Canon 60D or Nikon d5300 for Making Movies

[Kshitiz]

Hello everyone,
I know this question might have been asked quite a few times but well i wanted your views first hand. N this is my first post on dvxuser soo please be kind.
Anyways im looking to buy a new dslr 90% for video work (making short films..etc) im confused betn canon 60D and nikon d5300. The canon feels better in my hand and the nikon feels .. Small ish. But the features (image quality, DR, etc) are all better on the nikon. The canon has a better body with more professional buttons oh n how can we forget the aperture wheel and also the video on the canon just looks better to me. Also ive decided on buying these lenses a kit lens :- 18-55 , 50mm f/1.8, and an 85mm f/1.8 , a cpl filter, ND filter and a manfrotto 621B monopod. Also im not a noob just new to dvxuser. Ive outgrown beginner dslr's soo im not looking at the rebels n the 3200,3300. Also i dont want to start a nikon vs canon war. And im not considering the GH2 because i dont like the M43 sensor.
Soo if you made it till here.. Thank you soo much and your feedback will be very valuable to me. Cheerios.

 

[David W. Jones]

If it were me… I would try out each camera I was considering to narrow it down. Also, IMHO how a camera feels in your hand is only really relevant if you are shooting with the camera in your hand. Lastly, I own cameras with full frame sensors, S35 size sensors, and M4/3 size sensors, and while you think you do not like the M4/3 sensor, I could post footage from all 3 sensors sizes and you would not be able to tell which was which.

Good Luck with your quest!

 

[Kshitiz]

Hey thanks and yeah i agree with you .. The canon feels good in my hand and im leaning towards it but the 60D is nearing the end of its life cycle and the d5300 is quite new. Soo im a little (Read : LOT) confused. Also i have a budget of $1650. Any recommendations ??

 

[Samuel H]

The image from the D5300 is a lot better, and that's what I care about most...

The 60D has exactly the same image as the T2i. Lots of aliasing/moire, not a lot of detail. The colors are nice and the DR is good, but still the Nikon has a slight edge in both areas if you ask me.

 

[David W. Jones]

Also i have a budget of $1650. Any recommendations ??

I just added a GH4 to my kit, which in my opinion is a better video tool than the 2 cameras you were looking at, and fits your budget.

 

[Kshitiz]

The image from the D5300 is a lot better, and that's what I care about most...

The 60D has exactly the same image as the T2i. Lots of aliasing/moire, not a lot of detail. The colors are nice and the DR is good, but still the Nikon has a slight edge in both areas if you ask me.

Yeah this is what is confusing me. Though the difference in image quality is not much to the naked eye but still.. But a major negative point for me hesitating to go with nikon is that as you go higher in their dslr range their cameras (For Video) start lagging behind to their rivals. And i wouldn't want to sell all my lenses , body and other accessories and jump to another system when i want to upgrade. I hope i made some sense.

 

[Kshitiz]

I just added a GH4 to my kit, which in my opinion is a better video tool than the 2 cameras you were looking at, and fits your budget.

Yeah i absolutely agree with you. The gh4 is a beast and im tempted but the small sensor puts me off and the budget $1650 includes the lenses and the accessories that ive to buy.

 

[lyrov]

If you like filmaking and you re of course planning on doing it in the long term future, I would suggest you not to think like deciding just for a camera body, but for a whole system. If you decide to go with Canon I would advise you to get a used 600D instead of a new 60D (exactly same image) and save the cash for better glass. 600D with ML is just as good as the 60D (and it has a 3X crop as a bonus).

 

[maranfilms]

If I were to go Canon, I would get a 5d2 before the 60d, the lowlight is much better, also you can use old lenses (m42) or Nikon on the canon. And it just so happens I have one for sale.lol

 

[Kshitiz]

If you like filmaking and you re of course planning on doing it in the long term future, I would suggest you not to think like deciding just for a camera body, but for a whole system. If you decide to go with Canon I would advise you to get a used 600D instead of a new 60D (exactly same image) and save the cash for better glass. 600D with ML is just as good as the 60D (and it has a 3X crop as a bonus).

Im getting a new 60D with the kit lens for around 750$ and i like the body of a 60D much better than a 600D. It feels better.. Anyways which lenses do you recommend?

 

[Kshitiz]

If I were to go Canon, I would get a 5d2 before the 60d, the lowlight is much better, also you can use old lenses (m42) or Nikon on the canon. And it just so happens I have one for sale.lol

Hahaha who wouldn't buy a 5D2 before a 60D
But ive to invest in glass too thats why im not buying a 5D2 or the 6D.

 

[lyrov]

Im getting a new 60D with the kit lens for around 750$ and i like the body of a 60D much better than a 600D. It feels better.. Anyways which lenses do you recommend?

For sure I would not recommend the 18-55 kit lens. Image quality is ok...but built quality and handling are awful. A real pain to use for video. Wasted money in my opinion. The 50mm 1.8 is not that great either, but its cheaper and much faster so I think its ok for the money. The 85mm f/1.8 is a very good lens. All of those of course are options for a limited budget. If you wouldnt care much about photography (no need for AF) I would highly recommend the samyangs. 24mm, 35mm, 85mm all of them f1.4 and excellent lenses for the money. Finally if you want the best value glass in my opinion (but not exactly cheap) take a look at the Art line of Sigma.

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

I would HIGHLY recommend getting the kit lens. It's the only cheap wide angle available for this range. I use mine as an 18mm f/3.5 prime. Not bad really. Covers my wide angle needs and gets a lot of use. Plus it's a decent macro lens, focuses really close. Anything above 18mm I use the cheap 50mm f/1.8 (filming people). Those two cheap lenses cover everything you need to make a film.

Besides those, you're missing
-telephoto (>100mm)
-ultra wide angle (10-20mm range)

For a cheap telephoto there is the Canon 55-250, a great one, but not indoors in dim light. It needs light.
For a little more there is the awesome Tamron 70-300 VC. Also not a low-light lens. If you can spend even more and find yourself needing a lowlight telephoto, look at something like the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro (non L)

-for the ultra wide there are the Tokina 11-16mm, the Canon 10-22mm, and the Sigma 10-20mm

I would suggest you buy the kit lens + the 50mm first and shoot for a while, then you'll find out whether your type of shooting needs a telephoto or a wider lens. Decide that and invest in one of the mentioned above.

As for bodies, the 60D is a much better camera in every single respect compared to the 600D, the only one thing they're similar at is image quality, other than that, it's a VERY different camera. A much better one for videography but also especially for photography.
Videography related ones are:
-It has a larger, much stronger, higher quality body, weathersealed, pleasing grip in hand
-Has quite a lot more buttons, like a WB button and you can dial in the Kelvin (you can't choose an exact wb with 600d),
-It has a dedicated aperture wheel. You have to press two buttons to change it with the 600d
-It has a top LCD screen to view settings fast,
-Finer ISO increments control (important as 160 multiples are the best)
-Larger battery (3 times more shots)
Photography related:
-A much bigger viewfinder
-Better autofocus system (9 all cross type as opposed to 1 in the 600d)
-Faster burst rate and deeper buffer size
-Faster performance overall ( shutter lag, startuptime, etc)
-Faster flash sync speed (1/250vs200)
-Added partial and spot metering
-Maximum shutter speed of 1/8000 vs 4000
And more (little things like being able to lock up the mirror, etc)

So by all means if you have the money get the 60D. Adding magic lantern also gives insanely more features like focus peaking, zebras, builtin intervalometer, higher bitrate, live waveforms and histograms, raw video recording (!) (limited to 720 but still) and MUCH more (these also apply to the 600d)

-As of comparing it to the d5300, the d5300 has a better image quality. It does. By a good margin. But you will sacrifice all of these usability features and get a camera that's an ergonomic pain to use (all the advantages of the 60d above also apply here, plus add to the list the inability to install magiclantern- peaking, zebras, waveforms, histogram, raw - has a buggy liveview zoom assist for focus, even cant change the aperture in liveview without leaving and coming back in (!)

-But again it does have better image quality, no moire/aliasing, higher detail, cleaner ISO performance. Priorities are different for everyone. So only "you" can decide. If the image quality of the 60D is good enough for you, take the usability features and get that one. If it's not enough for you, and you really care about absolute image quality, then it makes sense to sacrifice these usability features and get the d5300)

-Last tips:
1-please get a Zoom H1 (100$) or any external recorder. Don't forget audio. It's just as important as the image. Audio on all these cameras sucks. A zoom will make a world of difference to your productions value.
2-install Technicolor's Cinestyle, of Flaat, or at least use the neutral picture profile and turn contrast and sharpness all the way down. Contrast in-camera reduces dynamic range significantly, and gives a harder-to-grade baked-in image, an sharpness introduces halos and is just purely ugly. Do it in post. Much better!

 

[Kshitiz]

I would HIGHLY recommend getting the kiht lens. It's the only cheap wide angle available for this range. I use mine as an 18mm f/3.5 prime. Not bad really. Covers my wide angle needs and gets a lot of use. Plus it's a decent macro lens, focuses really close. Anything above 18mm I use the cheap 50mm f/1.8 (filming people). Those two cheap lenses cover everything you need to make a film.

Besides those, you're missing
-telephoto (>100mm)
-ultra wide angle (10-20mm range)

For a cheap telephoto there is the Canon 55-250, a great one, but not indoors in dim light. It needs light.
For a little more there is the awesome Tamron 70-300 VC. Also not a low-light lens. If you can spend even more and find yourself needing a lowlight telephoto, look at something like the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro (non L)

-for the ultra wide there are the Tokina 11-16mm, the Canon 10-22mm, and the Sigma 10-20mm

I would suggest you buy the kit lens + the 50mm first and shoot for a while, then you'll find out whether your type of shooting needs a telephoto or a wider lens. Decide that and invest in one of the mentioned above.

As for bodies, the 60D is a much better camera in every single respect compared to the 600D, the only one thing they're similar at is image quality, other than that, it's a VERY different camera. A much better one for videography but also especially for photography.
Videography related ones are:
-It has a larger, much stronger, higher quality body, weathersealed, pleasing grip in hand
-Has quite a lot more buttons, like a WB button and you can dial in the Kelvin (you can't choose an exact wb with 600d),
-It has a dedicated aperture wheel. You have to press two buttons to change it with the 600d
-It has a top LCD screen to view settings fast,
-Finer ISO increments control (important as 160 multiples are the best)
-Larger battery (3 times more shots)
Photography related:
-A much bigger viewfinder
-Better autofocus system (9 all cross type as opposed to 1 in the 600d)
-Faster burst rate and deeper buffer size
-Faster performance overall ( shutter lag, startuptime, etc)
-Faster flash sync speed (1/250vs200)
-Added partial and spot metering
-Maximum shutter speed of 1/8000 vs 4000
And more (little things like being able to lock up the mirror, etc)

So by all means if you have the money get the 60D. Adding magic lantern also gives insanely more features like focus peaking, zebras, builtin intervalometer, higher bitrate, live waveforms and histograms, raw video recording (!) (limited to 720 but still) and MUCH more (these also apply to the 600d)

-As of comparing it to the d5300, the d5300 has a better image quality. It does. By a good margin. But you will sacrifice all of these usability features and get a camera that's an ergonomic pain to use (all the advantages of the 60d above also apply here, plus add to the list the inability to install magiclantern- peaking, zebras, waveforms, histogram, raw - has a buggy liveview zoom assist for focus, even cant change the aperture in liveview without leaving and coming back in (!)

-But again it does have better image quality, no moire/aliasing, higher detail, cleaner ISO performance. Priorities are different for everyone. So only "you" can decide. If the image quality of the 60D is good enough for you, take the usability features and get that one. If it's not enough for you, and you really care about absolute image quality, then it makes sense to sacrifice these usability features and get the d5300)

-Last tips:
1-please get a Zoom H1 (100$) or any external recorder. Don't forget audio. It's just as important as the image. Audio on all these cameras sucks. A zoom will make a world of difference to your productions value.
2-install Technicolor's Cinestyle, of Flaat, or at least use the neutral picture profile and turn contrast and sharpness all the way down. Contrast in-camera reduces dynamic range significantly, and gives a harder-to-grade baked-in image, an sharpness introduces halos and is just purely ugly. Do it in post. Much better!

Thank you soo much for helping me out. Even i intend to use the 18-55 lens as a 18 f/3.5 prime because its cheap n wide on an aps-c. And later as i save and make some money will buy a nice wide prime.
Also, i disagree with the telephoto zooms because 55-250 is not good.. Ive used it for filming.. N i really like the shallow dof that a fast lens gives. I was looking at the 100mm f/2.8 and if i had the option id buy both the 85mm and the 100mm but budget constraints are there so i decided to go with the 85mm its cheaper than the 100mm n faster.. Also its a very good lens.

Now u really helped me decide betn the 60D n the d5300 because if the 60D has the same sensor as the 7D n takes similar images.. Soo if its good enough to be used in act of valor, black swan then its good enough for me too. Also i hate that we cant change the aperture in live view on nikon..
N also thanks for you input about the contrast and sharpness also about te neutral picture profile .. I already knew this but it feels good to know that tgere are people who give a **** about others ..
N your last Tip about the mic.. Yes ive been looking for an external mic.. Looked at Rode Videomic pro but goes just out of my budget. I dont know much about tge Zoom so.. Care to enlighten me?

 

[Samuel H]

There are good and bad copies of the kit lens. I used to say it was a great lens, then sold it with my T2i, later used a different copy from a friend... oh, my, truly awful, soft and with loads of CA, completely different. I would have kept my copy if I had known this...
(my guess: at this price range, quality control uses pretty low standards)

Anyway, my advice: buy lenses that will work both on your current camera and in any future ones.
I bought vintage Leitz lenses for the Leica-R mount, but those are slightly out of your price range. With a $20 adapter, they can work on Canon EF, Nikon F, Sony A, Pentax K, micro43, Sony E... basically everything except PL. But they are about $500-$600 each, so you'd only be able to afford two after you buy something like the D5300.

The next best mount in terms of compatibility is the Nikon F mount. Check this compatibility chart. If you buy lenses for the Nikon F mount that have an aperture ring, you can use them in Nikon, Canon, m43, and Sony E cameras.

With $1650 for a camera and lenses, I would get the D5300 with kit lens (to be used mostly as a 18mm f/3.5 stabilized prime), plus the samyang 35mm f/1.4 (as a normal lens) and 85mm f/1.4 (as primary portrait lens), all in Nikon mount. Not the most durable lenses, but they should last if you treat them with care, and they are optically great lenses (comparable to lenses costing five times as much, read this) that won't tie you to a camera system.

 

[David W. Jones]

Yeah i absolutely agree with you. The gh4 is a beast and im tempted but the small sensor puts me off and the budget $1650 includes the lenses and the accessories that ive to buy.

Ever have any first hand experience shooting with M4/3 sensor cameras? The sensor in the GH4 is anything but small. Sure it's not as big as a full frame sensor, but adding a Speed Booster puts it into the S35 size range where you are now. Shoot without the Speed Booster and it's like you have a second set of lenses for tighter shots. Not to mention a camera which shoots up to 4K, which gives you a little leeway into how long this camera will be a viable tool in the future. Speaking of lenses, you mention that part of your $1650 budget will go to new lenses. Why not use the lenses you are shooting with now and save the coin? Lastly, do you really feel purchasing 4 year old camera technology is a wise investment for another 3 years of use with the 60D?

All the Best!

Dave

 

[lyrov]

I would suggest you buy the kit lens + the 50mm first and shoot for a while, then you'll find out whether your type of shooting needs a telephoto or a wider lens. Decide that and invest in one of the mentioned above.

As for bodies, the 60D is a much better camera in every single respect compared to the 600D, the only one thing they're similar at is image quality, other than that, it's a VERY different camera. A much better one for videography but also especially for photography.

Im sorry Ebrahim, but especially about lenses, I can't agree to the logic '' buy now - shoot for a while - change later''...this is exactly the easiest way to throw your money. Sooner or later cheap lenses will be collecting dust. Im not saying that because Im smart, but because it happened to me.
However about camera bodies buying the cheapest possible with the same image quality of course, is the way to go. This is why I suggested a used 600D with ML than a new 60D. It would save more money for glass. And believe me I could have suggest even a used 550D if it didnt have the overheating thing. You said it yourself: ''the only one thing they're similar at is image quality''...well thats the point, right?

Anyway the OP said he prefers the 60D and he wants it new (I know... nothing can beat the smell of a brand new camera...haha)...ok I respect that...but Im afraid the love will end soon...

 

[Kshitiz]

There are good and bad copies of the kit lens. I used to say it was a great lens, then sold it with my T2i, later used a different copy from a friend... oh, my, truly awful, soft and with loads of CA, completely different. I would have kept my copy if I had known this...
(my guess: at this price range, quality control uses pretty low standards)

Anyway, my advice: buy lenses that will work both on your current camera and in any future ones.
I bought vintage Leitz lenses for the Leica-R mount, but those are slightly out of your price range. With a $20 adapter, they can work on Canon EF, Nikon F, Sony A, Pentax K, micro43, Sony E... basically everything except PL. But they are about $500-$600 each, so you'd only be able to afford two after you buy something like the D5300.

The next best mount in terms of compatibility is the Nikon F mount. Check this compatibility chart. If you buy lenses for the Nikon F mount that have an aperture ring, you can use them in Nikon, Canon, m43, and Sony E cameras.

With $1650 for a camera and lenses, I would get the D5300 with kit lens (to be used mostly as a 18mm f/3.5 stabilized prime), plus the samyang 35mm f/1.4 (as a normal lens) and 85mm f/1.4 (as primary portrait lens), all in Nikon mount. Not the most durable lenses, but they should last if you treat them with care, and they are optically great lenses (comparable to lenses costing five times as much, read this) that won't tie you to a camera system.

Yeah ive given a thought to samyang lenses too but its a bit difficult to get it here in mumbai. Anyways im trying!

 

[Kshitiz]

Ever have any first hand experience shooting with M4/3 sensor cameras? The sensor in the GH4 is anything but small. Sure it's not as big as a full frame sensor, but adding a Speed Booster puts it into the S35 size range where you are now. Shoot without the Speed Booster and it's like you have a second set of lenses for tighter shots. Not to mention a camera which shoots up to 4K, which gives you a little leeway into how long this camera will be a viable tool in the future. Speaking of lenses, you mention that part of your $1650 budget will go to new lenses. Why not use the lenses you are shooting with now and save the coin? Lastly, do you really feel purchasing 4 year old camera technology is a wise investment for another 3 years of use with the 60D?

All the Best!

Dave

Yeah thats the dilemma its a 4 year old technology and the 70D isnt very different except for the wifi touchscreen and the autofocus however i prefer to manually focus. Im giving the gh4 a long and hard look will buy the camera which feels right when the time comes. (Im soo confused)

 

[Kshitiz]

Anyway the OP said he prefers the 60D and he wants it new (I know... nothing can beat the smell of a brand new camera...haha)...ok I respect that...but Im afraid the love will end soon...

Anything new just feels like its only yours anyways im not against buying used .. A month back was looking at buying a used 6D with the VAF filter. I wish i wudve bought it but then the owner decided to not sell it for another couple of months.. Talk about assholes!