I'm about to buy a new camera, I've got a limited budget max 2.500€ (more or less 2.800$) there are 3 option: Canon 7D Canon 5D II or Canon 5D III used. What are your impressions? What type of film do you take it with?
Copy the link below to share this page:
I have the 5DII and a 1Dx. I passed on the 5DIII because I really dislike the 5DII (mostly because of low ISO shadow noise). If I were really trying to stick to your price range, I'd likely pick the 7D. Personally, I think the FF thing is a bit over rated but I shoot with the 50 and 85 F1.2 a lot. Perhaps it would be worth looking at Blackmagic (particularly the EF body) as well. If you already have some or all the required accessories it might not be that big a hit. The obvious thing to do would be to rent and try for yourself. Indeed, depending on your usage that might carry you over until a better camera is in your range. You might find that the overall cost is a wash (you can deduct the rental costs and do not need to worry about depreciation or rolling over the equipment later). I'm just suggesting it might be worth figuring out on the back of an envelope. The 1Dx is still using h264 but it does do All-I encoding which makes editing much less problematic. The 1Dc also has the (somewhat) more grading-friendly profile available on the Cxxx series. That said, there are lots of people who are creatively making video with any of the cameras you mention.
While I agree that buying kit is a slippery slope and there's some great new thing new every day it seems, if you go in with your eyes open and a plan you can build a great little package and make a little money with it. Since you're just getting started I would say go with the 7D, maybe a little Rode mic to go on top and the best lens you can get. Good luck.
Don't know if $2800 is your total budget or just what you're planning on spending on a camera body alone. Also don't know if you own other gear, but people just getting started with shooting their own stuff tend to forget that all the accessories like lenses, compact flash cards, batteries, etc., will cost money too so you don't want to blow all your money on just the camera body. You will also need to think about a tripod and lights if you don't have that already.
thank you very much for all the comments, I appreciate it! @christopher i mean, if you film like..drama, close up, dialogue scene..or panoramic view of landscape..nature and so on.. :) @alle i've already seen them, and I really love the canon c100 but it's way too expensive for me at the moment :\ about the blackmagic, i like it, and the possibility to use ef lens and zeiss but i don't like the battery...is not so durable right? @ed well 2500 it's for the camera only body or possibly with one lens, i have already some cards, tripod and other accessories
I have the Cannon 7D, and I have been very happy with it.
How do you like the 300D?
@christoper oh interesting...i didn't know that there's a possibility to change batteries, tought was built in with no possibility to change..like an iphone. good to know, thank you
The question is: What specific use do you plan on giving to this camera..? I have had the 7D the MkII and the MKIII and the 6D and if your purpose is to tell a story the 7D will be just fine spend money on glass, not on the body which will be obsolete in 2 years. I have seen award winning movies shot with the 7D, now.... if you want all of the advantages of a full 35mm sensor (and I would) look into the 6D which is a little more than a 7D but definitely less than a 5D MkIII this camera has very brand new technology in it like ALL-I compression I would NOT consider the MkII, because you have to think of "Resale value". Lenses... lenses LENSES !, they are the ones that are going to help you convey a message... an emotion, the body will not.
@victor thank you for your considerations and i'm totally agree with you about lenses in fact i'm considering on buying a nice couple of it and, reading all the other comments, i will look for the 7D i guess
BMC Pocket Cam.
Hey Gigi, there is some very good advice here from people who shoot. I don't shoot, but I teach no-budget filmmaking and I have to stay on top of this question as it's a big one for my class. I'm a big believer in owning your camera, (for shooting no-budget features) and I could give you a number of reasons why it makes sense, especially at the price range you're talking about. And that's without knowing what else you'll be shooting with it. If you make money as a content creator and you want to shoot a feature (or 2 or 3), then owning a camera will pay off. My other 2 cents here is to recommend you look into the mirror-less cameras, like the Panasonic GH4, which is $1700 and expected to be available by the end of this month. I hear a lot of good feedback about the GH2/3's and the first impressions on the GH4 seem to be strong, especially for this price point. And it's a 4k camera, (not that I think that's so important for no-budget features yet). You might also look into the Sony A7s. It's not available yet and there's no estimated street price, but it also shoots 4k and it literally sees in the dark. The early stuff I've seen from NAB is astounding, but I'm sure there are quirks that you'd have to consider. All these cameras at this price range have their drawbacks, when you compare to a $100k Alexa, but come on! I've seen numerous films shot with a 7D that looked terrific, moved audiences and are playing now on Netflix, etc. In other words, it's hard to go wrong these days. And as someone once said--it's the painter not the paintbrush.
I agree strongly with Mark. It all depends on what you are shooting and what you will be shooting in the future. We just finished shooting a feature using two RED cameras and I only mention them because we also had two hacked Panasonic GH2s on set as well. We ended up having to do a few very quick insert shots after all the principal photography AND the pickup days were done and I didn't have the funds to rent another RED for a day (which would have meant getting production insurance for that day which was just about as much money as the camera/lens kit). So I made the call to use the GH2. We are cutting in a 2k timeline and we were very concerned that the GH2 footage just wouldn't match up to the RED. We shouldn't have been. It looks incredible. Even projected on an Ultra-HD projector in a screening room NO ONE could tell the difference. With that being said, I would absolutely wait until the GH4 comes out here in a month or so. It has an interface unit (AG-YAGHG) that will turn this camera into a production camera, giving support for XLR inputs and (in my opinion) a hugely beneficial timecode sync capability (and much more). Of course the two units together will be above your $2,800 price point, the combination is, or at least should be pretty amazing for the price. Also STRONGLY concur with Mark that it is most definitely the painter and not the brush... Just my two cents here! Matt
Hey Matt, thank you for that in-the-trenches validation of the Panasonic. I by no means mean to shill for them, but I've been recommending those cameras, (based on others' reports), so it's good to hear that they worked out for you. You also bring up one of the points I make when I teach my class about buying over renting. Often filmmakers get a sweetheart deal on an expensive camera during their main shoot. But if you have to do additional shooting--pickups, reshoots, inserts--that deal often goes away and your point about insurance is an excellent one, too. Renting over buying (on a micro-budget shoot) really only pans out financially if you know you can never go back and shoot again, and you get that good deal.
thank you Matt and Mark, i'll check them out
Just to chime in again.... The issue with buying a lens is that it further embeds you in the manufacturers ecosystem. From this discussion, it is clear you are not yet set on a destination technically but you do intend whatever step you take to be just the next step to be followed by others. That implies keeping your options open. Buying a DSLR lens is not a good long term investment if you don't plan to stay with the DSLR platform. This is particularly true give that most lenses can be rented for a reasonable price. I have a great many Canon lenses, most of them L level, and I'm very happy with the 1Dx but I mostly do still photography and, for that work, I'm not switching from Canon any time soon simply because that would mean a lot of stranded investment. So here are two questions I always ask myself: 1) Where do I want to get long term and how does this purchase fit with that goal? 2) What is it that I need to do but my present equipment prevents or makes awkward and how does a planned purchase resolve that issue? If I can't answer these questions, I tend to make do with what I have
And agree with Mike again! I/we decided long ago NOT to make a camera purchase (other than the aforementioned GH2s) simply because the technology is ever changing. Gone are the days when you could buy an Arri 35-3 (for MOS work) and an Arri 435 or 535 and never need any other camera - ever! Of course you'd be spending a half-million on a couple of those, so their was always that consideration ;) What you buy today is going to be outdated before you have it paid off in most cases. We saw that with the RED One when it first came out here in this area (SF Bay). I have lots of friends and know of a lot more who put out a significant chunk of money for that camera thinking they were going to rent it out (along with themselves as a DP) only to find that there were so many of them in the area, they couldn't really get much of a return on their purchase. Then of course the camera went through some pretty significant changes, so they had to constantly purchase "newer/better/faster" in order to keep up. It ended up driving many either broke or just to cut their losses and sell their rigs. So in my humble opinion, you are MUCH better off to either just rent the gear (assuming you are living in an area that has a lot of film production activity) or buy smart - get yourself some REAL cine-lenses for one. That typically means PL mount lenses (or Arri BL and/or Panavision mounts, but few newer cameras use these, so be very careful here), particularly if you are going to be going the used route. PL mount lenses are ONLY designed for one thing: Making films. The great thing about these lenses too is that they really hold their value (which is good and bad I guess in that they are still expensive on the used market). Most very old lenses, if handled and cared for properly, will outlive you and I and our grand-kids (and theirs). I have some fabulous lenses I have purchased on eBay over many years that I could sell tomorrow for at least what I paid for them, if not more. I have a Cooke Panchro 20-60, a Angenieux 25-250 (yes, it's a MONSTER) a Variogen 20-40 and a nice collection of primes that I wouldn't sell for pretty much any amount of money, unless I get out of this business all together. All were bought at a SIGNIFICANT discount on eBay, (oh, I did purchase a pretty incredible Century Optics 14mm prime that I use WAY more than I ever thought I would, from a guy on Craigslist). Right now too you can get some really incredible deals on lighting gear as many shops are starting to equip their trucks with more and more LED lighting. Maybe build your own Kino Flos (they are just so ridiculously expensive, but you can't really shoot a film without them). Pretty much everything else though makes sense to just rent unless you have a place to keep it all (we live on a boat, and our one storage unit is stuffed to the gills with other equipment). But buying a camera that will be obsolete in a couple years? Let someone ELSE buy it and you just rent it out... Always nice to have something small and simple like that GH2 (or better yet the GH4 when it comes out) for those times when you are not wanting to get production insurance to rent a kit for a one-day pickup! Two cents worth again... Matt
Oh and yes, we have PL mount adapters for our GH2s. That Angie 25-250 looks pretty silly when attached to the camera body (the lens itself is probably pushing three feet in length and maybe 15-18 pounds!), but it works! I've never actually used the Angie on a project, to be honest, but it was dirt cheap - estate sale and it wasn't listed correctly on eBay, so I took a gamble...
And, the Canon c-series DO have a PL lens variant. If you want to go Canon and have some hope of lens longevity. All of this talks against an EOS upgrade and for rental while saving for a 'proper' body. I was at the Canon cinema launch in Toronto and have to say they were VERY impressive. and competitively priced to similar bodies. The c500PL (which is 4K / 10bit RAW) would be my choice except that I have a full complement of EOS lenses and even then, as pointed out, they are not really the best for video.