Which DSLR for Video under $1000?

A hacked Panasonic GH2 still has the best video mode (in terms of resolution, moire, etc). The A55 has the best autofocus, but little manual options for video (however, this not the case with the newly released A57). The others, while offering an APS-C sized sensor and are great for photos, do have moire and aliasing issues (I don't know why they keep getting recommended for video).

1) why did you start 2 threads?
2) the GH2 hacked may be good but its still not fantastic unless you are only doing youtube in which case you cant the difference between anything
3) when shooting HD you cant have higher resolution when your only shooting 1920x1080
4)higher bitrate does not mean higher resolution
5)auto focus on a dslr while a nice feature is not the best compared to a real video camera
6)i dont think that you fully understand video much less DSLR video which is completely different than a regular video camera

when it comes to image quality right now seriously nothing beats canon. they have the market in DSLR video and in professional video cameras as well. a canon combined with a good lens will beat the GH2 with kit lens any day of the week. just saying considering your lack of experience odds are good that you will not be using quality lenses anyway.

aldfig0 i would like you to explain your reasoning behind why a "hacked" GH2 is the best camera for video lol
Edited by Conspiracy - 3/17/12 at 8:19pm

The various Canon models with the 18MP sensor have tons of issues in video mode that are not present in the GH2. Look here for some examples:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/459/first-look-panasonic-gh2-versus-canon-60d
Even some point and shoots can beat them in regards to video:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/2930/sony-hx9v-vs-canon-600d-dslr-gets-beat-by-compact-in-video-mode

Stills is a completely different story. But the focus of this thread is video.

Have you ever wondered why people buy cameras like the Panasonic AF 100 or Sony NEX FS100 when much cheaper DSLRs exist that also offer 1080p? There's a lot more than shallow depth of field - moire, aliasing, less dynamic range, bad compression, rolling shutter, etc, are issues that are very present in most DSLRs' video mode.
Edited by aldfig0 - 3/18/12 at 12:01am

LOL really... your going to base your opinion off low res pixel peeped screenshots and youtube videos? i have seen comparisons of all the DSLRs on a silver screen and compared against film as the gold standard and Canon is by far closer to a better image. The tests you use on eoshd might be ok for a casual everyday video shooter. any smart person would but a video camera over a DSLR if they needed the ability to run and gun. shooting video with a DSLR requires you to take your time which is why most amateur DSLR video looks awful.

what you and every other tard on OCN that tries to argue about DSLR video doesnt understand is the type of shooting DSLRs are used for. they are not ideal for home movies and messing around for fun casually. your lack of supporting your claim as to why canon isnt a good company to go with for dslr video makes me wonder if all your knowledge is from surfing the internet and quoting bad reviews rather than actual physical experience with any camera at all.

This sentence makes absolutely no sense at all and is why you dont know ish and should not try to assist people with dslr video.

"There's a lot more than shallow depth of field - moire, aliasing, less dynamic range, bad compression, rolling shutter, etc, are issues that are very present in most DSLRs' video mode."


have you ever personally compared any of the dslr cameras and analyzed how they perform? im not sure if you have because dynamic range, compression, and rolling shutter are not issues in DSLR video. dslr cameras have better dynamic range and latitude than the cheap cameras you listed from sony and panasonic. and if you think they have bad compression then you arent encoding your footage in prores.

the fact that you have linked a comparison to a small sensor camera out performing a larger sensor and your post shot that you never read the article lol. the reasons the sony hx9v beat the 600D according to the author of that article is 60p/1080, small telephoto optics, and auto focus...


im not going to even start with how you cant compare dynamic range by shooting random scenes and how wrong you are by saying that one of a dslrs issues is dynamic range, dynamic range has to be compared in controlled tests with charts not compositions around a bedroom or outdoors.

i think you dont fully know the meaning of all the words that are in your response that you probably copied and pasted from someone else or just completely took all of your info out of context.

comparing DSLRs video through pixel peeping screen shots and youtube videos are not by any means an actually accurate way of examining the image quality of how they stack up against anything. if you read the actual article with the videos you linked rather than just the title they say how although the cameras seem to have better and newer quality features the canon still beat them overall in practicality. the title of those 2 articles are misleading as inside the articles they do not come to a flat out conclusion that canon was actually beat.
Edited by Conspiracy - 3/18/12 at 5:57am

Wow... I don't even know where to begin.

First of all, viewing a zoomed in frame on a computer is much more harsh in terms of exposing flaws than a projection on a large screen - that's why DVDs look fine when played on a projector but seem horrible on a 1080p monitor.
I DID explain why - you are the one that seems to not understand what those terms are

For example
Compression - just google "clean HDMI out" - you will find a lot of users want this because, surprise, they don't like the default compression
Then why would anyone care about this?

Those "cheap cameras" cost about $5000 USD and are hardly obscure cameras, you should have known about them if you are interested in video.

Here are some actual quotes from the article, you can CTRL + F them if you don't believe me:
The main reasons why the author bought the camera is because it is small and discrete (that is why Henri Cartier-Bresson is mentioned) yet it has fantastic video and is more practical.
I didn't provide links to any youtube videos. Two things are comparable if all variables are kept constant except the thing that you are interested in. Please don't accuse me of not reading the articles when you are not reading them yourself. This is the first sentence of the first article:
Edited by aldfig0 - 3/18/12 at 1:58pm

How about a T2i with Magic Lantern? It'll be hard to find a camera with as many features as Magic Lantern adds for under $1000.

Do continue arguing, this is very educating.

i wanted your explanation. im not trying to prove canon is better im simply trying to prove that your knowledge of these cameras comes from B&H prices and quotes from less than professional tests and comparisons.

$5000 is a rather cheap camera if your trying to compare professional quality. last time i checked when compared to celluloid film canon DSLRs were closer to matching that quality than your high quality $5k cameras with smaller sensors. the point im trying to make is that while the other cameras succeed in one area does not mean that other cameras are better for different purposes. if your were knowledgeable in video you would have said well because you like nature you should go with this camera + lens or camera with fixed lens to give a more accurate suggestion rather than screw canon only get GH2 because its the best nuff said... herp durp.

have you ever wondered why people buy the cameras you mentioned over DSLRs other than because your article says they are better? its because a DSLR is not a run and gun camera those cameras are and excel in that area of usage.

you never found a quote from the article explaining your claim to the DSLRs having less dynamic range or attacking how canon doesnt have richer colors than the other cameras that beat it... hmm maybe because although a canon DSLR isnt the best choice for certain types of shooting it still has qualities that make certain people want to use them.


i shoot with a Sony PDW-700 on a regular basis, shot with that camera recently? its a little more than $5000 and has a slightly larger sensor. But I dont know anything about video because i dont have quotes from articles comparing cameras. or work with professional videographers. but whatever keep arguing the quality of tools needed for a job that you know little about. not every job can be done with one camera and if YOU knew anything about video you would have addressed that and that is the point i was trying to make, i dont care if canon isnt the best DSLR for shooting home movies obviously the GH2 has that market covered lol