Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

3SQ Machine

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 8, 2019
352
202
Looking to get a (relatively) cheap starter video camera that will work well within the iMac, iPad, iMovie etc. ecosystem. I did enough searching to realize these items can get 4-5 digits fast -- which is overkill for what I need. Basically want a chance to experiment with some "real" cinematic mode, have something portable for family moments, get along with Mac, and not break the bank. It would be great if it were mirrorless, 4K, and could occasionally function as a webcam if needed. Heck, I'll troll the used market if needed just to get something started.

By the way, already have a Canon Rebel T6s, but this is just for stills since for video it maxes at 1080p (also not the most portable).

I realize this is an advanced group in this forum, but I figured y'all had to start somewhere before leveling up to pro rig. Appreciate any direction you can offer.
 

barbu

macrumors 65816
Jul 8, 2013
1,262
1,052
wpg.mb.ca
I’d save my money and give it a go with the Canon. You can use different lenses and really, 1080p is just fine. Maybe use the money you saved on a nice lens.
Edit to add:
I have an old NEX7 and a bunch of lenses and adaptors. Mirrorless saves you a bit of body but really the lenses are the main bulk no matter what you choose.
 

ColdCase

macrumors 68040
Feb 10, 2008
3,361
276
NH
For portability you can't beat something like a newer iPhone or GoPro. For long distance zoom and wildlife a big lens is desirable/required, and as barbu mentions, the lens is were the money and bulk is.

I have a few Canon brand video cameras including a EOS70D that take reasonably good video and are apple eco friendly. But they now only seem to come out for special occasions. Its that portability thing and small cameras do a great job now days taking video. Its only where you have to have a big image chip to do what you want that the bigger cameras make sense. Big image chips and lenses are big $$$$, but there should be good starter deals in the used market, decent cameras to experiment with.

These type cameras don't do well in an application where you record for long periods of time without a break (several hours tend to over heat them). A webcam may be better suited for webcam work.
 

840quadra

Moderator
Staff member
Feb 1, 2005
9,262
5,979
Twin Cities Minnesota
Look into a used EOS RP or EOS-R. Both are mirrorless, and do far better at video than the SLR canons do for various reasons. Being able to use the EVF and get some natural stabilization (from your head) is a huge plus for video quality. They work with EF Lenses (Adapter needed) without losing any F-Stops, and both take really good video for the $$ spent. If to go with new lenses, get R Mount lenses with OIS and you can up the game with native glass that does really well even on the low end of their $$$ ask.
 

coolguy4747

macrumors regular
Jun 26, 2010
207
180
Do you have a budget in mind?

IF your only lens for the Rebel is a kit 18-55, I don't think it will be worth using it on a mirrorless camera (which you'll likely want for video), so there's no reason to stick with Canon unless you generally prefer them.

IF you do have additional lenses that you would like to continue using, then you'll most likely want to stick with Canon, as others have suggested.

If you don't require interchangeable lenses, the Sony ZV-1 and RX100-series cameras are compact and have reasonably fast lenses and larger sensors than smartphones and typical point & shoots, so you can get closer to a "cinematic" look. Definitely more portable than a DSLR. I have the ZV-1, which I use as my webcam for daily work Zoom calls and personal video chatting too, as well as a decent camera when I don't feel like taking my bigger cameras/lenses. I mostly use a USB capture card for Zoom, but I have used Sony's webcam app too and it works fine.

If you want interchangeable lenses, most manufacturers have sub-$1,000 cameras that shoot 4k with pretty good quality, so it will depend more on your personal preferences for other features/ergonomics. Fuji X-S10, Nikon Z50 or Z5, various Sonys & Canons, all are pretty good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3SQ Machine

sevoneone

macrumors 6502a
May 16, 2010
905
1,165
If you are trying to stay out of the 4-figure pricing you mentioned above, and you want to stick with Canon, take a look at the EOS M50 ii. It's a very solid camera for the price. MSRP is $699 including a kit lens, $599 for just the camera body. You get a full articulating touchscreen and an EVF. 4k @ 30fps and 24fps and 1080p up to 120fps. There is lots of room to grow too. You can get adapters for Canon EF and EF-S lenses and a wide range of "vintage" lenses also. If you have any full-frame 'EF' lenses, you can also get speed booster adapters that reduce the focal length to provide a similar field of view as the lens does on a full-frame camera while increase the effective f-stop of the lens/ Example: my Canon 24-105 F4 is an F2.8 when using the speed booster on my EF-M mount camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3SQ Machine

e1me5

macrumors 6502a
Jun 11, 2013
500
1,078
Cyprus
Your T6 does all these stuff you ask. It's as cinematic as the real cinema cameras as it has the same sensor size as most of those, so in theory you can reproduce the same images. The secret to cinematic look is lighting and composition, not really the camera. You can try learn these, also how to mess with your camera's settings to manipulate the feel of the image and maybe invest on a good lens and when you can feel that that small canon doesn't really satisfy you any more you can upgrade to a better camera. 4k comes with a cost in storage and performance and it doesn't guaranty any improvement of the look of your images.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.