Nikkor Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 I have been asked about a camera with good results in poor light (concerts, theatre, ballet,etc) for video and stills. The problem is the budget, 800€. I have no clue, a d5500 maybe? He is used to canon... I wonder if any mirrorless has working AF in lowlight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Sony a6000 can focus pretty damn well in low light and has good low light ability. Would not choose the d5500 for this situation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 What does a 5DmkII runs for these days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lintelfilm Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 BMPCC - definitively better than D5300 (I've done a low light side by side and the Pocket trounced the Nikon). A speed booster and fast lens helps too of course. Also if you shoot RAW you can lift the shadows a few ISO and clean up very dark footage.It all depends if your friend wants an easy life or not though ... Santiago de la Rosa, TheRenaissanceMan and maxotics 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 What does a 5DmkII runs for these days?It goes for around 700€ used, but the last time I used one the autofocus was terrible. (I know, moiree, but he's not going to shoot anything landscapy). The bm is a no-go because he needs stills, the a6000 is ok but I don't know if I want to recommend a sony to anyone anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Policar Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 A7S is a stunner in low light, but AF is really poor for stills compared with the 5D Mark III at least, which is my reference for "good" AF. I wouldn't push the 5D Mark II past 800 ISO for motion unless I was okay with things getting splotchy or 3200 on the Mark III. A7S I would push to 20,000 without worry. It's nuts. If you can tolerate dodgy AF a used A7S will really blow anything away. Better low light than Alexa, Red (well, so anything is better for low light than Red), C300, F5, etc. and not by a small margin. Nikkor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 BMPCC - definitively better than D5300 (I've done a low light side by side and the Pocket trounced the Nikon). A speed booster and fast lens helps too of course. Also if you shoot RAW you can lift the shadows a few ISO and clean up very dark footage.It all depends if your friend wants an easy life or not though ...I agree with you but these damn hot pixels of BMPCC in high ISOs are a pain to remove... Lintelfilm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zach Ashcraft Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Need AF for Stills or Video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 Need AF for Stills or Video? Well, I guess stills. If he wants it in video too I guess the 70d is the only option, remember it's 800€...If not I would just tell him to get a d750 or a a7sii/a7rii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavier Plagaro Mussard Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 800€ for the body?? If 800€ is for everything, you could probably do well with a Panasonic LX100. It's not A7s, but open at f1.7 it's not bad at all! Nikkor and Lintelfilm 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 If you can keep ISO below ISO1600 (like ISO1250 or lower) that is. And for 'concerts, theatre, ballet' I bet the zoom doesn't quite cut it.Also, this shouldn't matter, but it might, the appearance of you shooting with a compact camera... especially if it's a paid gig... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 It's probably a good option, but I think it also needs the penis factor (it's about artsy stuff so I guess it needs penis factor). And yes, the zoom is too short. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Best low-light performer (cleanest shadows at high ISOs) under 800, it's the Nikon D5300/D5500.This is the short answer. Longer answer:People are recommending the Blackmagic pocket, LX100, 70D, 5DII Moire hell? The first three are not lowlight cameras. 800/1600 is as good as they go.A6000 a bit better than those, but still noisier than D5300, i tried. cleaner codec shadow floor and better colours. D5300/5500 falls just a bit short of the 5D, without aliasing, moire and sharper.Also lowlight performance depends on the lenses as much as the sensor, and Nikon has a VAST native line-up of fast primes and zooms and vintage ai-s glass. Compare that to the a6000 line and fast lenses cost. (the guy wants a stills + video camera, so adapting is off)I recommend him:-D5300/D5500 -Cheap loup for an EVF-18-105mm as a general package with IS-cheap 50/85mm f/1.8 for those times it's not enough. (Choose D5300 vs D5500 based on bargain price, they're not different in IQ but the later has a nice touchscreen and flat profile)Also since he specifies noise performance, ''make'' him get neat video. It pushes any camera's low-light performance by at least 2 stops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Best low-light performer (cleanest shadows at high ISOs) under 800, it's the Nikon D5300/D5500.This is the short answer. Longer answer:People are recommending the Blackmagic pocket, LX100, 70D, 5DII Moire hell? The first three are not lowlight cameras. 800/1600 is as good as they go.A6000 a bit better than those, but still noisier than D5300, i tried. cleaner codec shadow floor and better colours. D5300/5500 falls just a bit short of the 5D, without aliasing, moire and sharper.I don't wish to start some kind of argument but from my tests the D5500 has shown to be far noisier at high iso's than my Panasonic GX7 and moreso, the LX100. And Matt's comparison video of last year also proved the D5300 as being inferior to the GH4 and BMPCC for noise. The a6000 is the only non-fullframe camera I have tried that has bested my GX7. Nikkor and TheRenaissanceMan 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagnje Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 d3300 with a decent lens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I don't wish to start some kind of argument but from my tests the D5500 has shown to be far noisier at high iso's than my Panasonic GX7 and moreso, the LX100. And Matt's comparison video of last year also proved the D5300 as being inferior to the GH4 and BMPCC for noise. The a6000 is the only non-fullframe camera I have tried that has bested my GX7. No start, Arguments are good for all of us!-My conclusion is based upon -Comparing the D5300 to the 5D MKIII and finding them identical in lowlight perfrmance.-Comparing it to the a6000 and finding a cleaner codec at high ISOs. A6000 isn't 5DIII level as the Nikon. Plus outside of noise the image is more jagged/artifical probably because of the hints of aliasing and e-sharpening and olour rendtion-Comparing against the GH4 (for a very, very long time owning only hose and being a lover of IQ testing) and no way anyone would ever see the GH4 cleaner than the 5DIII/D5300. I can't go beyond 800 on it, while with the 5DII/D5300 I shoot at 3200. It's not just a diffrence, but a big one. Perhaps being so sharp, applying neat video then downscaling to HD would make it D5300/5500. But NR is not a pleasant experience in time, and the D5300/5500 can take NR too.-Havent tried or compared to GX7 or LX100, they might be special. To OP: remember, all my words are on noise performance, NOTHING else. If we talk on other things I'd love an a6000 body/evf with a D5500 image/colour/log, and GH4 resoution, and 70D AF. So saying D5300/5500 isbest means only hownisy his images will be when he shoots at higher ISOs than 1600.Still haven't shot on a sub 5000$ camera that shoots people's faces as gorgeous as the D5300, including 5D, GH4, A7s.The C300 (and therefore C100) is the one that exceeded it in that regard, drama/narrtive close-ups of actors and doc. interviews. My only complaint on the nikon, having to leave liveview to change iris and come back in. I still miss shots and/or bore actors adjusting exposure on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I have been asked about a camera with good results in poor light (concerts, theatre, ballet,etc) for video and stills. The problem is the budget, 800€. I have no clue, a d5500 maybe? He is used to canon... I wonder if any mirrorless has working AF in lowlight.Perhaps I should point out the very obvious fact that "concerts, theatre, ballet etc..." all have stage lighting, to varying degrees obviously, but its still there & sometimes it can be very powerful.I've found that I'm stopping down the lens or turning down the ISO more often than not at concerts etc... So it does beg the question of how much of a low light performer do you really need? Lintelfilm and maxotics 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 d3300 with a decent lens.D5300 rotating LCD and focus mag. button on right side (vs left side!) justify the price difference and then some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homestar_kevin Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I'd recommend Neat Video Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lintelfilm Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I don't wish to start some kind of argument but from my tests the D5500 has shown to be far noisier at high iso's than my Panasonic GX7 and moreso, the LX100. And Matt's comparison video of last year also proved the D5300 as being inferior to the GH4 and BMPCC for noise. The a6000 is the only non-fullframe camera I have tried that has bested my GX7. No start, Arguments are good for all of us!-My conclusion is based upon -Comparing the D5300 to the 5D MKIII and finding them identical in lowlight perfrmance.-Comparing it to the a6000 and finding a cleaner codec at high ISOs. A6000 isn't 5DIII level as the Nikon. Plus outside of noise the image is more jagged/artifical probably because of the hints of aliasing and e-sharpening and olour rendtion-Comparing against the GH4 (for a very, very long time owning only hose and being a lover of IQ testing) and no way anyone would ever see the GH4 cleaner than the 5DIII/D5300. I can't go beyond 800 on it, while with the 5DII/D5300 I shoot at 3200. It's not just a diffrence, but a big one. Perhaps being so sharp, applying neat video then downscaling to HD would make it D5300/5500. But NR is not a pleasant experience in time, and the D5300/5500 can take NR too.-Havent tried or compared to GX7 or LX100, they might be special. To OP: remember, all my words are on noise performance, NOTHING else. If we talk on other things I'd love an a6000 body/evf with a D5500 image/colour/log, and GH4 resoution, and 70D AF. So saying D5300/5500 isbest means only hownisy his images will be when he shoots at higher ISOs than 1600.Still haven't shot on a sub 5000$ camera that shoots people's faces as gorgeous as the D5300, including 5D, GH4, A7s.The C300 (and therefore C100) is the one that exceeded it in that regard, drama/narrtive close-ups of actors and doc. interviews. My only complaint on the nikon, having to leave liveview to change iris and come back in. I still miss shots and/or bore actors adjusting exposure on it.Having owned both the D5300 and GH4 for an equal amount of time (overlapping briefly before I sold the D5300), I'm certain that the GH4 is not superior to the D5300. In 4K I would say it's about equal all things considered. The GH4 really lives up to its reputation as an awful low light performer. In 4K at 1600 the noise makes detail look like 720p, and colour goes out of the window. The D5300 I was a little happier taking to 1600 but compression artefacts are much worse and the noise is ugly, so I'd call it a draw personally.True the BMPCC only goes up to 1600, but even in ProRes HQ you can lift by about one stop footage that has been unavoidably exposed far to the right and get pretty decent results. The codec means that neat video works wonders too. The other thing I don't see talked about much is the importance of dynamic range for a lot of low light situations. I'm going to be shooting a light festival on Thursday night and when I first took the job on, I was really panicking about the cameras I have and was seriously considering renting a C100 or A7S. But after tests I'm actually glad I have a BMPCC. Because if there are lights in the shot (as there very often are in low light situations), good dynamic range, strong codec and highlight rolloff is vital. With the GH4, such scenes are split into crushed areas and/or blown areas, whereas the Pocket can reveal detail in the shadows (yes it's noisy but the grain is fine and detail is in there) and highlights of a night scene. Also if you know how to extract it you can get bold colours from low light scenes with the BMPCC.Perhaps I should point out the very obvious fact that "concerts, theatre, ballet etc..." all have stage lighting, to varying degrees obviously, but its still there & sometimes it can be very powerful.I've found that I'm stopping down the lens or turning down the ISO more often than not at concerts etc... So it does beg the question of how much of a low light performer do you really need?This. This is what I've been thinking all along and it relates to what I said above. So yeah the D5300/5500 or alternatively a Panny G7. If you watch The Camera Store's video review of the G7, they show plain as day that it's noticeably superior to the GH4 in low light (making it definitely equal to the D5300 IMO). 4K means your friend can both crop in if lens options are limited, and apply noise reduction if necessary. My lens suggestion would be a Chinese (Turbo or whatever) speed booster and the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 Mark I (the non-VC version). Though autofocus is obviously off the table with that. The Leica 25mm f/1.4 (which I got for about $300 new on eBay) could be a good choice considering the crop of 4K and the ability to zoom in post. That would give autofocus too. Go to HD for a "normal" 50mm equiv. field of view. In fact the more I think about it the better I think G7 + Leica 25mm 1.4 would work. maxotics, Chrad and TheRenaissanceMan 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.