Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best SLR that records video for under 1K?
- Thread starter benji21
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
550D=t2i
600D=t3i
My understanding is that DSLRs are limited on time when recording as they can overheat the CCD with prolonged use.
I thought the Canons were limited to about 12 minutes due to how they handle the cards file system.
If you are going be doing some heavy video... save your money and get either a Canon 7D or Nikon D7000.
Nikon D5100 you are limited to any in camera tweaking.
Even if you are shooting for 25min which I can't see why or how, you need a card that's going to handle the buffering. And basically a camera that can take that kind of shooting. That's why I'm suggesting the 7D or D7000.
If you are shooting for videos, you would want to shoot in increments of 5min or less. Anything more than 25min, get a camcorder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZPNwIMMFik
Nikon D5100 you are limited to any in camera tweaking.
Even if you are shooting for 25min which I can't see why or how, you need a card that's going to handle the buffering. And basically a camera that can take that kind of shooting. That's why I'm suggesting the 7D or D7000.
If you are shooting for videos, you would want to shoot in increments of 5min or less. Anything more than 25min, get a camcorder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZPNwIMMFik
Discussions I've seen in the past regarding Canon say there isn't any video quality difference between the 7D and the lower end T2i.
The problem with the 7D is that it does not have articulating display, somewhat limiting it's usefulness.
Probably the best answer is by a dedicated camcorder - right now, it's just too much of a hassle unless your needs are light.
The 600d/550d will give you the best value for money.
The 600d has manual audio controls, an articulating display and a digital crop function allowing 3-10x zoom at 1080p. These are the only features that the 550d doesnt have related to video, otherwise they are the same camera.
Could you maybe specify what you are recording so we can help decide whether a DSLR is the best choice for you.
The 600d has manual audio controls, an articulating display and a digital crop function allowing 3-10x zoom at 1080p. These are the only features that the 550d doesnt have related to video, otherwise they are the same camera.
Could you maybe specify what you are recording so we can help decide whether a DSLR is the best choice for you.
My Canon P&S was limited at 30 minute clips in 720p. I haven't yet played around with the T3i's video capability yet however I believe I read you are able to record up to 30 minute clips with it (don't quote me on that though
) I haven't shot a 30 minute clip yet on the T3i so I could be wrongMy Canon P&S was limited at 30 minute clips in 720p. I haven't yet played around with the T3i's video capability yet however I believe I read you are able to record up to 30 minute clips with it (don't quote me on that though
What are you recording that requires shooting for 30 minutes straight?
I don't think there is a "Best" camera for shooting video. You can have someone who knows how to shoot, lighting, composition, settings, etc and they will produce a good to great video especially if they know how to do post production and capture the shot in the camera, no matter what the camera!
Get one that feels good in your hands or that you feel comfortable manipulating the controls with.
Get one that fits your budget. If you are just getting into this, which it sounds like you are, get something that is relatively inexpensive in case you don't like it or you are not shooting as much as you thought you would. This way you are not nose deep into it.
Get one that feels good in your hands or that you feel comfortable manipulating the controls with.
Get one that fits your budget. If you are just getting into this, which it sounds like you are, get something that is relatively inexpensive in case you don't like it or you are not shooting as much as you thought you would. This way you are not nose deep into it.
Most of the stuff Ive read (well, the convincing stuff anyway!) has claimed that its more to do with financial reasons. If DSLRS have greater video recording lengths than 30 minutes, then they would be classified as a video camera by the European Union these have a higher rate of import duty than stills cameras.
The maximum length of one continuous video clip is 29 minutes for the T3i. For the Canon 1100 (Im not sure whats its called in the States), its about 17 minutes.My Canon P&S was limited at 30 minute clips in 720p. I haven't yet played around with the T3i's video capability yet however I believe I read you are able to record up to 30 minute clips with it (don't quote me on that though
Friends wedding
Obviously not as the main videographer for the wedding but more as an alternative (backup) wedding video for the bride and groom. Other than that, probably nothing at that length of recording.OK, so I was a minute off
OK, so I was a minute off
Actually, it's more like 29 minutes and something seconds - you were closer, but I wanted to sound like the big man
Love the t3i/600D
I have the t3i and use it often for video.
The t3i swivel display is great because you can take videos and see the screen easily if you hold the camera up high/down low. You can also protect the screen better by flipping the swivel screen shut. That's really the most noticeable difference between t2i/550D and t3i/600D but it's worth it. I've gotten some really nice shots from obscure angles and down low that would have been much more difficult or required me to lay in the dirt to see what the images would look like.
I have the t3i and use it often for video.
The t3i swivel display is great because you can take videos and see the screen easily if you hold the camera up high/down low. You can also protect the screen better by flipping the swivel screen shut. That's really the most noticeable difference between t2i/550D and t3i/600D but it's worth it. I've gotten some really nice shots from obscure angles and down low that would have been much more difficult or required me to lay in the dirt to see what the images would look like.
It has to do with the FAT32 file system on these cameras. These cameras were never meant for dedicated video use, so continuous recording wasn't really a concern.
Time doesn't have anything to do with it. It's all about file size. You're limited to 4gb clips, which is roughly 12 minutes of HD video.
There's not. The 7D is a better build of a camera. For still use it's superior, but videowise they're the same. The t3i and 60D offer an articulating screen, which is a huge benefit for shooting video. The audio still sucks on these cameras regardless of the ability to turn off AGC/control manually.
Lens
Forgot to mention that if you get a Canon, you should get this lens to go with it...it's only $13k
But seriously, instead of going with the stock 18-55mm (if you have any leeway with price) I got the Canon 18-200mm EF-S and it's a great all-around use lens for indoor and outdoor use since the zoom range is phenomenal. The Tamron brand version of the same thing is supposed to be decently comparable for nearly half the price but I didn't want to risk getting a shoddy product. That's your call.
Forgot to mention that if you get a Canon, you should get this lens to go with it...it's only $13k
But seriously, instead of going with the stock 18-55mm (if you have any leeway with price) I got the Canon 18-200mm EF-S and it's a great all-around use lens for indoor and outdoor use since the zoom range is phenomenal. The Tamron brand version of the same thing is supposed to be decently comparable for nearly half the price but I didn't want to risk getting a shoddy product. That's your call.
Have you got a few review links that describe why that might be? Given that the cameras share the same photo internals I'm a little curious.
You can buy a rig of some sort for that. Which you would do anyway if you plan to shoot a lot of video. I don't see that as a problem.
http://vimeo.com/6517042
Why I like the 7D or D7000 is that you get more tweaks inside the camera prior to post processing. You don't get that option in entry level cameras. I know from shooting with the D90 it gets tricky when you shoot in low light. Its good that you have some options so that you can adjust. to your needs.
Video is only one feature. I would definitely look at what else these cameras can do, and will it fit my needs. Spending x-amount of dollars on a camera is lot to invest. Will this investment be profitable? How much time will have to spend post processing?
What tweaks are you talking about? As far as I am aware incremental ISO is the only thing that is different.
They don't share all of the same photo internals.
7D has:
Dual Digic-4 processors
8fps burst compared to t2i's 3.7fps
19 point AF, compared to 9
Max burst duration jpeg of 94 compared to 34
Shutter speed range 1/8000-30sec vs. 1/4000-30sec
There's more, but these are the big differences.
As for the body itself, the 7D is made of magnesium and can be weathersealed when used with L glass
Also has:
PC terminal, Wireless Speedlite EX Control for external flash connection
More accesible menu/button layout
For video, there really isn't much of a difference. The 7D offers intermediate ISO levels to work with and custom light temperature settings. Also, you can monitor an HD signal out through its HDMI connection. I also prefer the more rugged body.
These differences are relatively minor for just video, so it probably doesn't warrant the price jump. However, for heavy still use, the 7D clearly wins out.
I have a t2i. It's GREAT for video. In fact, that's why I bought it.
If you are serious about video, get the t3i, the articulating screen is worth it. Save the money you'd spend on a 7d for lens, audio capturing gear, and other goodies you'll need to rig up your t3i.
There is NO substantial difference between the t2i, t3i, 60d and 7d when it comes to video.
HOWEVER, the 7d is a better equipped camera for stills.
But for me, stills are not my priority - video is.
If you are serious about video, get the t3i, the articulating screen is worth it. Save the money you'd spend on a 7d for lens, audio capturing gear, and other goodies you'll need to rig up your t3i.
There is NO substantial difference between the t2i, t3i, 60d and 7d when it comes to video.
HOWEVER, the 7d is a better equipped camera for stills.
But for me, stills are not my priority - video is.
Here's dpreview's take on the matter:
"The major engineering challenge with video modes in conventional DSLRs is that the mirror must be flipped out of the way in order to capture it. With the optical finder blanked out, you must use the rear LCD for composition. For the casual video shooter this is far from ideal for two main reasons. Firstly, for handheld shooting the camera becomes a less stable platform, because you have to hold it out, away from your body. Secondly, LCD screens have limitations. The image on an LCD screen can be tricky to see in bright light, and even if this isn't a problem, critical focus is hard to judge, too.
In our opinion, the interchangeable lens cameras that do video best are those like the GH2, and Sony's Alpha SLT-A33 and A55, which offer electronic, rather than optical finders. Electronic finders offer all of the benefits of a live 'through the lens' view, but in a more comfortable position, safely shielded from glare. This doesn't matter for more advanced shooting (where a sturdy tripod and LCD composition might make more sense) but it makes a big difference for more casual, handheld video work. On those occasions when you'd prefer to use the LCD, the GH2's screen is fully articulated, making it easy to compose video (and of course stills) from virtually any angle.
The GH2 is easily the best video-equipped stills camera that we've ever used. The depth of its feature set is impressive, but more importantly, it creates great looking video. Movies shot at default high quality settings look fantastic, and the 60fps sensor output ensures nice, smooth footage, even when it comes to fast-moving subjects (like the skiers in some of our video samples)." The GH2 goes for $1k with a 14-42mm (28-84mm equivalent) lens.
"The major engineering challenge with video modes in conventional DSLRs is that the mirror must be flipped out of the way in order to capture it. With the optical finder blanked out, you must use the rear LCD for composition. For the casual video shooter this is far from ideal for two main reasons. Firstly, for handheld shooting the camera becomes a less stable platform, because you have to hold it out, away from your body. Secondly, LCD screens have limitations. The image on an LCD screen can be tricky to see in bright light, and even if this isn't a problem, critical focus is hard to judge, too.
In our opinion, the interchangeable lens cameras that do video best are those like the GH2, and Sony's Alpha SLT-A33 and A55, which offer electronic, rather than optical finders. Electronic finders offer all of the benefits of a live 'through the lens' view, but in a more comfortable position, safely shielded from glare. This doesn't matter for more advanced shooting (where a sturdy tripod and LCD composition might make more sense) but it makes a big difference for more casual, handheld video work. On those occasions when you'd prefer to use the LCD, the GH2's screen is fully articulated, making it easy to compose video (and of course stills) from virtually any angle.
The GH2 is easily the best video-equipped stills camera that we've ever used. The depth of its feature set is impressive, but more importantly, it creates great looking video. Movies shot at default high quality settings look fantastic, and the 60fps sensor output ensures nice, smooth footage, even when it comes to fast-moving subjects (like the skiers in some of our video samples)." The GH2 goes for $1k with a 14-42mm (28-84mm equivalent) lens.