Choosing a camera for long video shoots and photography.

For videography and photography i have a choice between the Sony A7II, Canon 80D, Canon 7DMKII and Canon 6D. The A7II is at a great price right now as well. The Canon 80D is cheap and is brand new, so won't get outdated any time soon. The Canon 7DMKII is a good all-round camera and at a great price as well. The Canon 6D is a Full Frame camera and is good at low-light performance but maybe outdated soon. I would buy a canon 17-40mm f4.0L for either the 80D or the 7DMKII and the 24-70mm f4.0L lens for the 6D. I would buy any good Sony FE mount lens in the above lens price range. Thanks. ;-)

I would not recommend a DSLR (all those Canons in this case) for serious video use unless you have a fair bit of outboard kit or the resources of a decent shoot crew. DSLRs are not designed for shooting video because their great strength -- the optical reflex viewfinder with its associated focusing system -- is not available when shooting video.

I can't comment on the various A7 options apart from what you can read in reviews. Is there a reason why you would like a FF camera for video or is that purely for the stills side?

How much experience do you have of stills and video shooting? That can make a difference to the advice you need. Also, you don't say what you'll be shooting and in what conditions. There is a world of difference between scripted drama work and 'run & gun' news gathering to cite a couple of extremes.

--
Albert
(The one in France)
Every photograph is an abstraction from reality.

AlbertInFrance said:

I would not recommend a DSLR (all those Canons in this case) for serious video use unless you have a fair bit of outboard kit or the resources of a decent shoot crew. DSLRs are not designed for shooting video because their great strength -- the optical reflex viewfinder with its associated focusing system -- is not available when shooting video.

Click to expand...

Maybe so but i wouldn't be needing the optical view-finder for the work I'm doing right now. I would still shoot photographs so the focusing system would do some good.

AlbertTheLazy said:

I can't comment on the various A7 options apart from what you can read in reviews. Is there a reason why you would like a FF camera for video or is that purely for the stills side?

Click to expand...

Yeah pretty much only for stills. And better lenses and quality for video? (not sure)

AlbertTheLazy said:

How much experience do you have of stills and video shooting? That can make a difference to the advice you need. Also, you don't say what you'll be shooting and in what conditions. There is a world of difference between scripted drama work and 'run & gun' news gathering to cite a couple of extremes.

Click to expand...

I've got quite a lot of experience in Photography and not that much in videography, but I'm a very technical guy so i can learn about this stuff easier. I forgot to mention that i will be shooting in one place with no movement for a concert in a usually A/C auditorium. (I will edit that into my post)

Thanks.

TechAndCats said:

TechAndCats said:

AlbertInFrance wrote

Is there a reason why you would like a FF camera for video or is that purely for the stills side?

Click to expand...

Yeah pretty much only for stills. And better lenses and quality for video? (not sure)

Click to expand...

Unless you will be pushing the envelope on low light I can see no benefit in shooting video with a FF camera.

TechAndCats said:

I've got quite a lot of experience in Photography and not that much in videography, but I'm a very technical guy so i can learn about this stuff easier. I forgot to mention that i will be shooting in one place with no movement for a concert in a usually A/C auditorium.

Click to expand...

So how much video will you actually shoot? Is this a frequent requirement?

If you're just shooting static off a tripod then live view will be fine. How will your footage be used?

As it's for a concert will you be able to get a sound feed from the house mixer? If not you need to think very carefully about audio equipment. Good sound is more important than image quality for concert shooting. Check the inputs available and whether there is a headphone monitoring socket. The remaining option would be a separate audio recorder.

Even a house mixer feed will probably need tweaking to be suitable for you.

I just wrote this minutes ago!

"... If you are primarily shooting video, buy a camcorder. If you do the occasional video, or are willing to invest the money and time to properly outfit your DSLR and learn how to operate it to get similar performance as a camcorder... go for it.

I dabbled in video before getting into still photography. I always wonder why the heck someone would outfit themselves with a bulky DSLR setup for $4000 when they can get a heck of a decent video camera for half that money."

But my vote would be for a mirrorless camera. The mirror is not necessary for video. A mirrorless is what I use and a true manual focus lens is going to be better for video than an AF lens switched to MF

TechAndCats Wrote:

AlbertTheLazy said:

AlbertTheLazy said:

I've got quite a lot of experience in Photography and not that much in videography, but I'm a very technical guy so i can learn about this stuff easier. I forgot to mention that i will be shooting in one place with no movement for a concert in a usually A/C auditorium.

Click to expand...

So how much video will you actually shoot? Is this a frequent requirement?

If you're just shooting static off a tripod then live view will be fine. How will your footage be used?

Click to expand...

My footage will mainly be used as an Archive and maybe 5 minute clips on YouTube.

AlbertTheLazy said:

As it's for a concert will you be able to get a sound feed from the house mixer? If not you need to think very carefully about audio equipment. Good sound is more important than image quality for concert shooting. Check the inputs available and whether there is a headphone monitoring socket. The remaining option would be a separate audio recorder.

Click to expand...

I have a good mic and a H4n to record into so audio isn't a problem. I would have just hooked it up to the house mixer but the concert hall is very old and just doesn't have mics (can't do anything about it, people who need mics rent their own and that's very expensive.

Thanks.

PenPix said:

"... If you are primarily shooting video, buy a camcorder. If you do the occasional video, or are willing to invest the money and time to properly outfit your DSLR and learn how to operate it to get similar performance as a camcorder... go for it.

Click to expand...

I would have just got a camcorder but I really want to up my game in photography as well. :-|

PenPix said:

I dabbled in video before getting into still photography. I always wonder why the heck someone would outfit themselves with a bulky DSLR setup for $4000 when they can get a heck of a decent video camera for half that money."

Click to expand...

I agree completely.

PenPix said:

But my vote would be for a mirrorless camera. The mirror is not necessary for video. A mirrorless is what I use and a true manual focus lens is going to be better for video than an AF lens switched to MF

Click to expand...

True. I like the A7 lineup but just can't decide from the 3 in my price range, also a metabolism adapter is quite expensive as most of the time I would be using canon glass,hence why I want a Canon dslr and that most of the A7's overheat other than the A7S (I may be wrong but I can't find anywhere on the internet to prove so.) The three A7's I'm looking at are the a7, a7ii, a7r and A7S. Buying a camera is so hard!

TechAndCats said:

TechAndCats Wrote:

TechAndCats said:

TechAndCats said:

I've got quite a lot of experience in Photography and not that much in videography, but I'm a very technical guy so i can learn about this stuff easier. I forgot to mention that i will be shooting in one place with no movement for a concert in a usually A/C auditorium.

Click to expand...

So how much video will you actually shoot? Is this a frequent requirement?

If you're just shooting static off a tripod then live view will be fine. How will your footage be used?

Click to expand...

My footage will mainly be used as an Archive and maybe 5 minute clips on YouTube.

Click to expand...

On that basis, quite honestly almost any video-capable camera would suffice. It would probably make sense to separate your two requirements and get a cheap camcorder or bridge camera for the video and the best still camera you can afford.

TechAndCats said:

TechAndCats said:

As it's for a concert will you be able to get a sound feed from the house mixer? If not you need to think very carefully about audio equipment. Good sound is more important than image quality for concert shooting. Check the inputs available and whether there is a headphone monitoring socket. The remaining option would be a separate audio recorder.

Click to expand...

I have a good mic and a H4n to record into so audio isn't a problem. I would have just hooked it up to the house mixer but the concert hall is very old and just doesn't have mics (can't do anything about it, people who need mics rent their own and that's very expensive.

Click to expand...

Even more of a reason to get a cheap camera for video. You'll only be concerned with the picture capabilities.

I don't know prices and availability in Sri Lanka, but a camera that will do all you need for video will cost a fraction of a FF DSLR or mirrorless.

There is, of course the question of why you want FF and whether you need it to achieve your shooting aims. A Sony A6300 would possibly answer al your needs but I'm guessing.

What do you mean by a long video shoot? DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are incapable of shooting more than 30 minutes at a time by design so as not to compete with camcorders. This is not an issue if one is shooting small clips that would be edited together.

CBokeh said:

What do you mean by a long video shoot? DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are incapable of shooting more than 30 minutes at a time by design so as not to compete with camcorders. This is not an issue if one is shooting small clips that would be edited together.

Click to expand...

I don't mind the 30 minute limit as i can just restart the recording after the limit, only problem is overheating. I still don't know what cmaera to buy though, no one has said anything.

TechAndCats said:

I still don't know what cmaera to buy though, no one has said anything.

Click to expand...

That is because nobody can tell you what is important to you.

OK. Buy a Panasonic fz200 plus a crop format Canon. If that's not the best choice you can blame me.

Any camera on your list is going to give you amazing stills and video. The Sonys do tend to overheat. Even if you make it so far with the Sony that you need to restart the shot you'll likely have the camera overheat in the second cycle. For that reason the Canons would be better. I do agree with the other posters who suggest getting a dedicated camcorder, but...

I suggest rather than mull over the possibilities in the abstract, that you go hold these cameras in your hand. All of the advice anyone can give you to by X camera might go out the window if you don't like the feel or the menus or the weight of that camera.

About overheating, keep in mind one thing: the sony's in your price range that overheat are the a6300 and the a7Rii, and they overheat only in 4k, in full hd they got no overheating problems at all. Trading a camera that overheats in 4K for a camera that doesn't have 4k at all isn't that big of a good deal if you keep that in mind. And if the a7ii is in your price range, an used or grey imported A7S may be in price range too, and, besides being one year older, its much better than the A7ii for video, as it is designed especially for video and low light.

Also, about the adapter, if you decide to go full frame with the a7 line it is no problem too. The expensive metabones speedbooster is only needed in crop sensors (such as the sony a6300) to get rid of the crop factor and give you the full frame look. With a full frame camera you already have the full frame look and all you need is a cheap commlite EF-NEX adapter to get the aperture command over the lens, IS and working AF, and that will cost you only $100. Of course, a Canon lens in a Canon body will have a faster AF, but that is only a big deal if you're doing sports or fast moving objects (such as kids runing around your room), and can be worked out buying one Sony lens latter, on purpose of having a better AF when it is needed.

Just pointing out some things, so you can make your decision with more information

:-| I guess so.

CBokeh said:

Any camera on your list is going to give you amazing stills and video. The Sonys do tend to overheat. Even if you make it so far with the Sony that you need to restart the shot you'll likely have the camera overheat in the second cycle. For that reason the Canons would be better. I do agree with the other posters who suggest getting a dedicated camcorder, but...

Click to expand...

That's what I've heard. Really comes down to the 80D or A7II. Maybe in an A/C hall they won't overheat? Haven't seen any overheat tests done on the A7 or A7II so far.

CBokeh said:

I suggest rather than mull over the possibilities in the abstract, that you go hold these cameras in your hand. All of the advice anyone can give you to by X camera might go out the window if you don't like the feel or the menus or the weight of that camera.

Click to expand...

I can rent any of the canon cameras but i can't rent any other camera as the only other way to get it would be on B&H.

Next week i'll be renting the 80D for a concert to try it out.

Thanks.

Milts said:

About overheating, keep in mind one thing: the sony's in your price range that overheat are the a6300 and the a7Rii, and they overheat only in 4k, in full hd they got no overheating problems at all. Trading a camera that overheats in 4K for a camera that doesn't have 4k at all isn't that big of a good deal if you keep that in mind. And if the a7ii is in your price range, an used or grey imported A7S may be in price range too, and, besides being one year older, its much better than the A7ii for video, as it is designed especially for video and low light.

Click to expand...

True, I really hope the A7II doesn't overheat. I looked at used a7s' but are just too expensive for my budget. Even if I were using 4K, i wouldn't as file sizes are massive and i have no use for it.

Milts said:

Also, about the adapter, if you decide to go full frame with the a7 line it is no problem too. The expensive metabones speedbooster is only needed in crop sensors (such as the sony a6300) to get rid of the crop factor and give you the full frame look. With a full frame camera you already have the full frame look and all you need is a cheap commlite EF-NEX adapter to get the aperture command over the lens, IS and working AF, and that will cost you only $100. Of course, a Canon lens in a Canon body will have a faster AF, but that is only a big deal if you're doing sports or fast moving objects (such as kids runing around your room), and can be worked out buying one Sony lens latter, on purpose of having a better AF when it is needed.

Click to expand...

Really?! I never knew that would work. I thought the only point of getting such a great camera would be to have a good adapter for canon glass, as i already have a viltrox adapter, Great! I think i've settled on the A7II, even though I'm renting out the Canon 80D next week ;-)

Milts said:

Just pointing out some things, so you can make your decision with more information

Click to expand...

Thanks.

Well, in fact 4k has massive file sizes and its not that great for some uses haha

The main reason the metabones is so good it's that it usually has a better build quality and they make firmware updates to the adapter to fix bugs and improve some things. But the better perfomance it gives it's not as great as the price difference haha But make a research about the non-metabones adapters, i talked about the commlite one that it's one of the most popular, but it is known that there are differecens betwen all the manufacturers and some may give you better results than the others. Some lenses may work well in one adapter and not work at all in other model, maybe even some cheap chinese one may do the job better than the expensive ones haha So it's up to you find which adapter it's better for the lenses you already have and which lenses are better for future purchase

About overheating in the A7ii, i've never seen any complaints, but it may be a good idea to rent one to test before buying. Good luck

Milts said:

Well, in fact 4k has massive file sizes and its not that great for some uses haha

The main reason the metabones is so good it's that it usually has a better build quality and they make firmware updates to the adapter to fix bugs and improve some things. But the better perfomance it gives it's not as great as the price difference haha But make a research about the non-metabones adapters, i talked about the commlite one that it's one of the most popular, but it is known that there are differecens betwen all the manufacturers and some may give you better results than the others. Some lenses may work well in one adapter and not work at all in other model, maybe even some cheap chinese one may do the job better than the expensive ones haha So it's up to you find which adapter it's better for the lenses you already have and which lenses are better for future purchase

Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. Will buy the Sony A7II, and will use my Viltrox Adapter with the canon glass that i'll rent. Until christmas i'll rent the glass and then buy some good Sony FE mount glass.

Milts said:

About overheating in the A7ii, i've never seen any complaints, but it may be a good idea to rent one to test before buying. Good luck

Click to expand...

Hope so too! Sadly I can't rent the A7II though, can only rent Canon Stuff. Thanks!!