Deciding on camera body for documentary work

[Sam Baker]

Hello everyone

 

I'm trying to decide on a second hand camera body for some documentary work, low budget, probably short docs (though I hope to progress to full length, though I'll invest more money when that day comes).

I'm kind of half settled on getting the Canon 5D mk ii, but only when I see it at a particularly good price second-hand, for example recently I saw it going for (body only) £440. This may have been a one off, I'm willing to spend something around £500 for the body.

I want this to be something that will last me quite a while, hence why I'm not going for the much cheaper body's available, I feel like the 5D mk ii is perfect in this sense.

I'm open to other ideas, for example, the GH3 has had so many recommendations all around the internet. I kind of wanted to stick to Canon, mainly because of the functionality that comes with Magic Lantern. But maybe someone else has a better recommendation, maybe a different model of Canon.

I'm concerned about moire, I've seen the Mosaic VAF-5D2 filter which combats this, though I can't seem to find it for sale in the UK. I would like the body to have a full sensor, basically I'm looking for as much of a cinematic look at possible within my budget. 

I know this is all very vague, it's just a general outline, maybe some of you have some questions that I can answer which will lead you to recommend something to me. Any help with be much appreciated! I'm sure you must get people asking for camera recommendations every day!

Thanks again,

Sam

[Nikkor]

The moire filter is going to add to the cost. The video quality is very primitive and unless you want to use ml raw (not really suited for documentary) any recent camera is much better.

gh3, d5200, etc...

Welcome to the forum 

[fuzzynormal]

I just shot a doc with a GM1 and a Gx7.  Outboard audio isn't the greatest process, but aside from that the imaging looks great.  I got better results from those Panasonic cams than I would have acquired from my 5DII...except for interviews.  That FF interview look with a wide open 50 or 85mm is pretty sweet.

[lafilm]

Save up for a used Canon C100.

Can't beat it for Docs.

[Danyyyel]

For that low, camera like the Nikon D5300 would be very good compared to the Canon 5d2 because of no moire aliasing and better resolution. It will have a big advantages compared to gh3 (and most low cost m43 and Sony cameras) in low light. You will be getting 5d mark 3 low light quality out of it and that is very very important for Doc work. Super DR and colour is also two other advantages. It does have two drawback like absence of peaking and you will have exit video to change aperture. Those can be mitigated with a good viewfinder loupe for about $ 60 and buying older Nikon lens with aperture ring. You have 50 years of lens to chose from and it will be a lasting investment because they will mount on about every camera brand. One thing not to forget about when doing doc is investing in at least some good microphone and recorder.

[tosvus]

You probably need to think about what things are most important to you. As people have mentioned, the D5300 is probably the best budget solution to combat moire. I'm not so convinced there is that much practical difference in terms of low-light compared to the GH3, unless you shoot very specialized, demanding scenes. You may prefer the colors from the Nikon. I think that's the positives for the D5300, except possibly AF speed if you plan on using that a lot. In all other regards, for video, the GH3 will win hands down. (usability, features, codec, stability, robustness, weather-sealing etc). If you prefer to use manual glass, the m43 cameras are great for that, and you can even get a speedbooster (maybe a cheaper one first, and save up for a good one!). Some people feel using this and say Nikon lenses gives a less clinical look than using m43 lenses, and it will allow shallower depth of fields for when you want that & equalize any low light advantage the D5300 may have. The Panasonic G6 could even be a good alternative. Think about how you want to deal with audio. The Gh3 has headphone jack, which is hugely helpful if you plan to record audio straight into the camera.  If you plan to use an external recorder and sync in post, not a big deal, of course.

[IronFilm]

Be mad to get a 5Dmk2 when so many cheaper and better solutions exist!

 

I say just get a GH4 with a GH1 as a back up (as you never want to only have one camera, especially not for documentaries!).

[ac6000cw]

The Panasonic G6 could even be a good alternative.

​....and you could buy two of those in almost new condition for £500, or one and a good used lens - the G6 is an underrated camera, it's got some features (like focus peaking) that the GH3 doesn't even have. Unfortunately the GH4 is well beyond the budget of the OP.

In low light with the G6, I use a second-hand Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 (non-VR, Nikon fit) on a cheap Camdiox focal reducer to get the equivalent of a 12-35mm F2.0 zoom - total cost about £220, and it's easy to manually focus with the aid of focus peaking.

[jgharding]

Might be a controversial choice, but at that end of the budget scale I'd be tempted to a Sony RX100 MK 2 or 3 and little vari ND.

Screw a little handle into the bottom and away you go, stabilised and easy. Very unobtrusive so people don't get intimidated. I used to use one before I had a C100.

[The Chris]

I would suggest something like the Sony RX10 or Panasonic FZ1000 if you don't want to go with a traditional video camera. Both use the same sensor, have mic inputs, the Sony has the faster lens, the Panny shoots 4k and had a fully articulating screen. If you're dipping your toes into doc work, these are great options. 

Bob Krist is a National Geographic photographer and he shoots a lot of his stuff with the RX10. Here's a couple good reads from him.  Check out his Vimeo page, stunning work, lots of it shot on the RX10.

http://www.oldmaninmotion.com/four-great-still-shooting-feats-my-sub-1k-mirrorless-can-do-that-my-3k-dslr-cant/

http://www.oldmaninmotion.com/mirrorless-mirrorless-on-the-wall-2/#more-538

[j.f.r.]

Hello everyone

 

I'm trying to decide on a second hand camera body for some documentary work, low budget, probably short docs (though I hope to progress to full length, though I'll invest more money when that day comes).

I'm kind of half settled on getting the Canon 5D mk ii, but only when I see it at a particularly good price second-hand, for example recently I saw it going for (body only) £440. This may have been a one off, I'm willing to spend something around £500 for the body.

I want this to be something that will last me quite a while, hence why I'm not going for the much cheaper body's available, I feel like the 5D mk ii is perfect in this sense.

I'm open to other ideas, for example, the GH3 has had so many recommendations all around the internet. I kind of wanted to stick to Canon, mainly because of the functionality that comes with Magic Lantern. But maybe someone else has a better recommendation, maybe a different model of Canon.

I'm concerned about moire, I've seen the Mosaic VAF-5D2 filter which combats this, though I can't seem to find it for sale in the UK. I would like the body to have a full sensor, basically I'm looking for as much of a cinematic look at possible within my budget. 

I know this is all very vague, it's just a general outline, maybe some of you have some questions that I can answer which will lead you to recommend something to me. Any help with be much appreciated! I'm sure you must get people asking for camera recommendations every day!

Thanks again,

Sam

​Stop spending money on toy cameras and poor suggestions from basically everyone here.......

 

5D MARK II is a professional photography camera which I would take over any MFT 4k or Nikon consumer dslr + it shoots excellent video in close ups to medium shots, anything wider and you will lose quality so I wouldn't suggest it, but it can be an excellent interview camera and a professional photography camera which you can use as well in your documentary.

 

Invest money into a Canon C100 Mark II and have the best documentary camera within it's price range with professional tools that consumer cameras simply do not have. Even the first C100 can be had for not too expensive and would be an excellent choice. The problem with buying "cheap" consumer cameras is it becomes an endless cycle of compromises and lack of features.

 

If you own a 5D and C100 you can easily make money doing more professional jobs, the "cheap" way of thinking usually leaves people there forever. I know people who didn't even know how to shoot invest into RED CAMERA systems and just learned as they went and made all of their money back + more simply based off of the gear they had. Something to think about........

[Roman]

The 5D mark II for £440 is an absolute steal as you're getting a really good full frame stills camera, solid body and decent enough video quality. For me the most important factors In documentary shooting you want in a video camera is:

1) weather resistant (depends where you shoot)
2) good battery life (need to be filming all the time) 
3) good in low light (can't control conditions)
4) small file sizes that are quick to import and edit
5) good audio connections, ideally XLR inputs but you can always attach something like a tascam dr 70d

I think for £500 you could get a used GH3 which is a solid, weather sealed camera with good battery life for £400 and then spend the rest of your budget on a good lens like a voigtlander which will enable you to shoot in low light and with a shallow depth of field. That said i've seen the gh4 going for £800 and that gives you 4k which is really useful for interviews and re-framing shots. 

[fuzzynormal]

​Stop spending money on toy cameras and poor suggestions from basically everyone here.

​Yes, by all means, stop playing with toys.  At least buy gear that makes you appear like a professional behind the lens and next to the cool camera stuff because that's what the viewer will truly appreciate when they watch the final product. [rolls eyes]

Never mind these option that give you professional level imaging for a few hundred bucks, just use gear that has brand prestige among industry people.  Such as a RED.  It's so great.  And your favorite gritty movie was once shot with it.   

If you do otherwise, you're not going to be prestigious or taken seriously by other guys that appear professional next to cool camera stuff.  

Well, unless you actually capture a compelling story and create an emotional and memorable film...which depending on your circumstances, using a toy camera might give you the best chance of acquiring, but, hey, whatever.  As long as you look good in your PR shot when you're pointing and standing next to a big camera with a huge matte box.

And you'll never make money!  

As a documentarian that's probably going to be true no matter what gear you use.

Anyway, the "you-must-use-this" snob attitude (and it is a legitimate snob attitude) about specific brands is ridiculous.  Sure, some people in the "biz" embrace it, and maybe it even helps them in their certain industry circles, but it doesn't mean it's an attitude we all need to share or assume that outlook works for one's particular needs.  If you have the skill and the story, you can shoot the damn thing on a smartphone.  As a documentary film maker, if you start with thinking about the story you'll always be better off than starting by thinking about the gear.

My opinion is that too many people get that backwards.

[Flynn]

If you're willing to buy used and can afford it I'd get the C100 with the dual pixel autofocus upgrade. Check out News Shooter to see how helpful the dual pixel autofocus can be for a crew of one. If the C100 is too much money I'd get the 70d.with the 24mm STM, the rumored 50mm 1.8 STM (rumored to be announced next month), and the 85mm 1.8. Those three lenses will probably set you back about $600 if you get the 85 and 24 used. Or just get the 70d kit with the 18-135 STM lens, which will give you more range and image stabilization. The only way I would even consider a Canon DSLR is if it had dual pixel autofocus, otherwise the other companies are way more attractive. If the NX1 is too much money get a GH3. Whatever you get, make sure you consider what lenses you're gonna need and if the lenses will need image stabilization.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

What kind of documentaries will you be doing? what is the ''look'' you're after? Do you already have any lenses? This will be a decisive factor. Or are you getting lenses later after the body with a separate budget? do you already own the other basic stuff like tripod,light,audio? 

to simplify

what do you want to make?

what gear you already own? 

what's your available budget to spend now? 

 

only by answering these 3 questions we can offer any kind of constructive help. 

 

[Flynn]

I'd also consider the Nikon 5300. Love the Nikon look straight out of the camera and you have a fantastic choice of lenses. And I second the RX10 as being a great all in one solution.

[Flynn]

I'd also consider the LX100.

[Zach Ashcraft]

I'm currently loving the image and usability of the Nikon D750. In the last 2 years, I've owned the 5d3, C100 (mk1, no AF), and A7s, and right now my favorite camera to use for my documentary work is the D750. It gives me the best image/least amount of fuss ratio out of all the cameras i've owned. The C100 was great but lack of 60p was just a huge bummer, as I shoot slow mo often in B-roll. I'd personally look for a used one of those. 

Gh3 is another great option at one heck of a price right now. I don't like the color as much out of the GH cameras, but definitely a capable camera performance wise. 

 

 

[j.f.r.]

​Yes, by all means, stop playing with toys.  At least buy gear that makes you appear like a professional behind the lens and next to the cool camera stuff because that's what the viewer will truly appreciate when they watch the final product. [rolls eyes]

Never mind these option that give you professional level imaging for a few hundred bucks, just use gear that has brand prestige among industry people.  Such as a RED.  It's so great.  And your favorite gritty movie was once shot with it.   

If you do otherwise, you're not going to be prestigious or taken seriously by other guys that appear professional next to cool camera stuff.  

Well, unless you actually capture a compelling story and create an emotional and memorable film...which depending on your circumstances, using a toy camera might give you the best chance of acquiring, but, hey, whatever.  As long as you look good in your PR shot when you're pointing and standing next to a big camera with a huge matte box.

And you'll never make money!  

As a documentarian that's probably going to be true no matter what gear you use.

Anyway, the "you-must-use-this" snob attitude (and it is a legitimate snob attitude) about specific brands is ridiculous.  Sure, some people in the "biz" embrace it, and maybe it even helps them in their certain industry circles, but it doesn't mean it's an attitude we all need to share or assume that outlook works for one's particular needs.  If you have the skill and the story, you can shoot the damn thing on a smartphone.  As a documentary film maker, if you start with thinking about the story you'll always be better off than starting by thinking about the gear.

My opinion is that too many people get that backwards.

​Name me one film this year that won any type of award shot on a smart phone...... You simply don't limit your tools because you have an amazing story, you combine them both. No cheap consumer MFT Camera I would place above a C100, none.

I stand firm with my suggestion as buying a 5D Mark II for that cheap which can be used for excellent pictures + very good low light shooting. If you have the money combine it with the C100 Mark II or even 1 with the auto focus upgrade. Canon has the best colors in this cheaper price range of all cameras imo as well.

[fuzzynormal]

​Name me one film this year that won any type of award shot on a smart phone.

​Tangerine.  Look, It's just my opinion that you're just being kinda snobbish about RED and canons cine gear.  I get it.  I just think it's kind of a quaint notion.  Others will disagree.  That's the reality of it and it's fine.  As for the 5DII, I also use it for interviews. It's a great tool.