# good/high end cameras?



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

Well I'm looking for a camera with all the bells and whistles. I'm ideally looking for one around 500-600 dollars i'll be willing to go a few hundred either direction. I'm not using this as a thread saying "oh i don't wanna do research" but for more of a discussion of cameras around this price range. Also i might be willing to go for a cannon 7D but it would be awkward to film while skateboarding.
Features that are a must:
High quality
Aperature, exposure, white balance ect.
Good zoom
Audio
Extras:
Fish eye mount
handle mount
Image stabilization.
HD


----------



## nitroboarder22 (Apr 16, 2008)

i dont remember the prices exactly but there are 2 prosumer type camcorders that come to mind 

the canon hf s200 (or any HF series canon) I had the HF s100 and loved it. the image quality is amazing, I made a handle for it and bought a fisheye. perfect little camera that still puts out amazing video

the other is the panasonic TM700- the big deal with this one is that it shoots in 1080HD at 60 frames per second. Which is a rare thing, most cameras will only do 60 FPS at 720HD if that. so if your looking for a good slow motion camera consider the TM700
I have never used the tm700 but all I hear are good things about it

since both of these cameras aren't really professional the manual settings will be somewhat limited. The HF s200 has a manual focus nob under the lens but its kind of hard to learn how to use. I'm pretty sure you can control the manual settings you mentioned like aperture, white balence etc. on these cameras 
If you want true manual setting the price range goes way up like $1000-2000 but for the regular filmer the above 2 cameras get the job done without a problem


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

nitroboarder22 said:


> i dont remember the prices exactly but there are 2 prosumer type camcorders that come to mind
> 
> the canon hf s200 (or any HF series canon) I had the HF s100 and loved it. the image quality is amazing, I made a handle for it and bought a fisheye. perfect little camera that still puts out amazing video
> 
> ...


thanks for the helpful response i don't really want to bust 1000$ dollars but now that i realize it i have a pro quality color corrector so i guess all i'll need is good quality


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

also i got a friend whose willing to sell me a gl2 for 650 dollars any opinions on this?


----------



## nitroboarder22 (Apr 16, 2008)

alecdude88 said:


> also i got a friend whose willing to sell me a gl2 for 650 dollars any opinions on this?


depending on what kind of shape it's in i would probably do that. i believe The gl2 is a canon tape based camera. so its using technology that is fading out. but thats a good deal on a good camera


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

I got a used one for $500 on Amazon and I love it.
DMC-G2 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

Check out the lens system: http://www.digitalcamblog.com/tag/panasonic-g2/


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

I own a Canon 7D. There is absolutely no way you'll find one for anywhere close to $700. Used ones (just the body) are going for ~$1100-$1300.

Do you want a camera for video or for still shots? Do you want something with interchangeable lenses?

If you're serious about wanting to do some good video then I would consider two cameras. Use a Canon T2i (almost as good as the 7D) for your video & stills and then keep a seperate video camera for hand-held shots.

If you have a spare $200 after your birthday then you can spend it on a GoPro or something for POV clips.... or you can use it to buy better lenses (or a better mic) for the Canon


----------



## C.B. (Jan 18, 2011)

alecdude88 said:


> also i got a friend whose willing to sell me a gl2 for 650 dollars any opinions on this?


i used gl2s all the time in highschool there great cameras id go for that deal


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

i would want a camcorder that would preferably have a digital storage system just because its that much easier to get on a computer. I'm also looking for good zoom quality not just digital. the T2i looks great for taking pictures and long shots but i also planned on using this for skateboarding so i wouldn't want it for filming lines


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

I'm not sure what you mean by 'digital storage system'. I mean... all digital cameras/camcorders use digital memory, so you either put the memory card in a reader or you plug the camera into your computer to transfer files.

If you want HD Video... do you want 1080P or 720P? Very very few P&S cameras have 1080P, so that will push you to either mirrorless cameras or DSLR's.

If you want a pocket compact (which will all do 720P video): There's the Panasonic LX-5, and the Canon S95, or if you want more zoom, the Panasonic ZS5 or ZS7. With the ZS5/7, the aperture control on it is really a joke though.

Mirrorless cameras are more expensive, but they take better pictures. The Olympus E-PL1 is around $500 I think. There's also the Panasonic GF1. The new GF2 probably breaks your budget. All these cameras can take fisheye lenses, but I think they are *really* expensive.

For DSLR's, you're going to be looking at budget models. The Canon T2i probably takes the best video. The Nikon D3100 is decent. If you want a smaller DSLR, there's ones from Panasonic again... the G2. The Canon 7D is way over your set budget.

If you get a camera AND a camcorder, it might be more than $600 though, depending on what you get. HD Camcorders are kind of expensive.

Yeah ok... I'm a camera whore xD Interests: Photography. I said it and I mean it! :laugh:


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

cocolulu said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by 'digital storage system'. I mean... all digital cameras/camcorders use digital memory, so you either put the memory card in a reader or you plug the camera into your computer to transfer files.
> 
> If you want HD Video... do you want 1080P or 720P? Very very few P&S cameras have 1080P, so that will push you to either mirrorless cameras or DSLR's.
> 
> ...


hey man plugging cameras isn't a problem i've always loved photography just haven't ever had a camera of my own  i might just go with the camera route because you get amazing quality with them its just harder to film skateboarding with

I'm kinda leaning towards the T2i because i love photography and it can film long lense (which i prefer most of the time)


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

Lots of versatility with a HDSLR. Lenses will run you bankrupt, though. Good lenses, that is. The newest Canon zoom fisheye will suck at least $1400 from your bank account.

My man has a Canon Vixia HF S10(?) I think. I should know--I bought it--but I can't remember. It shoots amazing video. The manual controls are good, but tough to get to. Not as easy as having all the control within a fingers reach like a DSLR, but the video is really, really nice. That said, if you dropped it, it's over. Same with a DSLR. I dropped my 40D from waist height in a parking lot in Chicago. Put a few little scratches in it, but rendered the battery grip useless. Had to buy a new grip. Photographic equipment is expensive, and it's a big, empty hole that you keep tossing money into.

Plus, if you like to shoot with long lenses... The Canon 70-200 f/2.8L is just over $2000. Sure, there are cheaper zoom lenses, but then you're sacrificing great glass. You might not be able to tell the difference, but I can. 

The good thing about a crop sensor DSLR is that your zoom lens will give you a little more zoom. On the other hand, at the wide angle end, it won't be as wide. If you're shooting with a long lens, a crop frame HDSLR with a good zoom lens would be a great option. But, you might have difficulty finding it in your price range.

Also worth noting, they sell reasonably priced rigs that you can hold with one hand. You will have to use auto focus, but it might make filming skateboarding easier.


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

> I'm kinda leaning towards the T2i because i love photography and it can film long lense (which i prefer most of the time)


I think that's a great choice. Canon makes really awesome budget DSLR's that do really good with video, and you have tons of Canon lenses to choose from if you want to build a collection. They have the least compatability concerns...

I'm endorsing them, even though I'm a Nikon person :laugh: (well okay, I actually have a Canon manual focus camera and a few lenses, but film is expensive)



> Photographic equipment is expensive, and it's a big, empty hole that you keep tossing money into.


Yeah no kidding  It's by FAR the most expensive hobby. Nevermind lenses, I think I've spent more on *filters* than I have on snowboard gear this year.



> Plus, if you like to shoot with long lenses... The Canon 70-200 f/2.8L is just over $2000. Sure, there are cheaper zoom lenses, but then you're sacrificing great glass. You might not be able to tell the difference, but I can.


Hahaha, well I wouldn't go that far to say that. I think you can take awesome pictures with cheaper zooms, it's just that the 70-200 f/2.8's will be awesome in more circumstances. Cheaper zooms for example, can still be good in outdoor daylight, but they tend to suck indoors compared to the big expensive zooms.

Which I guess leads me to:



> Good zoom


... that's really hard to define. Do you mean good zoom range? A zoom with a large aperture (like f/2.8 like StarCommand was talking about?)? One that's really sharp?

If you get the T2i, I think it comes with a 18-55mm zoom lens, and that is a very basic zoom lens. I'm not sure what you're after, so it might be 'good' enough, or it could be underwhelming. Unfortunately.. the really good zooms, like Star pointed out, are really expensive.


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

...which is why you don't buy high end Canon lenses unless you're rich or doing photography/video production for a living.

Sigma and Tamron both make 70-200 f/.28's for less than $1000 that give good results. Not that it matters.... if sharpness is all you care about then you'll be shooting with a prime lens anyway.

One thing that is *important* to realize is that the focus on DSLR cameras while taking video pretty much sucks. The auto-focus is slow and the manual focus is cumbersome to operate by oneself.

I almost never shoot any action vids with my DSLR.


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ that's the reason I got the G2 for HD is that it has a LCD touch screen to select your focus points, as well as motion tracking. The lens are more affordable than the Canon.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

focus didn't seem bad in this vid but there wasn't a lot of movement 
YouTube - Canon EOS Rebel T2i Video Test #3 (468mb file)


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

also for all you photographers about how much time do you spend editing pictures?


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

Speaking from experience.... its a complete pain for one person if they are holding the camera. Doable with a tripod, but you'll need to be an experienced videographer to control focus properly for subjects that move into different focal planes


alecdude88 said:


> focus didn't seem bad in this vid but there wasn't a lot of movement
> YouTube - Canon EOS Rebel T2i Video Test #3 (468mb file)





alecdude88 said:


> also for all you photographers about how much time do you spend editing pictures?


Depends on what you're doing and if you screwed up your exposure or framing. Your question is like asking "how long do you spend choosing mp3's to listen to". Depends on what I have in mind and what I have already downloaded.


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

this is what i always wanted.











dvx 100 b + century optics Xtreme fisheye










jizz all over the place.


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

^^^^^^^ a $300 POV camera accomplishes that. (granted the glass is cleaner/sharper with the century optics) but on the web, you'll hardly notice. Watch the vid below in 720p, pretty damn sharp for $349... vs your $4000 camera. Not to mention how much easier it is to shot with and how durable POV cams are.





I'm the guy on the knuckle in the Orange jacket with a Walmart Monopod. Did you also notice the camera getting hit by the skiers tail? (@ 44sec.)


----------



## SobeHall (Feb 28, 2011)

If you want video then I'd say the GoPro HD hero, you can do the research on it's capabilities but it's $299.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

tj_ras said:


> this is what i always wanted.
> dvx 100 b + century optics Xtreme fisheye
> jizz all over the place.


wow thats one amazing looking fisheye i hate watching videos with flat colors 



Tarzanman said:


> Speaking from experience.... its a complete pain for one person if they are holding the camera. Doable with a tripod, but you'll need to be an experienced videographer to control focus properly for subjects that move into different focal planes
> Depends on what you're doing and if you screwed up your exposure or framing. Your question is like asking "how long do you spend choosing mp3's to listen to". Depends on what I have in mind and what I have already downloaded.


that last analogy is really good :laugh: my only gripe with POV cameras is they lack a zoom which i really want. I've been through a few video classes and have learned about most of the shot types and camera movements so i feel if i get a camera with out a zoom i won't be reaching my filming potential :dunno:

also thanks for all the help guys


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

baconzoo said:


> ^^^^^^^ a $300 POV camera accomplishes that. (granted the glass is cleaner/sharper with the century optics) but on the web, you'll hardly notice. Watch the vid below in 720p, pretty damn sharp for $349... vs your $4000 camera. Not to mention how much easier it is to shot with and how durable POV cams are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh no doubt i wont argue withu on that. But a dvx compared to a go pro in the area of custom settings and sound is like night and day, but of course u pay out the wazzooo fora dvx compared to a go pro, and as for lenses theres nothing clearer then a century optics, back when i filmed ihad a Sony vx 1000 with a raynox mx3000 fisheye, later i bought a deathlens(century optics fisheye) and the pictures crispyness and sharpness was unbelievably different. But yea id get like a go pro now a' days cuzz they are just unbelievably good and small.


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

My tech:

you can shoot long shots on a tripod with your high-end SLR (200-300mm)
shoot the close-ups fisheye style with a helmet cam/chase cam
WYSIWYG 70mm shots on the SLR

My cost:
$500 used Panasonic G2
$250 200mm Lens
$350 Drift HD170 POV Cam
affordable tripod and monopod


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

I like the rubber band tip! Brilliant.

I spend hours editing photos. Hours. And I rarely put them into photoshop or manipulate them at all. I just drop them into Aperture and adjust for blown out highlights, or try to save really underexposed stuff. Anything out of focus is a loss as far as I'm concerned. It also depends on how many images I've shot. Takes longer to sort through and edit 800 than it does 150.


----------



## snowvols (Apr 16, 2008)

Time to thread jack. Anyone have any experience with a Nikon 3100 DSLR? If so what are your thoughts? I want to get a DSLR but a cheaper body and get good lenses first. Then upgrade the body.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

snowvols said:


> Time to thread jack. Anyone have any experience with a Nikon 3100 DSLR? If so what are your thoughts? I want to get a DSLR but a cheaper body and get good lenses first. Then upgrade the body.


its hard to say because if your getting a DSLR your most likely spending quite a bit of money already. So it might just be smarter to just get a better camera?


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

Mmm, quality images are 90% the glass (lenses) that you are using. The technology in camera bodies changes every ~5 years... but a sharp, top of the line lens in 1995 is still a sharp lens today.


----------



## snowvols (Apr 16, 2008)

alecdude88 said:


> its hard to say because if your getting a DSLR your most likely spending quite a bit of money already. So it might just be smarter to just get a better camera?


The camera, Nikon D3100 and a 18-55 mm lens costs around 575. I really want a Nikon D7000 and it is 1200. I would rather buy a cheaper body and good lenses to start out with. Than spending the 1200 and the cost of a lens to start out with. I just do not know if the D3100 is any good? :dunno:


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

I am looking at the D3100 myself. Sweet deal right now for two lenses on that thing for around $600. It also shoots full 1080 HD as a bonus. The big drawback that I see is the number of frames per second that it shoots. Only 3. It's just not as rapid fire as say the D90 or the D7000 I am sure. You should still be able to get great shots with it though and the body is more compact than a lot of other DSLR's. Don't be surprised if you try to upgrade in a year or two though.


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

You will never be able to keep up with camera technology. It's really out of control.

I'm thinking of getting a 5D Mark II, but I know as soon as I do, they are going to release the Mark III.


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

I have both a D7000 and a D3100, so I can tell you what some of the differences are.

I think, overall, it's definately better to save money for lenses instead of dumping a lot of cash on the camera body. Most of the time, camera bodies are just a step up from cheaper models, but lenses really let you take photos you otherwise could not... but the exception is sports. If you want to take pictures of, for example, basketball players, or kids running around, the autofocus speed and shutter speed (in terms of shutter lag) is really important on the camera body. So it really depends on what you have to shoot... I mention this because:

The D3100 has some shutter lag. It's a good camera, and it has the essential features down, but one place they cut corners with is getting a snappy, quiet shutter. It's loud and it's slow, as DSLR's go. It's still much faster than any P&S you'll get though, so YMMV.

Regardless, I've been very happy with mine. It has all the essential features you'd want. Good resolution, good in low-light.

One thing you might want to consider though, is a D90. It's a bit old, but the D90 has an autofocus motor that lets you use lenses that are older, if you're into that. Nikon and the other suppliers (Sigma/Tamron/Tokina) come out with roughly 4-8 lenses every year, and it's only in the recent years that they've made lenses with autofocus motors. So with a D3100, you will only have autofocus with the newer library of lenses (which is somewhat ok, since new lenses are usually better). With the D90, you can pretty much use all lenses for the last several decades, but the D90 I think is larger, and probably doesn't do video as well.

I do want to say though, that Canon's entry-level DSLR's are very good, and they don't have that autofocus motor limitation.

I think with DSLR's it's always great to start small though. Then as you take pictures, you can learn what you need, and what you don't need.

Long answer :laugh: hope that helps.


----------



## snowvols (Apr 16, 2008)

That helps out a bunch cocolulu. I am really just wanting to take scenics with it for the rest of the winter and when I start hiking again. There will be action shots i.e. people riding and trying to catch people in the deepness of the white room. Think the D3100 will do that?


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

snowvols said:


> That helps out a bunch cocolulu. I am really just wanting to take scenics with it for the rest of the winter and when I start hiking again. There will be action shots i.e. people riding and trying to catch people in the deepness of the white room. Think the D3100 will do that?


Yeah, the D3100 will be great for scenic landscapes. I mostly use mine for landscape and travel, since it's so small and light and easy to lug around. In landscapes, nothing is moving fast so camera speed doesn't really matter.

For action shots, the D3100 will work, but if you need split second timing, more expensive cameras (D90 or D7000) might be just a tad better. We're only talking fractions of a second here, so if it's not important, the D3100 will be fine.

One thing to think about is that you might want to look at what lenses you want to buy. Once you see the cost, it may tilt your decision about how much to spend on a camera body.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

you seem to know a lot about cameras so how would the Cannon T2i stack up against other cameras in the filming department?


----------



## rgrwilco (Oct 15, 2007)

The t2i is much better for any motion related video than the d3100. The 3100 only shoots 30p at 720 and 24p at 1080. The sensor also produces a lot of jello cam effect with movement. The d3100 has no mic input as well.

The t2i has 720p 30p and 60p, 1080p at 30p and 24p, mic input, and is not much more money. look online at footage of the two for yourself.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

rgrwilco said:


> The t2i is much better for any motion related video than the d3100. The 3100 only shoots 30p at 720 and 24p at 1080. The sensor also produces a lot of jello cam effect with movement. The d3100 has no mic input as well.
> 
> The t2i has 720p 30p and 60p, 1080p at 30p and 24p, mic input, and is not much more money. look online at footage of the two for yourself.


wow that helped alot and i've been very impressed with the footage i've seen shot with the T2i its amazing really.


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

I think RGR just about covered it :laugh:


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

i watched a review on the t2i it said its not the best DSLR for action sports because it has a slower auto focus than most cameras. If i turned off the auto focus and focused it my self that should fix that problem right?

just answered my own question with the power of google


----------



## snowvols (Apr 16, 2008)

Well bought the D3100 yesterday. So far i really enjoy it and am looking forward to taking some good photos with it. Thanks again for your help coco


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

how much do different lenses effect the picture quality? I know sometime fisheyes can really wash out colors


----------



## rgrwilco (Oct 15, 2007)

^A lot. It depends on the quality and design of the glass in the lenses.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

would this be a smart lens to buy with a canon T2i? 
Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

alecdude88 said:


> would this be a smart lens to buy with a canon T2i?
> Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS


Every lens has strengths and weaknesses, so it's really about picking a lens for what you want to do.

That lens is mostly a daylight/scenery zoom lens. f/3.5-5.6 is the aperture, and for that lens it's kind of small, meaning that it takes in less light. This is fine for daytime of course. It has a very useful zoom range, so it's great as a 1st lens since it covers so much territory.

Eventually, you might want a lens with a bigger aperture, like f/2.8 or f/1.4 (smaller number means bigger aperture), but those lenses can be pricey, especially if they are zooms. Those lenses are good for portraits and indoor shots.


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

alecdude88 said:


> would this be a smart lens to buy with a canon T2i?
> Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS


A good place for lens reviews is:
Welcome to Photozone!

The review on that lens isn't so complimentary. It basically says the lens is not very sharp at 70-135mm.

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Lab Test Report - Analysis


----------



## Sincraft (Sep 6, 2010)

Do yourself a favor and 
1. spend less money and get a near dslr point and shoot or
2. spend alot more money (and probably be disappointed unless you find a camera that does ONE thing you want it to do exceptionally well)
3. REASEARCH the cameras. 

there are sites with very large databases of cameras , reviews, customer reviews, problems, side by side comparisons etc.

It all doesnt' amount to a hill of beans until you read the customer complaints. Find the ones that do not mention anything about focus and you will be happy. If you end up with a camera that has flaky focusing, you will surely be disappointed. 

The more you spend, the harder they are to get those pictures you think you deserve. I bet I can take my $200 point and shoot and outshoot most people with prosumer or pro cameras. simply because they had too much money to spend and havent a clue how to work their cameras. Or worse, they got a buggy model and don't know better to return it to the manufacturer.

The pressure for competition in the DSLR lines is very strong. Releasing cameras with KNOWN issues, that could end the life of the camera, is not uncommon for the big name camera manufacturers. So do your research before you buy what you are looking for.

This is also one of the only things I recommend extended warranties on too. Just be sure not to try to get the warranty honored if you drop the camera or get it wet. At least dry it out! 

Oh and I have a Nikon D5000 DSLR. I would recommend you look into this camera if you plan on shooting outdoors, for the price and the kit lenses, not too bad. Add an SB 600 external flash, and you have a winner. Indoor, not very good. Always under exposes. Adjusting makes it feel artificial...can't put my finger on it. Just not happy with it to be honest. camera also was plagued with sudden death issues. Notes from engineers leaked info that Nikon knew of this issue but pressure to compete with Canon made them push it out to the public as they felt the issue would only affect 10% of the models, alas - it affected MUCH more than that until they could rectify the subsequent shipments.


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

Yeah i've done some looking into cameras and the T2i seems like the best for me. Its suppose to work good in low light and shoots 1080 hd footage so not a whole lot to complain about

as for lenses its just so hard to tell if a lens will be good or bad. guess i'll have to make sure to read all the reviews because i don't want to drop $300+ on a lens and have it distort colors and what not


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

*Bingo or Boarding?*



Sincraft said:


> Do yourself a favor and
> 1. spend less money and get a near dslr point and shoot


Also take a class on Google Picasa. It's way better than Photoshop or Lightroom


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

baconzoo said:


> Also take a class on Google Picasa. It's way better than Photoshop or Lightroom


just watched a video on it looks like a great software for organizing photos. I just love my photoshop so much. :laugh: 
i feel like i'll be using both a lot once i get enough money for a camera.


----------



## baconzoo (Nov 12, 2010)

I was being a little sarcastic. Picasa classes are for Grandmas and so are point and shoot cameras.

Although in all seriousness: If your shots are good and they don't need to be edited much, Picasa has been my choice for getting event photos quickly uploaded to the web. Just a quick crop, auto watermark, and ease of tagging and uploading.

Past events: Picasa Web Albums - Suburban Blend


----------



## alecdude88 (Dec 13, 2009)

yeah when i watched a intro video for the program it seemed like the fastest way to prepare a photo if you didn't want to edit anything.


----------

