What Camera?!?!?!

do not listen to the peoplle that say get a t2i, or any other DSLR. it will cost well over your budget. and you gotta leave about 200 bucks for a decent tripod. i would go with a panasonic tm700, my buddy loves his and they are fairly easy to use.

im more looking for a dslr idc if its referbish used and same with the tripod as longs as it works im good

Man, your budget isn't high enough to go with a dslr setup.

You should go with a Panasonic tm700 with a beginner tripod setup like the 701HDV head with 190xdb legs.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/749839-REG/Panasonic_HDC_TM900K_HDC_TM900_High_Definition_3MOS.html

&

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/567602-REG/Manfrotto_190XDB_with_701HDV_Video.html

It will go over about 100$
but this is what you want

panasonic tm700 or one of the canon hv's. both will give out just as good of output as a DSLR if in the right hands. Then once you get a lot more money, ball hard with a nice HDDSLR setup or upgrade to a prosumer camcorder. With only 1k in DSLR equipment your footage will look like shit.

here's an example of footage from under $1k in t2i+equipment from a kid I know. T2i users like Abe spend at least $2k on equipment to get solid output from their T2i's

oh wow.

This was the first day with my t2i. Just had the body and the 50mm. That woud be under 1000 dollars.


I suggest you buy a canon hv20/hv30/hv40. I loved my hv20

that video wasnt bad and i would really prefur a dlsr because i like to take pictures too.

Then get more money so you have a decent lens. For like 1200 you can get a decent manfrotto tripod, a refurbed t2i and a used tamron 17-50. It will get you started but dont expect to produce any masterpieces

The tm900 takes pictures? Unless ur willing to spend 2k+ then I suggest getting a video camera.

If you want to take video buy a TM700, if you want to take pictures buy a used low end DSLR so you have enough for a decent lens. With 1k you can't get a DSLR video setup.

its not that im not willing to spend 2k im 14 theres no fucking way im getting 2k, 1k is a stretch and its gonna be hard at like 60$ a week

this.

Are you recommending yourself cameras now? If you spent 1200 on a TM700 setup you could make way nicer videos than 1200 on a T2i setup.

I don't recommend it but I can't control what you do...

Im 15 and I have about $3500-$4000 of camera gear that I paid for.
About $1000 was help paid for by my mom & some other family.

just tell me what you think of this idea
save up get like a used/referbished t2i/60d body with like a 50mm lense then save up a little more get a fish eye lense then save up more and get a tripod. after that when i see something i want for it i can keep upgrading as i go

dude, do you want to just listen to what everyone is saying? honestly why would you make a thread if your just gonna take anyone's advice. you dont sound like you know much about cameras, so once again the t2i is not a good choice.

im just saying im not gettin a video camera im only looking for a dslr i just want to know what one for a good price it could go over 1g just give me some ideas something with a fast amout on FPS or p in video

well first off, you said you couldnt go over 1 grand at all in the OP. second, you never said you NEEDED a DSLR. If you can get a grand to start, then another grand in the future, then you could most likely pull out a decent t2i setup. but im warning you. it is not easy to use what so ever.

No no and no. Your idea is terrible. A dslr with a 50mm and no stabilization is useless buying cheap glass for a dslr is just kicking yourself in the face, it will fall apart. Go with my idea, a cheap manfrotto and that panasonic tm900. It has higher frame rates than the t2i and it's a sick little camera.

Except go with the TM700 instead. The Tm900 doesn't really have any huge advantages over the 700 and since you're on a tight budget the extra couple hundred bucks will be better spent elsewhere. If you're 100% foolishly set on a DSLR, then you could probably get a used T2i, 50mm f/1.8, and beginner Manfrotto video tripod. You can make nice videos with that, but you're limited to shooting off a tripod all the time with a not very versatile lens. If you try doing anything other than tripod shots, your footage will suck.
Once again go with the TM700. You will be able to tripod shots as well as follows.

DON'T GET A DSLR

DON'T GET A DSLR

DON'T GET A DSLR

DON'T GET A DSLR

DON'T GET A DSLR

I have nothing to add because everyone explained it already, but getting one will be a terrible mistake.

OP is stupid because he asked for people's opinions and isn't considering any of them. If you ever decide to open you ind DON'T GET A DSLR! and get the tm700 it is a great camera and it is exactly what you are looking for.

I am thinking about the tm700 i just really would like to be able to have pics to but does any one know the specs of it and if you can get add ons for it as well and a sample video?

people have also told me to get a soney hx100v and I want your opion on that

Panasonic HDC-TM700

Review
User reviews
Specifications
Compare
Shop

Share
Print
E-mail

Want it8
Got it8
Had it5

Manufacturer: Panasonic
Part Number:HDC-TM700K

General

Product Type Camcorder - 1080p
Enclosure Color Black
Digital Zoom 700 x
Total Pixels 9.15 megapixels
Optical Sensor Size 1/4.1"
Optical Sensor Type 3MOS
Min Illumination 1 lux
Analog Video Format NTSC
Digital Video Format AVCHD
Image Stabilizer Optical (POWER O.I.S.)
Min Shutter Speed 1/2 sec
Max Shutter Speed 1/8000 sec
Shooting Modes Digital photo mode
White Balance Automatic,
Presets,
Custom
White Balance Presets Cloudy,
Sunlight,
Indoor
Camera Flash Built-in
Widescreen Video Capture Yes

Main Features

Camcorder Sensor Resolution 3.05 megapixels
Camcorder Effective Video Resolution 2.53 megapixels
Camcorder Effective Still Resolution 2.63 megapixels
Camcorder Interpolated Still Resolution 14.2 megapixels
Color Support Color
Face Detection Yes
Still Image Format JPEG
Remote Control Remote control - Infrared
TV Tuner None
Supported Resolution 1080i,
1080p

Memory / Storage

Flash Memory 32 GB Flash - Integrated (soldered memory - 32 GB )
Supported Flash Memory SD Memory Card
Image Storage JPEG 4864 x 2736,
JPEG 3840 x 2160,
JPEG 1920 x 1080,
JPEG 4608 x 3072,
JPEG 3600 x 2400,
JPEG 2880 x 1920,
JPEG 3072 x 1728,
JPEG 4032 x 3024,
JPEG 3200 x 2400,
JPEG 2560 x 1920,
JPEG 640 x 480
Media Type Flash card

Lens System

Type Zoom lens - 3.45 mm - 41.4 mm - F/1.5-2.8
Focal Length 3.45 mm - 41.4 mm
Lens Aperture F/1.5-2.8
Optical Zoom 12 x
Lens system type Zoom lens
Min focal length 3.45 mm
Lens Manufacturer Leica
Max focal length 41.4 mm
Features Built-in lens shield
Filter Size 46 mm
Focal Length Equivalent to 35mm Camera 35 - 420 mm
Focus Adjustment Manual,
Automatic
Zoom Adjustment Motorized drive

Additional Features

Low Lux / Night Mode Yes
Digital Still Camera Function Yes
Additional Features DPOF support ,
Face detection ,
Built-in speaker ,
Pre-Rec function ,
Backlight compensation ,
Touch-screen control ,
Takes photos while movie recording ,
Face Recognition ,
USB 2.0 compatibility ,
Dolby Digital 5.1 channel recording
Remote control Remote control - Infrared
Software Drivers & Utilities,
Panasonic HD Writer AE 2.1
Included Accessories Accessory shoe adapter,
Lens hood,
Stylus

Viewfinder

Viewfinder Type LCD

Display

Type LCD display - TFT active matrix - 3 in - Color

Digital Player (Recorder)

Type None

Microphone

Type Microphone - Built-in
Microphone Features Zoom

Connections

Connector Type 1 x HDMI output,
1 x USB,
1 x Composite video/audio output,
1 x Microphone,
1 x Headphones
Expansion Slot(s) 1 x SD Memory Card

Audio Input

Audio input type Microphone
Microphone type Built-in
Microphone Operation Mode Surround
Microphone Technology Electret condenser

System Requirements for PC Connection

Peripheral Devices USB port,
CD-ROM drive

Miscellaneous

Cables Included 1,
1 x A/V cable,
1 x USB cable,
1

Power

Power Device Power adapter - External
Battery type - Lithium ion

Battery

Supported Battery 1 x Li-ion rechargeable battery - 1250 mAh ( Included )

Viewfinder / Display

Display Form Factor Rotating
Display Format 230,400 pixels
Viewfinder Color Support Color

Physical Characteristics

Width 2.6 in
Depth 5.4 in
Height 2.7 in
Weight 13.4 oz

Shit, embed fail. You can get all sorts of add-ons for it. Mics, Wide or telephoto lenses, video lights, etc. You can also take pictures, but they won't be as good as a DSLR. Don't get the Sony, it'll be more $$$ and the TM700 is a better camera anyway IMO.

soneys cheper and takes WICKED good pics to same video too but i want you to check it out before you say that

Oh I thought you were talking about a different model. I would stay away from picture cameras if I were you.

i am hereing you out right now but the sony would save me tons of money and im filming and taking picks like 50/50

Now you're just trying to convince us that it's okay to get a DSLR when you can only afford the kit....

It's your money. Do whatever the hell you want with it. Keep in mind though that many people here have advised you that getting a DSLR with your budget is a bad idea.

Lot of information in this thread that is wrong imo.


First off, if you truly, honestly can't spend more than $1k, don't get a DSLR. People are correct in telling you that. You will need to spend more than that to get a good setup. I have put over $2k into my setup, as many others in m&a have.

However, there is a little bit of misinformation regarding how much money you need to put into a T2i to get a 'good image.' First of all, what do people even mean when they say that? You can't pay to have your T2i create a better image. They all produce the same image. I'm assuming you're talking about lenses, but please guys, don't keep phrasing it the way you did.

There is a HUGE difference between saying 'you have to put in at least $2k to have a good DSLR setup,' and saying 'you have to put in at least $2k if you want your T2i to produce a decent image.' The former is correct, the latter is not. The first statement means that you have to spend at least $2k in order to have a couple good lenses, some cards, and maybe a glidecam and basic tripod. By having that gear, shooting will be easier and more pleasant, and you can do more with your camera. However, I guarantee that if you give a talented filmer a refurbished T2i, the Tamron 17-50, and the Canon 50mm f/1.8, he will be able to make stunning images, and that setup will be under $2k for sure (let's ignore tripods since I doubt OP will be dropping $1k on a tripod regardless). The amount of extra shit you have for your camera doesn't really affect the images you capture as long as you have a couple good lenses (although I guarantee you will be wanting more lenses and stabilization).

I just wanted to clear that up, but I still agree with almost everybody that you definitely should not buy a DSLR if you really want to stick to your budget. However, if you insist on getting a DSLR, PLEASE don't buy the whole kit, buy a refurbished body and get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC. from there maybe you can add a 50mm f/1.8. The Panasonic TM700 that has been suggested is a GREAT camera and I highly recommend it.




Mike, sorry to target your statement about $2k. I knew what you meant, but it was misleading to the OP, and I sometimes feel like the whole 'you need to spend $__k if you are even thinking about a DSLR' is getting out of hand. I sure as hell didn't have $2k to drop when I bought my T2i (although I did drop over $1k) but I got by with what I was able to afford for a while, and I am pretty happy with the videos I made during that time period.

by my statement "your footage will look like shit" I wasn't trying to target image quality, but more of the stabilization aspect. I post that edit mainly because of the tripod pand where it is ridiculously choppy and not smooth. Not to mention that follows would look terrible.

Haha yeah, I was actually talking about this one: 'T2i users like Abe spend at least $2k on equipment to get solid output from their T2i's.'

As I said, I knew that you were referring to stabilization. However I just thought that to the OP, it may have seemed like you were talking more specifically about image quality, so I wanted to clear up any possible confusion.


Unfortunately, I don't think a nice tripod is in his budget anyway (/he might not have enough experience to realize the importance of dropping cash on a tripod), and a Glidecam is definitely not a necessary purchase, at least for a while. Follows are always dope, but you can make a good ski edit without follows for sure.

But just to reiterate, I really don't think that the OP should buy a DSLR.

your are right i dont have enough experience to realize the importance of a good tripod and in the future i can get more money little by little to buy add ons to a dlsr. at first for follow cams i would always be able to to a DIY steady came (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA-t8SaJ3VU&annotation_id=annotation_297339&feature=iv)




But im really think about just getting the sony hx100v for 400 and then making the DIY steady cam with a decent tripod to star off with. after that whne i can get more money get a good 2k t2i/60d setup
  

how does that sound??

Personally, I would say that if you're going to get a fixed-lens camera and are more interested in video, get the panasonic tm700. if you're more into photography, then idk really, that's not something i know much about.


on another note, i don't recommend buying a T2i/60D later on. Doing the whole 'buy a meh camera now, upgrade to a better camera later' is a terrible, terrible choice. Think how much money you will have wasted, when you could just A. Somehow get the cash for the camera you REALLY want, or B. Wait until you have enough money and don't buy a camera now. It just doesn't make much sense to drop $400 on that camera right now (which you will outgrow), then drop a shit ton more later on a DSLR, when you could just buy a TM700 or spring for a DSLR now, and put that $400 to better use.

im hering you out on this one but i dont have much money at the moment im trying to save up and it would take me a lot longer to get the dlsr or tm700/900 and when i outgrow the camera i could sell it or trade it it is actually a really good camera too

why do you say it would take you a lot longer to get the tm700? it's within your budget

he probably meant thats the most hes willing to save up to, not what he's currently got.

either way, that's how much he said he can spend. even if it means saving some, it will probably be worth it.

i completely agree with you. tm700 seems to be the best option for him

I agree with everyone else on this that if your budget is strictly $1000 bucks and you don't plan on spending money on it in the future the DSLR is prob. not for you.

Also, at the same time, my current setup is a refurbished t2i, a tamron 17-50, and a 50mm 1.8, and a $150 fluid head tripod. Surely this is not a "complete" setup but i've been working with it and it's been fun learning more about DSLR's. I was on a pretty tight budget like you but have managed to save some money over the summer so now i'm looking for some more lenses/accessories to invest in for the winter time.

I just love that DSLR's allow you to work with photography as well as take video. The decision is up to you but I dont' regret the path that i've taken thus far.

i can save up more then 1000 and im willing to save up more just i want a body and lense to be right around that for a dslr and in my opion the tm700 and the hx100v seem pretty equal except the tm700 is alot more

that is just not true. One is a video camera, one is a point and shoot digital camera.

with the same video quality

no

no dude.

explain and what about the nikon d3100

HD does not equal quality

hd=/=quality just because they're the same resolution doesn't mean they're the same quality. i heard a good analogy by someone on here that went something like, imagine the resolution as a painters canvas. a bigger canvas with a poor artist will produce a poor painting, whereas a good artist (aka sensor) will create better looking art regardless of the size of the canvas. just because its a higher resolution doesn't mean it gives better looking footage, or equal footage to that of another camera with the same resolution. that being said, its fairly obvious but for clarification, if they had the same image quality (the painters are of equal skill level) i'd pick a higher resolution (bigger canvas) although it's not often/ever two sensors of different resolution will perform exactly the same.

As for the d3100, i would not recommend it to do much in the video world. it only shoots 720 as opposed to 1080 (i know i just said resolution isn't critical) which isn't a huge deal when you're uploading to the web, i only watch at 480 unless its really important to see the quality because of bandwidth limits. the real kicker for skiing/sports filming is there is no capabilities for 60 fps shooting, which is pretty much essential for any dramatic slow motion. you can do subtle slow motion with 30 fps, bringing it down to 24, but as i said, its subtle. check other sources, but i think the 3100 gets pretty bad rolling shutter, but look that up, don't take my word for it.