February 20, 2015 at 5:50PM

0

First time camera and lenses

yeah, yeah, I know... yet another post about gear... But bear with me...

looking for: camera + essential lenses + accessories
budget: 1000 dollars, everything included
purpose: mainly filming shorts, but also some photography and learning
already own: camcorder (hc-v700), tripod, sd card, mic + recorder, fluid head, lights + light stands, slider, glidecam, shoulder rig, clapboard.
experience: quite a bit theoretical knowledge (webinars, youtube videos, books, etc), very little practical experience (couple of little shorts)

my current thoughts: canon 700D (magic lantern!), some vintage lenses (prime, 20mm, 35mm and 50mm) with lens adapters, ND filters, maybe an extension tube and if I can squeeze it in there, a camera bag.
The value of a kit lens is much debated. Yes, it is a pretty good lens for little money, but the non-constant apature can really screw you over when shooting video. Plus I would also prefer prime lenses because of their fast character and the fact that you have to physically move.

Any and all thoughts are much appreciated. :)

18 Comments

I would go for the Nikon D5200 or D5300 over the Canon 700D, for a few reasons...

- Nikon D5200/D5300 has close to no moire, so pretty much anything you shoot won't a problem in post. ( Canon APS-C camera have moire and aliasing issues )

- Nikon cameras have better dynamic range in both video and still photos.

- Nikon lenses can be used on a wide range of cameras with low cost mechanical adapters.

February 21, 2015 at 12:30PM

0
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

ou, good suggestion. I hadn't thought of that one. According to a lot of forums and videos they both seem to have their pros and cons. I think it might come down to the best deal I can get on either one of them.
Thank you for the suggestion, :)

February 22, 2015 at 2:30AM

10
Reply

The problem with moire is that unless you are VERY careful and check every shot with your monitor in 1:1 pixel mode, you won't know that your video has moire until you start to edit, and at this point your shot is toast as there is no way to remove moire, you will either have to throw away the shot or re-shoot to get rid of the moire.

This is my only main concern with Canon APS-C cameras, as Canon has had this moire problem for more than 5 years now and has done NOTHING to fix it. Nikon is more on the ball when it comes to eliminating moire from their video image, and starting from the D5200 camera and higher does not have this problem.

February 22, 2015 at 11:58AM

0
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

Are the Nikon camera's 100% free of moire? That is really quite impessive. :D I know that that is quite the problem with entry-level canon camera's, and I thought that you meant that the 5300 just had less of it, but if they got rid of it all together, then that is quit a big deal indeed. Thank you for pointing that out.

February 23, 2015 at 11:13AM

15
Reply

Not a 100% moire free, but very close to it. Much better than any other DSLR in it's price range.

To get 100% moire free you have to move up to the Panasonic GH4 or Sony A7S cameras. ( very curious to see if the $800 Samsung NX500 4K camera is moire free )

February 23, 2015 at 2:48PM

0
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

Since you'll be using vintage primes, there's really no reason to go with the 700D. Get a T3i instead, save yourself a few hundred bucks, and spend it on lenses instead. The 700D and 600D use the same sensor and have most of the same specs...for video, you wont notice a difference. In photos, you'd need to be using auto-focus lenses to notice a difference, and even then, it'd be a small one (f/2.8 lenses or better would be noticeable with dual-cross points).

You can spend $3-400 on the body and the rest on lenses and kit, rather than $6-700 on the body.

February 23, 2015 at 6:52AM

2
Reply

No, it has to be a Red. Don't not get a Red. But you must wait until the Weapon upgrade.

Only kidding. My observation is that no one seems to care much about the vintage Canon FD lens series, generally available pretty cheap, and I do read good things about them. But you have to be careful because they are not as compatible with as many camera bodies as Nikons lenses are.

The best FD to EF lens adapter is this one, built by Eddie Houston an ex-Canon engineer with a high quality removable glass element which guarantees infinity focus.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CANON-FD-to-EF-Canon-ADAPTER-AF-CONFIRM-LENS-D...

My post is very incomplete, so please do listen to the others.

February 23, 2015 at 8:28AM

0
Reply
Saied M.
1261

There also seam to be quite a lot of original 7D's on sale second hand. The cheapest one I found is around 500 dollars. Would that be worth considering?

February 23, 2015 at 11:47AM

18
Reply

While the original Canon 7D is a pretty bad performer when it comes to shooting video, two feature films have been shot with it. "Tiny Furniture" (2010) and "Like Crazy" (2011)

The 7D would be my absolute last choice when it comes to shooting video.

February 23, 2015 at 2:53PM

14
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

I would try to get a full frame camera if you can.

That way you do not have to deal with crop factors making hard to get wide shots without distortion. Its possible to get close at 1.6x but even then you have to have a 16mm lens to get 25mm style shot and there would be significant distortion.

February 24, 2015 at 3:09PM

25
Reply
Kyle Dockum
Videographer and Editor
1388

>>>That way you do not have to deal with crop factors making hard to get wide shots without distortion.

Sensor sizes and crop factors have NOTHING to do with having distortion in your shots. With the right lens you can duplicate almost anything that a Full Frame sensor camera can do with NO distortion.

What is difficult is trying to match the shallow depth of field of a Full Frame wide-angle lens with a smaller format. For example, something shot with a Full Frame camera and a 24mm lens at f/1.4 would require a 12mm f/0.7 lens for the Micro 4/3 format which does not exist. There is a new Voightlander 10.5mm f/0.95 lens for the Micro 4/3 format, which would be equivalent to a 21mm f/1.9 lens on a Full Frame camera.

So unless you absolutely have to shoot wide angle shots with ultra shallow depth of field, the difference between these two formats ( Full Frame and Micro 4/3 ) is becoming meaningless, as you can shoot essentially the same shot with both formats.

February 24, 2015 at 10:48PM

2
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

Yeah but there is a lot more glass and adapters you will have to use to get the same image. It is going to be a lot more work to get the wide shots you want, and make the camera much larger in the process.

The problem is once you go below 18mm in glass there will be warping (no if and or buts) cause you are entering the fish eye realm, and there is ways to get around it but it is not native so artifacts and other stuff is going to be a lot less relenting.

February 26, 2015 at 9:27AM

22
Reply
Kyle Dockum
Videographer and Editor
1388

If you use native Micro 4/3 glass then it's no different that shooting with native Full Frame glass. No distortion, sharp, clean images.

>>>The problem is once you go below 18mm in glass there will be warping (no if and or buts) cause you are entering the fish eye realm

Completely FALSE. Right now you can buy native prime Micro 4/3 glass down to 10mm that is rectilinear design, with no more distortion that you would get with an equivalent Full Frame lens. If you switch to zoom lenses you can go down to 7mm rectilinear with very little distortion.

And if you switch to the 16mm film format C mount lenses you can get wide angle rectilinear lenses down to the 4mm focal lengths with very little distortion.

Distortion is all about lens design and has nothing to do with the actual focal length of the lens.

NOTE: To reduce the cost of manufacturing wide angle lenses, Micro 4/3 lens manufacturers are using in-camera distortion correction ( essentially image correction software ) to produce the final image. This might become an issue once RAW format recording becomes more common, as your RAW format software will have to do the same image correction that the cameras are doing now.

February 26, 2015 at 2:58PM

0
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

I just found somebody who is selling his t3i for 200 euro (230 doll hairs). I think that's my best bet right now. That leaves me enough money for some good glass that will survive multiple camera's, it will provide enough room to grow and if I later want to step up to a blackmagic or something like that, I'll still have this camera to take pictures.

February 25, 2015 at 5:33AM

16
Reply

Yes, good glass can last a lifetime, while cameras are lucky to last 5 years.

Also, consider manual Nikon AI-S glass which is fairly cheap and can mount on almost any camera on the market with the right adapter, including the new Canon cameras. ( Canon EF glass has a much smaller range of cameras that can use it )

February 25, 2015 at 2:33PM

0
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
31895

Yeah I would go for that, that is a little bit of a steal at that price :)

March 2, 2015 at 6:14PM

15
Reply
Kyle Dockum
Videographer and Editor
1388

Do not obsess over FF and/or shallow depth of field.
It is the road to ruin.

February 25, 2015 at 9:30AM

9
Reply
avatar
Stelrad Two Machine Doulton
Editor by choice, film maker by necessity.
307

Canon mukemmel bir makina.

June 28, 2020 at 3:55AM

0
Reply

Your Comment