Best lowlight on restricted budged

[Nikkor]

Lol whatever, I'll leave the thread to you so you can write in it like a journal and keep the lenses thread free of your new discoveries.

[Cinegain]

Yeah, but Zach, '2220 Euro'... you do realize the topic has 'on restricted budget' in the title and is specified to be 800 EUR, right?

And even then... a new Nikon D750 is about 1700 pops right here, looks great and is pretty much a champ in lowlight. For that kind of money just forget about tuning (pumping money into) an outdated body that has already been succeeded in the market segment.

I like the mentality: 'only advance when you've reached the max of your current camera, but still leaves you wishing for more'. But you take it to the extreme by using an almost ancient camera and giving it hip replacements and a pacemaker. Cosmetic surgery to get those wrinkles under control. But eventually it's going to end up on life support. Maybe time to let go and move on; could be time to stop trying to patch it up one more time.

Time is ticking and every day new technology advancements come into this world. They're not here to make your life a hassle, they're here to improve it, open up new creative possibilities. The A7S-series has pushed the lowlight bounderies. It gives filmmakers a new scale of options to explore. Time to embrace stuff like that.

I feel like because the T2i is all you really know by some hardcore experience, you've come to love it and accept its image quality. I think you have realistic expectations of the T2i, but that's kinda of a weakness as the bar has been raised so much higher by now and your expectations might not quite be in line with that of people nowadays. Still think other cameras are a way better deal and atleast easier to get some decent results with! And with less time wasted on pushing a camera beyond its limits, you have more time left to figure out other things... we always agree that 'content is king', but doesn't the king belong in a palace rather than some abandoned cabin in the woods. What if Kendy Ty had used a D750 instead of the T2i. Would those videos have been off better or worse?

Kinda with araucaria on this one.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

 

[IronFilm]

What does a 5DmkII runs for these days?

It is shit shit shiiiiiiiit at low light compared to a Sony A5100/A6000 or Nikon D5200/D5200/D5500!
Don't buy a Canon

[TheRenaissanceMan]

It is shit shit shiiiiiiiit at low light compared to a Sony A5100/A6000 or Nikon D5200/D5200/D5500!

Agreed. I actually love the 5DII RAW image--even over the Mark III's--but low light is not its strong suit. 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Low light is a skill you need to acquire by camera techniques, not by the camera. You can get night gels and place them over lights if your thinking of cinema. In weddings and the groom and everything, you need to move the camera to a good spot, even if you have the light adjusted right on the camera. You may get that ugly overglow. Music videos are same story of film. In terms of client work, just tell the guy to move to a good spot and ask him if he feels his eyes being hit by the light, if he is. You are good. For documentary just use noise reduction and people used VHS camcorders in documentaries. In terms of a getting a sexy look the impresses people, well then would you keep the next camera you buy or would you just keep on buying unnecessary cameras and not try to achieve your own look? The news channels used worse cameras than DSLR's just as a reminder. Just keep what you need and roll with it, doesn't matter the camera price, just keep it and roll. Meaning film stuff, don't worry about constantly buying stuff. You can help find a camera that suits your look, but keep it. I see guys all over selling their mirrorless cameras and DSLRs nonstop and buying new cameras. I'm fine with my Gopro Hero 3+ Silver, Samsung Galaxy S6, T2i, Tracfone, and webcam on my laptop. Oldschool, but I keep it because I found a look I enjoy. I'll try to show the Non-DSLRish Arri look I got properly. All I'm worried about now is getting the stuff that would me as a filmmaker, not the camera.

In some situations--events, documentary, and natural light location shooting, for example--it helps to have a camera you can push to higher ISOs. I always prefer to set up lights, but sometimes that's not possible. In that case, your camera's ability to achieve good image quality in marginal illumination can help you get the results you want. It's nothing to do with style. Money either, since lots of cheap cameras are great in low light these days. It's about finding the right tool for the job. And the simple fact is that newer cameras are better low-light tools than older ones. 

Insisting that older, crappier cameras somehow help you work better in low light is....asinine. 

(And if you have a counter argument, keep it brief and focused, would you?)

[Cinegain]

I still have my Flip MinoHD 3rd Gen, bro.

[mercer]

Whirling dervish. I love the t2i. Make a short. 

[Nikkor]

I will make a T2i short soon.

I quote you on this.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Please stick to the topic. 

Does the D5500 allow manual WB Kelvin control?

Was finally in the market for a B-Cam for the D750 and wondering what to pair it with. D5500/D7200 or stump up for a FF Nikon.

To red: Sadly no, you don't get to dial-in the kelvin number. Big omission. 

The D7200, I was just shooting last night is a beautiful camera. Absolutely beautiful build and body. The video image and 1.3x crop are brilliant. 60p is better than anything from Canon/Nikon. 

I'd take it as a second body for the D750 rather than another FF. The smaller sensor for extra reach is valuable and the sports stills capability of the D7200 is very very cool. 

[Bioskop.Inc]

The best low light camera on a restricted budget? - Is the one you can afford, pure & simple. (800 euros was the amount mentioned)

There is no best, just buy something, shoot loads with it so that you can learn its strengths & weaknesses.

As far as the OP is concerned, all concert, theatre & ballet venues have lights, to varying degrees - never heard of a pitch black event, never.

If you've been hired by someone to shoot an event, then you'll have full access to the stage etc... So you'll be able to shape the light (whatever the brightness/quality) to your advantage & you have to learn to be adaptable!

The first gig I was hired to shoot was in a pub, with very few lights & the band were squeezed into a very tight space. I told them that video would be out, but could take some photos - they understood & were amazed at the pictires that i gave them.

The last gig I filmed, the lights were too bright!!!!!! Had my ND filter on the whole time & I still had to stop down.

If you just want to shoot things for fun, then you're screwed really - bands, venues etc... don't want anyone filming, taking pictures on big equipment (they hire people for that). If this is you, buy something small & compact or just use your phone.

[red]

Please stick to the topic. 

To red: Sadly no, you don't get to dial-in the kelvin number. Big omission. 

The D7200, I was just shooting last night is a beautiful camera. Absolutely beautiful build and body. The video image and 1.3x crop are brilliant. 60p is better than anything from Canon/Nikon. 

I'd take it as a second body for the D750 rather than another FF. The smaller sensor for extra reach is valuable and the sports stills capability of the D7200 is very very cool. 

Thanks Ebrahim. Your input is always appreciated. I had thought about jumping to a Micro Four Thirds system but my investment in Nikon and it's low light ability for indoor events is second to none so thinking about a second body. I always dial in a kelvin number and the D5500 not having one means can't quickly match during shoots.

I hadn't paid much thought to the D7200 but have started to notice it doesn't have the omissions the D5500 has.

What lenses did you have on the D7200?

I usually shoot 25p for DVD but good to know you rate the 60p as one of the best.

I always assumed the crop made the image a tad soft? I will experiment with the crop on my D750 as haven't really used it.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Thanks Ebrahim. Your input is always appreciated. I had thought about jumping to a Micro Four Thirds system but my investment in Nikon and it's low light ability for indoor events is second to none so thinking about a second body. I always dial in a kelvin number and the D5500 not having one means can't quickly match during shoots.

I hadn't paid much thought to the D7200 but have started to notice it doesn't have the omissions the D5500 has.

What lenses did you have on the D7200?

I usually shoot 25p for DVD but good to know you rate the 60p as one of the best.

I always assumed the crop made the image a tad soft? I will experiment with the crop on my D750 as haven't really used it.

I was just shooting some night footage of street fruit merchants with a 50mm f/1.8D (Which has a lovely image but a horrible focus ring) and a Nikkor 55-200mm which is a very dark kit lens, yet the D7200 captured clean night footage at 10.000+ ISO. I didn't do a side by side, but it seem to have an outstanding ISO performance compared to all the camera shoot with (gh4, d5300)

It's very reminiscent of the 5DIII low-light performance but a tad sharper. Feels like a small modern 5D. Gets shots done.

-Still can't change iris in liveview.

Over the D5300/5500 aside fro the massive build/size/tier/photography difference, it has manual WB, a headphone jack, better (yet 1.3x) slowmotion, dual card slots, bigger battery. 

D5500 loses all of these but gains the articulating LCD.

Even if the D7200 didn't offer any merits i'd still get it over a d5x00 camera just due to the body being so much better to use and approaching the perfect handheld camera design. Just perfect, not a d810 bohemous or a tiny d5500 rebel.

1.3x Crop mode on the d7200 is great. Just jumps in a bit without any noticeable loss, not like the crappy crop mode on the D750 (soft and moires hideously). It's actually very useful for a FF B-camera to have a image/colour-matched footage with a 1.5x crop (and 2.3x mode) reach when needed. 

Nikon keep making such small nice advances as video cameras but I am just waiting they go all-in and offer 4K with the same image characteristics.

A D7300 camera with UHD and flat profile in such a nice tough body with top notch photography would be a huge hit for gh4, nx1, a7s, etc 

It's a bit psychologically hard right now to pay for a D7200 the cost of a 4K camera like a GH4, but I do prefer the Nikon really. 

Highly recommended.

[mercer]

I was just shooting some night footage of street fruit merchants with a 50mm f/1.8D (Which has a lovely image but a horrible focus ring) and a Nikkor 55-200mm which is a very dark kit lens, yet the D7200 captured clean night footage at 10.000+ ISO. I didn't do a side by side, but it seem to have an outstanding ISO performance compared to all the camera shoot with (gh4, d5300)

It's very reminiscent of the 5DIII low-light performance but a tad sharper. Feels like a small modern 5D. Gets shots done.

-Still can't change iris in liveview.

Over the D5300/5500 aside fro the massive build/size/tier/photography difference, it has manual WB, a headphone jack, better (yet 1.3x) slowmotion, dual card slots, bigger battery. 

D5500 loses all of these but gains the articulating LCD.

Even if the D7200 didn't offer any merits i'd still get it over a d5x00 camera just due to the body being so much better to use and approaching the perfect handheld camera design. Just perfect, not a d810 bohemous or a tiny d5500 rebel.

1.3x Crop mode on the d7200 is great. Just jumps in a bit without any noticeable loss, not like the crappy crop mode on the D750 (soft and moires hideously). It's actually very useful for a FF B-camera to have a image/colour-matched footage with a 1.5x crop (and 2.3x mode) reach when needed. 

Nikon keep making such small nice advances as video cameras but I am just waiting they go all-in and offer 4K with the same image characteristics.

A D7300 camera with UHD and flat profile in such a nice tough body with top notch photography would be a huge hit for gh4, nx1, a7s, etc 

It's a bit psychologically hard right now to pay for a D7200 the cost of a 4K camera like a GH4, but I do prefer the Nikon really. 

Highly recommended.

Sounds awesome. Am interested in D5500, would love to see some footage from the D7200 though?

[Andrew Reid]

Ebrahim have you tried the Nikon 14-140mm VR on the D7200.

I did but only briefly and for a cheap lens I was impressed with how the stabilisation and sharpness stood up - the VR on this lens is quoted as 4 stops!! That's almost as strong as a E-M5 II. I could do some pretty nice moves with it and the jitter for static shots had been damped pretty well it seems at first glance.

I am tempted to sell all my expensive crap and just get the D7200.

I have the D5500 and LOVE the image but the build quality is yukky and I have the D750 but it's much bigger with a decent FX lens compared to the APS-C cameras and to be honest the image is no better, not even in low light. Such a smooth codec and sensor they have on the DX range right now!

[Nikkor]

The problem with the d7200, I believe, is that the 50 and 60fps mode are a 1.3 crop from the DX mode, I would also recheck if it has the flat profile. The fixed screen is also a bummer. If the d5600 has dlighting and 4K, I will get it 100% (unless there is a similar sony).

[IronFilm]

Nikon 14-140mm VR?? Eh?

[Phil A]

I don't want to derail this thread... but I see I'm anyway too late for that ;-)

If we ignore the price constraints of the original question, I'm really curious how the cameras stack up in reality. When you come from the photography world it's usually quite easy, at the same level of technology a 35mm sensor is rougly 1EV better at High ISO than the corresponding APS-C sensor. But obviously with video a lot more mojo (and in-camera processing) goes into the final result.

Andrew said the D5500 has the same High ISO result as the D750. We all know that the BMPCC is usable at ISO1600, so if we add the BMPCC specific Speedbooster to that equation which brings 1.75 EV of 'brightening', how does it stack up with the same lens used on both systems? For a comparable exposure to the BMPCC at 1600 you'd have to push the Nikon to ISO4000. 10Bit ProRes 422 HQ is probably then also more bendable in post than the 8Bit H.264.
Am I dumb or is the BMPCC with Speedbooster actually the safer choice if you have no possibility to light your scene? Also using a 35mm f/1.4 on a D750 vs a 24 1.4 on the BMPCC + Speedbooster would give more usable DoF thanks to the smaler sensor.

Only the A7r II in APS-C + Speedbooster or a A7s/A7sII would be better low light choices.

[jase]

Only the A7r II in APS-C + Speedbooster or a A7s/A7sII would be better low light choices.

I think you are right... Some weeks ago someone said the same here, but I dont remember who did.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Maybe you're referring to this post I made in reference to the BMPCC/BMMCC a while back. Here's a copy+paste; it's a point worth repeating.

---

Re: BMPCC low-light performance, let's break it down this way.

The Pocket's native ISO is 800. Using a Speed Booster, you gain 1 2/3 stops of light, effectively bringing that native ISO up to 2500. 

Since most of the Pocket's DR lies in the shadows, it can easily be pushed 2-3 stops in post with acceptable results. (Ctrl+F "underexposure." https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2014/06/director-of-photography-blackmagic-cinema-camera/)

Therefore, using the same full frame lenses, you can shoot the Pocket at an effective 10,000-20,000 ISO with acceptable results--the same or better than the A7S in S16 mode, according to Ebrahim--but with the added benefits of 10-bit 4:2:2 and RAW.

I don't claim the Pocket is the best low-light camera out there, but it's much more competitive than sensor size snobs would have you believe.