Click to expand...

What 35mm format are you trying to emulate? Full Frame? S35? Anamorphic? 2-Perf, 3-perf, 4-perf? Please be specific. If you don't aren't sure, then perhaps it would be best to back off the comparison to 35mm film since it can mean a multitude of different things.


davidil said:
Any recommendations? 7D? D90? What cameras should I look into? Is there a clear answer here?
Click to expand...

No, there is no clear answer. But there are literally hundreds of posts comparing the various available options. The ones that will probably matter most are the Canon 5D, 7D, 500D, and the Panasonic GH1 (with the hack).
 
When I say 35 I mean FF.

Does anybody knows when the followup for Nikon D90 be out? This camera is out more than two years, they usually upgrade them when it's that long.
 
davidil said:
When I say 35 I mean FF.
Click to expand...
Well, if you want full-frame 35, then that limits your choices substantially. As far as I can think of, the ONLY camera in the world, of any kind, at any price, that you can buy, that shoots video to a "full frame" 35mm sensor, is the 5D Mark II.
 
if you grab a t2i and shoot focal lengths from 18mm to 144m and stay at f5.6
then you will have the same dof and fov of the fixed 2/3 scarlet shooting aperture wide open
 
davidil said:
Between the D90 and t2i, which one would you guys take?
Click to expand...

No one is going to suggest the D90 over the T2i for video I don't think since most say the T2i is the the 7D's video equal. With your budget T2i is the best choice. Add a 50mm F1.8 for like $99 and you have your budget met. Either that or buy without the kit lens and get an F2.8 zoom.

You're not gonna get a Full Frame sensor shooting HD video for near $1,000. Sorry, but the T2i can do great shallow DOF.
 
GH1 since you can get it for around a grand now with the kit zoom. Articulating LCD screen and live viewfinder will be a little more video camera like...unless you really really want monitor out, then go with the t2i. Another reason to go with the Gh1 is that if the scarlet gets delayed again and you decide to go with the AF-100 instead you will have some m4/3 glass already.
 
It becomes a more difficult decision if you knew you were going to be able to get a hackable gh1 (and intended to do so).... if it's not going to be (or be able to be) a hacked gh1.... I personally, would probably choose the t2i if I were going to be using it equally for stills and video, and save the extra couple hundred and put it towards glass or what have you... just my opinion anyways...

If you were doing primarily video, and were going to hack your gh1 (assuming the one you end up with is hackable) then, I would probably be leaning towards the gh1.
 
davidil said:
So it's down to GH1 vs. t2i.... ?

For both stills and video, is there a clear favorite around here?
Click to expand...

Lets not forget that GH1 is a 2x crop and will be hard to get fast wide glass. Also, I don't believe you can use custom picture styles, so I'm not sure how the Dynamic range will compare with T2i using superflat vs GH1 without it. The GH1 has a smaller sensor as well, so DOF won't be as shallow. Not that you can't get shallow depth with it.

However, the hack and the articulating LCD make it quite appealing.....if you get a hackable unit. If not I probably would go with the T2i. I'd consider moving to the GH1 if it were hacked or hackable. The lack or really wide fast glass would have me wanting to keep the T2i though.
 
it is possible to get wide enough on 4/3rd
just shoot with a nikon mount 11-16/2.8 and a DX controller adapter
11mm field of view on gh1 is approx 14mm on a t2i

3998310498_b15d9d3132.jpg
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Well, if you want full-frame 35, then that limits your choices substantially. As far as I can think of, the ONLY camera in the world, of any kind, at any price, that you can buy, that shoots video to a "full frame" 35mm sensor, is the 5D Mark II.
Click to expand...

D3s?

skital said:
Lets not forget that GH1 is a 2x crop and will be hard to get fast wide glass. Also, I don't believe you can use custom picture styles, so I'm not sure how the Dynamic range will compare with T2i using superflat vs GH1 without it. The GH1 has a smaller sensor as well, so DOF won't be as shallow. Not that you can't get shallow depth with it.
Click to expand...

The difference between the T2i and GH1 is actually a lot less than the simple 1.6x vs 2x crop comparison. This is because the T2i crops part of the sensor away to get the 16:9 image, whereas the GH1's sensor is actually wider than most 4/3rds sensors to accommodate the 16:9 video. So aperture/FOV are not that different. And the fact that more lenses can be adapted to the GH1 means it is actually sometimes easier to find fast/wide lenses.

For the OP, I would have to agree with Perrone. Scarlet may never come out, and if it does, it might not be for a few years by which point you'll be wanting to upgrade anyway. Just get the best you can afford now. If your budget limits you to either the GH1 or T2i, I would suggest trying to get your hands on each one and figure out what you prefer more. Some people hate the small size of the GH1 when hand-held, others despise using the t2i's LCD to frame and focus. Each has their pro's and con's and much of it comes down to personal preference.
 
I went with the T2i, and am glad I did. I was just more comfortable with an APS-C sized sensor, and the EOS mount camera, from Canon, then I was with buying a 4/3rds sized sensor, in a mirror less still camera from Panasonic, even though I would be buying it, mostly, for video. With the introduction of the Panasonic AF-100, the 4/3rds sized sensor looks like it is going to be a much bigger player in the game then I imagined. However, I am not interested in doing a GH13 hack, so I am still glad I went with the T2i. From what I can gather, from posts on this forum and others (Not from personal experience) it appears that the T2i may be the better video camera, out of the box, then the GH1. As noted above, the video quality of the T2i is as good as the video quality of the 7D, for about $1000.00 less.
 
David G. Smith said:
it appears that the T2i may be the better video camera, out of the box, then the GH1.
Click to expand...

Actually, 'out of the box' the GH1 is a much better video camera. Rotating LCD, EVF, less rolling shutter skew, live histogram, no moire, no overheating issues, better 60p, continuous autofocus and unlimited record times make it far better for the average user. The T2i, however, is a better digital cinema camera. It works well for those who are willing to take their time and plan each shot to elimintate skew and moire, add a monitor or z-finder and a follow focus, set up custom picture profiles, shoot shorter takes (good for narrative but not events), and basically do all those things that people have been doing on film sets for decades.
 
deltoidjohn said:
Actually, 'out of the box' the GH1 is a much better video camera. Rotating LCD, EVF, less rolling shutter skew, live histogram, no moire, no overheating issues, better 60p, continuous autofocus and unlimited record times make it far better for the average user. The T2i, however, is a better digital cinema camera. It works well for those who are willing to take their time and plan each shot to elimintate skew and moire, add a monitor or z-finder and a follow focus, set up custom picture profiles, shoot shorter takes (good for narrative but not events), and basically do all those things that people have been doing on film sets for decades.
Click to expand...

Ok, I do agree with you on that. Working with the T2i is much more like working with a film camera. I cut my teeth shooting film and I really like working with the T2i. I have even brought my light meter out of retirement, and I love it. I can now use it to set lighting, and have a direct reference for my camera. (The T2i has a pretty decent TTL metering system, so it is handy to use my incident readings with my hand held meter, and compare it to the TTL meter, set to spot. BTW my meat and potato lenses are vintage manual lenses, so no auto exposure, thank you) The T2i IS NOT, a point a shoot video camera, that is for sure. However, I have never seen a camera with such quality images, FOR THE PRICE. Now, I have not shot with the GH1, so what it probably just comes down to is making a decision and then taking what ever camera you chose and wring the best out of it you can.
 
Yeah, I think it's good that the 550d forces you to learn all that stuff about metering, sync sound, proper camera movement (rather than just zooming) etc. Me, and most people of my generation, have never needed to use a light meter, and we take all the features of a prosumer camcorder for granted - things like zebras, built in ND filters, autofocus, XLR's, unlimited record times etc.

As the gear gets better and 'smarter', people get lazy and dumber. It's good to see people actually learning about their tools and art alot with the DSLR's.
 
deltoidjohn said:
Yeah, I think it's good that the 550d forces you to learn all that stuff about metering, sync sound, proper camera movement (rather than just zooming) etc. Me, and most people of my generation, have never needed to use a light meter, and we take all the features of a prosumer camcorder for granted - things like zebras, built in ND filters, autofocus, XLR's, unlimited record times etc.

As the gear gets better and 'smarter', people get lazy and dumber. It's good to see people actually learning about their tools and art alot with the DSLR's.
Click to expand...

I think that you are on to something. One of the biggest advantages of the video DSLRs is that they force a user, wanting to use them to the full potential, to know, or learn, the essential elements of photography, and apply them. When it is all said and done, man handling great images out of a video DSLR, will, if nothing else, school a user in photographic technique that they will be able to take to the next level, and beyond. While I think that the big camera manufactures are going to quickly incorporate large sensors into pro-sumer video cameras, with all of the video bells and whistles, and conveniences, we have come to expect, the low costs, and possibly increasing capabilities of future video DSLRs will serve student, and low budget filmmakers for sometime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top