PDA

View Full Version : What kind of Camera?


PsyOps
01-14-2011, 05:13 PM
I want to get a camera that does HD video. A guy told me he thinks you get the best bang for the buck if you buy an SLR that does HD instead an HD camcorder. I'm inexperienced at photography so I don't know much.

Any recommendations for a an SLR that is easy to operate and doesn't cost an arm and a leg? I'm hoping to stay under $500.

TIA

aps45819
01-14-2011, 05:30 PM
A lot of point and shoots will do HD video

I've been thinking about this one
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022411pentaxoptiow90.asp

hvp05
01-14-2011, 06:00 PM
Yeah, you can shoot video with a P&S, but I doubt you will have much control over it; it will be a straight-forward, "raw" capture.

If you can bump your budget a bit, you can get a DSLR that will do full HD. They should give you more well-rounded ability while remaining user-friendly like a P&S unit, but you may still need to purchase a lens separately, depending on which package you pick up. (There are ones sold as a kit including a lens, then there are ones where you buy the camera body, but you there are many options for finding great used lenses.)

Search B&H Photo (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/). My preference is for Canon products, so I would say look at the Rebel series if you want a DSLR, but Nikon or others have their own good offerings.

jbr13
01-14-2011, 07:25 PM
A problem you will run into with a DSLR shooting video is autofocus. The camcorders all have autofocus, but a lot of the DSLRs do not. If I am not mistaken, there are only a couple of higher dollar DSLRs that have autofocus.

PsyOps
01-14-2011, 08:42 PM
A problem you will run into with a DSLR shooting video is autofocus. The camcorders all have autofocus, but a lot of the DSLRs do not. If I am not mistaken, there are only a couple of higher dollar DSLRs that have autofocus.

So, what sort of HD camcorder would you recommend?

aps45819
01-14-2011, 10:53 PM
So, what sort of HD camcorder would you recommend?

Where and what do you want to record?

JEB
01-15-2011, 09:24 AM
A problem you will run into with a DSLR shooting video is autofocus. The camcorders all have autofocus, but a lot of the DSLRs do not. If I am not mistaken, there are only a couple of higher dollar DSLRs that have autofocus.

I've also heard of problems with Vibration Reduction.

aps45819
01-15-2011, 10:02 AM
I've also heard of problems with Vibration Reduction.

you need new batteries

PsyOps
01-15-2011, 07:26 PM
Where and what do you want to record?

Mostly will be recording videos of me playing the guitar. So the cam will go on a tripod. But I also want to be able to do family videos, which would require moving around.

aps45819
01-15-2011, 08:02 PM
Unless you want to invest $600+ in a DSLR, go nwith a point and shoot.
Best Point and Shoot Digital Camera for Video – Reviews and Rankings | Bestcovery (http://www.bestcovery.com/best-point-shoot-digital-camera-for-video)

desertrat
01-16-2011, 08:54 AM
I want to get a camera that does HD video. A guy told me he thinks you get the best bacg for the buck if you buy an SLR that does HD instead an HD camcorder. I'm inexperienced at photography so I don't know much.

Any recommendations for a an SLR that is easy to operate and doesn't cost an arm and a leg? I'm hoping to stay under $500.

TIA

Not sure why he would tell you that.

Check this one out.



http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Canon+-+VIXIA+High-Definition+Digital+Camcorder+with+2.7%22+Widescreen+LCD+Monitor+-+Black/9751908.p?id=1218167393367&skuId=9751908

aps45819
01-16-2011, 10:27 AM
Not sure why he would tell you that.

Check this one out.



http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Canon+-+VIXIA+High-Definition+Digital+Camcorder+with+2.7%22+Widescreen+LCD+Monitor+-+Black/9751908.p?id=1218167393367&skuId=9751908

People always think that if they buy expensive equipment, they'll take fantastic pictures.

If you are going to record yourself playing music, a camcorder might give you better sound recording but a little reasearch finds that none of the inexpensive HD camcorders have an input for an external microphone

hvp05
01-16-2011, 11:27 AM
Not to appear as Captain Obvious (:lol:), but it is notable which level of "HD" the equipment can shoot. Some of the cheap ones boast a dandy price tag, but are limited to 720p, whereas the better ones can do 1080p. You're a smart guy, Psy, but sometimes the simple things are easy to overlook. :howdy:

aps45819
01-16-2011, 11:39 AM
Not to appear as Captain Obvious (:lol:), but it is notable which level of "HD" the equipment can shoot. Some of the cheap ones boast a dandy price tag, but are limited to 720p, whereas the better ones can do 1080p. You're a smart guy, Psy, but sometimes the simple things are easy to overlook. :howdy:

:lol: It's just like cars, how fast you go depends on how much $$ you spend

PsyOps
01-16-2011, 12:19 PM
People always think that if they buy expensive equipment, they'll take fantastic pictures.

If you are going to record yourself playing music, a camcorder might give you better sound recording but a little reasearch finds that none of the inexpensive HD camcorders have an input for an external microphone

When I record myself playing the guitar I plug directly in to my audio recording studio and use Vegas Movie Studio to merge the video and audio.

PsyOps
01-16-2011, 12:20 PM
You're a smart guy, Psy, but sometimes the simple things are easy to overlook. :howdy:

Thanks........................ I think :lol:

I think I can sort out things in term of buying something in a camcorder. I definitely would make sure it could do 1080p. The thing I mainly wanted answered was, is it a good idea to get an all-in-one camera that would not only save in money, but do all the things in one device and avoid having to carry around two cameras. I also failed to mention that I want to upgrade what I have now in a still camera. Something with good stabilizaton, good zoom, good macro, and takes nice crisp photos.

hvp05
01-16-2011, 12:39 PM
Thanks........................ I thinkI tried to word that delicately. :lol: You said you don't know a lot about them, and your budget is a main concern, so with all these different sources flying around, I didn't want you to become fixated on the cost whilst overlooking the resolution (or other features) that may end up being a disappointment post-purchase. :buddies:


I also failed to mention that I want to upgrade what I have now in a still camera. Something with good stabilizaton, good zoom, good macro, and takes nice crisp photos.What do you currently own for a camera? Sounds like you are looking for an advanced P&S. I'm not sure what's on the market for P&S units at the moment, so it would take a little looking. With a $500 ceiling, you could definitely find a good one.

aps45819
01-16-2011, 12:40 PM
When I record myself playing the guitar I plug directly in to my audio recording studio and use Vegas Movie Studio to merge the video and audio.

So all that remains is to decide if you want 720 or 1080 resolution, zoom capabilities (optical is real zoom, digital is just enlarging the digital image and can be done on any computer) and how much you want to spend.
Just about everything records to an SD card these days (except Sony)

GopherM
01-16-2011, 06:51 PM
You could also go with a bridge or crossover camera like the Panasonic FZ100, FZ45, FZ35, Fuji FinePix S200EXR, Canon PowerShot S3 IS or other similar cameras. These are super zoom cameras with good resolution, good low light capability and shoot either 720 or 1080 HD. I have the FZ100 and it will allow you to capture still shots while shooting video. The Sony superzoom will allow you to capture panoramic shots while moving the camera either horizontally or vertically.

Aps pointed out that one source is dpreview as a good site. Trustedreviews.com is also very good. These cameras allow a wide range of shooting capabilities without all the lends changing. Several have hot shoe mounts for flash attachments. They don't offer the extreme high quality of professional shooting that higher end Canon and Nikons but for most of the shooting world they are more than adequate.

aps45819
01-16-2011, 09:29 PM
They don't offer the extreme high quality of professional shooting that higher end Canon and Nikons but for most of the shooting world they are more than adequate.

and you don't have to lug around a sack full of lenses

GopherM
01-17-2011, 02:06 PM
and you don't have to lug around a sack full of lenses

Not just the lugging, but the cleaning and everytime you swap lenses you have to worry about what is getting inside the camera body. If I was the fantastic shooter like a few of the recognized photographers are here then I might consider it. As it is, I would be like the every day duffer going out and spending thousands of dollars on the very best set of clubs and golf gear just so I could lob my shots into sand traps, water hazards and the rough,

It just doesn't make sense to spend beyond your capabilities. When you get better you will be educated enough to buy better and shoot better. Besides, I have seen some fantastic shots taken with a cell phone camera. It's mostly what's behind the lens and camera body that make the biggest difference.

jbr13
01-17-2011, 02:30 PM
Well put GopherM!


SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.