Need help selecting a digital SLR/video camera
#16
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SNA/LAX... somewhere sunny and warm, but crowded.
Programs: AA/UA/UR/MRP/IHG Plat
Posts: 916
Need help selecting a digital SLR/video camera
I just bought the Nikon D5500. Impressed with small size & weight, features and image quality. I was looking for a more compact travel package. Photo quality is great. I don't use video per se and haven't tried it yet. My concern about getting into the other system mentioned was their steep cost for a package that may not be improvement on newer dslrs. Saying that, the technology and feature set on many of them are pretty astounding these days. Good luck.
#18
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 16
My recommendation is to go somewhere that has several options, pick each one up, and play with them. It is my belief that we have now gotten to the point in camera technology that the overriding factor of which camera to buy (unless you need some specialized feature or purpose like weather sealing or 4k video) is how it feels to you.
There is an interesting article where a pro landscape photographer took 2002, 2007, and 2015 "pro-level" model cameras and took the same scene with the same lens on each camera. Looking at a spec sheet there are clear differences between the three cameras. Looking at the pictures zoomed in at 100% on a computer there are clear differences. He then printed at 13x9 and 30x20 sizes. At 13x9 he himself, a pro-photographer, could not see the differences between the cameras without a magnifying glass. At 30x20 six non-photographers could not notice the difference (though he, knowing better what to look for could). My guess is that 99.9% of the pictures you take you will view at less than 13x9 size, where you would need a magnifying glass to see the difference between cameras (and remember, this is comparing a new camera with a 13 year old camera!).
Lens and your own skill are the limiting factors for most people now, not the camera body.
There is an interesting article where a pro landscape photographer took 2002, 2007, and 2015 "pro-level" model cameras and took the same scene with the same lens on each camera. Looking at a spec sheet there are clear differences between the three cameras. Looking at the pictures zoomed in at 100% on a computer there are clear differences. He then printed at 13x9 and 30x20 sizes. At 13x9 he himself, a pro-photographer, could not see the differences between the cameras without a magnifying glass. At 30x20 six non-photographers could not notice the difference (though he, knowing better what to look for could). My guess is that 99.9% of the pictures you take you will view at less than 13x9 size, where you would need a magnifying glass to see the difference between cameras (and remember, this is comparing a new camera with a 13 year old camera!).
Lens and your own skill are the limiting factors for most people now, not the camera body.
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,040
I've convinced myself into the Sony a6000 over the Nikon d5500, although for sub-$1000 camera bundles these are miles ahead of what was available not that long ago.
I think the sony will get more use being smaller and lighter. if it feels too small, i'll add a batter grip.
I like that its faster for action photography.
image quality and focus seem to be the same or a slight edge to sony.
sony is about $200 cheaper comparing similar bundles.
the disadvantage of the sony is its seems to use battery life twice as fast, but that can be overcome with a $50 spare.
I think the sony will get more use being smaller and lighter. if it feels too small, i'll add a batter grip.
I like that its faster for action photography.
image quality and focus seem to be the same or a slight edge to sony.
sony is about $200 cheaper comparing similar bundles.
the disadvantage of the sony is its seems to use battery life twice as fast, but that can be overcome with a $50 spare.
#20
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 545
I would say the Panasonic GX7 would be a great value at this point and well worth getting.
Particularly when you compare using it with very fast lenses, you're going to get same image quality out of the GX/ in a lighter overall package and it is better for video.
There is also a brand new GX8 which is even better, but is more expensive than GX7 and bulkier (compared to the GX7, not the Nikon D).
Also a sleeper camera is the Olympus E-M10 as well. Simple, but really well done and fits great in the hand.
I will also echo the recommendation to go to the store and pick them up and handle them. A lot of surprises pop up there. Cameras you might have liked drop out and ones you didnt take seriously suddenly they come into the potential solution set.
If you do that in-store tryout, then do also try to buy the camera in store and support the retailer, I might add...
Particularly when you compare using it with very fast lenses, you're going to get same image quality out of the GX/ in a lighter overall package and it is better for video.
There is also a brand new GX8 which is even better, but is more expensive than GX7 and bulkier (compared to the GX7, not the Nikon D).
Also a sleeper camera is the Olympus E-M10 as well. Simple, but really well done and fits great in the hand.
I will also echo the recommendation to go to the store and pick them up and handle them. A lot of surprises pop up there. Cameras you might have liked drop out and ones you didnt take seriously suddenly they come into the potential solution set.
If you do that in-store tryout, then do also try to buy the camera in store and support the retailer, I might add...
Last edited by osamede; Aug 4, 2015 at 3:17 pm
#22
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Home
Programs: Virgin FC, Qantas, Golden Circle, Sofitel, Hyatt, Starwood, Nectar, and my Tesco Club Card
Posts: 1,769
A friend of mine who does a lot of video photography claims the Canons are better than Nikons for vIdeo work and uses a Canon 70d with an L lens fitted. When picking a lens for video go for one that focuses as quietly as possible or turn auto focus off.
I find snapsort useful for comparing one camera with another
I also 100% Agree with the recommendation to go into a store and handle the cameras. Make sure you get the camera shop to remove any security locks and chains particularly on smaller cameras as it can affect the feel of the camera in the hands. Word of warning about going into a shop to check the cameras out.... doing so might mean you buy a more expensive camera. I was sold on a Canon 700d until I went in and picked up the Nikon d7100, it just felt so much better and whilst initially I wasn't going to spend that sort of money it pushed my budget up. It also helped me rule out some of the rangefinder style cameras which just didn't feel right.
Last edited by Kettering Northants QC; Aug 18, 2015 at 12:43 am
#23
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, HH Diamond, Hertz PC
Posts: 171
I just bought the Nikon D5500. Impressed with small size & weight, features and image quality. I was looking for a more compact travel package. Photo quality is great. I don't use video per se and haven't tried it yet. My concern about getting into the other system mentioned was their steep cost for a package that may not be improvement on newer dslrs. Saying that, the technology and feature set on many of them are pretty astounding these days. Good luck.
I am shopping for a DSLR now for a vacation next week and looking at the D5500 due to the WiFi
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Massachusetts, USA; AA Plat, DL GM and Flying Colonel; Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 24,221
I was told the same thing by a camera store salesman (a professional camera guy, not someone at Best Buy who's on the camera aisle this week). It was in a situation where he had absolutely nothing, financial or otherwise, riding on my reaction to his statement.
#25
Suspended
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
Panasonics and Sonys are better than either Canon or Nikon for video work.
#26
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 545
thanks for the interesting suggestion
looks like these non-SLR cameras are generally more expensive, generally better for video, and generally inferior for photography (e.g. maximum aperture is about a stop less, etc.).
I don't really wan't to pay double, and my existing 1080p video is more than ample for my needs. aside from the weight/bulk, i'm not seeing much of an advantage. Am i missing something?
looks like these non-SLR cameras are generally more expensive, generally better for video, and generally inferior for photography (e.g. maximum aperture is about a stop less, etc.).
I don't really wan't to pay double, and my existing 1080p video is more than ample for my needs. aside from the weight/bulk, i'm not seeing much of an advantage. Am i missing something?
In particular the Micro Four Thirds, basically because you can really get compact and lightweight with these.
In addition to the cameras I mentioned above, if you want to be adventurous and really go for ultra compact, look at the Panasonic GM5, which has exact same image and video quality, but is cleverly designed to be compact while actually offering a lot of controls. You have to really examine closely this device to understand it. Once you do, it's kind of a sleeper.
With anyone of these Micro Four Thirds cameras, you can pick from a huge set of lenses. My picks for travel would be the Panasonic Leica 25mm 1.4 for night and the Panasonic 14-140 f4-5.6 (the latest version). The kit lens that comes with the GM5 (12-32) is also worth owning. it's a classic.
But personally I would not buy a traditional DSLR at this point in time. These companies are dragging their feet and in some ways kind of milking it. The money is too good for them to let go, but really they could be doing a lot more. They are stuck in the classic business trap that the likes of Ericsson, Motorola and Nokia fell into in mobile phones.
Last edited by osamede; Aug 21, 2015 at 8:56 am
#27
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SNA/LAX... somewhere sunny and warm, but crowded.
Programs: AA/UA/UR/MRP/IHG Plat
Posts: 916
#28
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
You can't beat Sony or Canon for lens selection. Most people though won't spend thousands for high-end lenses.
The Sony A6000 is about to be replaced any day now.
However, if the replacement is priced like the RX100 IV, it could be very pricey.
The Costco deals are pretty good. Do they offer deals on mirrorless? Because otherwise, they're pretty pricey setups.
The Sony A6000 is about to be replaced any day now.
However, if the replacement is priced like the RX100 IV, it could be very pricey.
The Costco deals are pretty good. Do they offer deals on mirrorless? Because otherwise, they're pretty pricey setups.
#29
Suspended
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
You can't beat Sony or Canon for lens selection. Most people though won't spend thousands for high-end lenses.
The Sony A6000 is about to be replaced any day now.
However, if the replacement is priced like the RX100 IV, it could be very pricey.
The Costco deals are pretty good. Do they offer deals on mirrorless? Because otherwise, they're pretty pricey setups.
The Sony A6000 is about to be replaced any day now.
However, if the replacement is priced like the RX100 IV, it could be very pricey.
The Costco deals are pretty good. Do they offer deals on mirrorless? Because otherwise, they're pretty pricey setups.
#30
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: FRA
Programs: MileagePlus Premier Silver, IHG Spire Elite, HHonors Silver, RapidRewards
Posts: 382
They've (both Sony and the Internet) been saying that for months.
My personal bias and recommendation is toward a Sony a6000 or a Sony a7 series if you're wanting video.
The Olympus OM-D series is nice also in terms of lightweight/less bulky, but I can't speak to their video capabilities.
My personal bias and recommendation is toward a Sony a6000 or a Sony a7 series if you're wanting video.
The Olympus OM-D series is nice also in terms of lightweight/less bulky, but I can't speak to their video capabilities.