Is a DSLR what i need?

Mark 00

Hi. My sister is just about to give birth to her first baby and wants to be ready. She is looking for something to take video with mostly.

I was wondering, instead of buying a video camera, could she buy a DSLR - something like the eos 1100d. Would the video quality be high enough for decent home movies. And that way she would also be getting a really good camera as at the minute she only has an old compact.

Advice welcome on what to buy!

daymobrew

The EOS 1100d shoots at 720p HD.

The EOS 1100d will be great for taking photos of the new baby as s/he grows. I take a lot more photos of my kids since upgrading to a DSLR.

Having said that, it is not ideal for video - focussing is messy (noisy and slow) - a dedicated video camera would be better.
Does she want it for the birth or for birth and later?
I don't take many videos on my DSLR.

Mark 00

ya it's for birth and later. as the baby grows.

I thought that this would be a good compromise but if the video is awkward i'm not so sure. It is video that she is mainly concerned with. The problem I see with buying video camera is that she'll only have an old compact for photos which will be pretty crappy

hbr

Mark 00 wrote: »

...She is looking for something to take video with mostly.

I was wondering, instead of buying a video camera, could she buy a DSLR - something like the eos 1100d. Would the video quality be high enough for decent home movies. And that way she would also be getting a really good camera as at the minute she only has an old compact.

A DSLR can produce very high quality video. Due to the large image sensor
and high quality lenses, video quality can be as good as professional broadcast
cameras costing tens of thousands of euro.

However, you should not underestimate how difficult it will be to shoot
video using a DSLR. Traditional DSLRs have a very fast and efficient
phase-detect auto-focus system. When the mirror is flipped up for live view
or video shooting. this system is not available and the camera uses a much
slower contrast-detect auto-focus system instead.

daymobrew wrote:

Having said that, it is not ideal for video - focussing is messy (noisy and slow)

I agree. The only way to shoot video with a Canon DSLR is to focus before
you start shooting. If you need to change focus, manual focus is the only reasonable
option. AF is slow and unreliable and the noise from the focus motor will be picked
up by the microphone.

I wouldn't buy the 1100D for use as a video camera. The 550D is a much better
choice. It is a better camera in every respect. It has an input socket for external
microphones. It shoots full 1080HD and it has a much better LCD screen. The
price of the 550D is very reasonable at the moment.

For shooting video, maybe you should consider one of the Sony SLT
cameras. These cameras use fast phase-detect AF, even when they are
shooting video.

Mark 00

Thanks for the advice hbr.

Both the 550d and the sony are a little out of the price range. I might just tell her to get a stand alone video recorder for now and maybe upgrade to decent camera a bit down the road.

Ballyman

Mark 00 wrote: »

Would the video quality be high enough for decent home movies.

It would be more than high enough when used properly however the DSLR comes with a very very steep learning curve.

It's not designed for shooting video primarily so you need a lot of knowledge to be able to use it effectively. There is no Auto Focus on them and it's incredibly difficult to focus accurately on moving objects. You will also need IS lenses (which are expensive) as every tiny bit of camera shake is magnified massively on-screen.

You would be better off getting a consumer camcorder of some description as that's more of a point and record type of device. Obviously the footage will be nowhere near as good as from a DSLR but it will be plenty good for home movies.

daymobrew

Ballyman wrote: »

You would be better off getting a consumer camcorder of some description as that's more of a point and record type of device.

I think that she will take more photos than movies. And photos can be printed and easily shared offline, unlike movies (need a device for playback).

I recommend getting the DSLR and take mostly photos. You will capture a lot more cool moments as photos than in videos.

Ballyman

daymobrew wrote: »

I think that she will take more photos than movies. And photos can be printed and easily shared offline, unlike movies (need a device for playback).

I agree but he did say:

Mark 00 wrote: »

She is looking for something to take video with mostly.

Mark 00

daymobrew wrote: »

I think that she will take more photos than movies. And photos can be printed and easily shared offline, unlike movies (need a device for playback).

While she did say she wants it more for videos than photos I think her logic is that she already has a camera (old compact). That's why I was trying to find some middle ground because I think it's bit of a waste taking all those baby and child moments on a compact.

I think I'm more confused now than I was before!