Camera recommendations

[grimlin18]

Thats the camera my husband Jason was talking about, the NEX. I saw someone else mentioned it too as more of a point and shoot camera but with professional quality photos...

well i got the one that comes with the better lense and it has many settings you can mess its really good i got some clean pictures of my cham shooting his tounge out and humming birds mid flight. it doesnt zooom in to far though but its really good.

 

[Dez]

Are you looking for a camera specifically to take pictures of your cham?

Yes mostly . I want to be able to do macro shots so I can take really close detailed photos as well as high speed captures like a tongue shot. Good quality video would be nice too.

 

[Jordan123]

There are currently 0 macro lens options for the NEX 5. All NEX 5 lenses are very slow and not good for high shutter speed fast shots aside from broad daylight. Though the NEX 5 rates itself as a 7 FPS continuous shooter in reality its a 2FPS shooter with a 30% shutter response delay compared to the Gh1.

You can use ANY camera lens relatively with the GH1 and a very cheap adapter...giving you so much more flexibility when shooting and choosing glass.

GH1 also has a foldout LCD instead of just a tilt. GH1 also has a viewfinder for shooting in daylight and NEX has none...the screen can be hard to see when you are shooting in bright areas. If you have to get any angle besides a straight shot.. (for chameleon photography..guess what? You will!) then the foldout LCD is a Godsend especially when trying to shoot around branches etc to get the right angle.

GH1 you will have to manual focus (recommended anyway) but the shots you can get from a GH1 because of the lens options cannot be rivaled in any camera system 800$ or under... also the NEX is 100$ more with just 1 slow lens...and another lens is 200$..... NEX 5 batteries can run 60-90$ each vs 20$ for Gh1 batteries...

Video mode in GH1 is FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR superior because of the legal and amazing bitrate hack which takes all of 5 seconds to perform. Video mode for the GH1 is far superior to every single DSLR aside from the... GH2....

Depth of field control (the ability to control how much of the shot is in focus vs out of focus) is far more flexible on the Gh1 because of the lens selection. NEX 5 cannot compare to practical use.

This is my last recommendation..as a professional I know you will do well with the GH1 and find it more practically appealing after having it for 1 week vs having the NEX 5. Foldout LCD your first shoot will pretty much seal the deal for you...let alone when you are trying to find specific lenses (like macro lenses) because the NEX 5 has nothing like that available.

also about the D3000 it has a lower pixel count, much less lens options, lenses are way more expensive....there is no foldout LCD or event tilt! NOT USEFUL FOR CHAMELEON SHOOTING, and NO VIDEO!!! Slow lenses unless extreme amounts of money are spent (try more than the whole camera to get a 50mm 1.4 lens) burst shooting at 3fps but normal continuous isnt even close to the GH1... D3000 is very noisy at high ISO....

D3100 is more expensive and the lenses are also crazy expensive...and also no foldout LCD.....also the video here is limited to 10minute clips vs no limit on GH1..also the FPS in 720p mode on D3100 is only 30 vs 60 on the GH1 allowing for fluid slow motion lizard tongue action videos vs a slide show presentation.


I rest my case! Good luck!

 

[Dez]

Whoa Jordan, thanks for the info. I'm checking out the GH1 right now

 

[Chamifornia]

the gh1 will not compare to an slr with a good macro lens though. You can find a used body with a used macro lens for 650 if you look around. I have the canon xsi and 40d with 100mm ef macro lens and the pictures i get are spectacular right from the start even when I was first learning. I would say get something like this with the kit lens which is a very good lens for a kit lens and save up for a macro lens. Trust me you wouldnt ever be dissapointed.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/613613-REG/Canon_3818B002_EOS_Rebel_T1i_500D.html
or the t3 kit is cheaper and also a great camera. If you checkwww.photography-on-the.net they always have stuff for sale for a good price. Or you can go the nikon route but I am loyal to canon

 

[Chamifornia]

I highly recommend the Panasonic GH1. You can find one for 399$ on B&H. On ebay you can get an extra chinese battery (be sure its panasonic brand just chinese writing) for about 20$ (each battery lasts for 3 hours straight of video shooting) and all of the GH1's are now hackable (legal and awesome) not just the old ones as of a week or two ago.

Then hit up ebay for a micro 4/3rds to canon FD mount adapter (20$) and you can use any old canon FD lens on the body (I recommend a canon FD 50mm 1.8 for a cheap lens and if you want to spend more the FD 50mm 1.4 is fine enough)

On a micro 4/3rds style camera that will give you a 100mm focal distance which should give you some beautiful shallow depth of field shots of your chameleon as well as perfect 1080 video (assuming you do the very very easy hack) at cinema style 24 frames...

(though with the hack you WILL REQUIRE a class 10 SDHC card...which the 16gig ones run about 30~$ and will let you shoot for 2 hours at stock camera settings and over an hour in hacked mode relative to what you are shooting)

I recommend Transcend card but never ebay them as they are often fakes from there.

The entire setup will cost you about 500$ but youll be producing professional videos and stills.

I prefer it highly to the 7D for many reasons...1 the video footage with the hack is better... the lenses are cheaper...the camera itself is about 1/4th the cost....the battery lasts longer...you can video for a longer period of time (7D is stuck on about 10-15 minutes something like that..and it also overheats all the time while the Panasonic GH1 will shoot as long as you want... ive recorded 3 hours at a go before and never had any problems)

If youre going to upgrade beyond a standard roughly 100$ consumer camera the GH1 is the next jump I would recommend. Anything less I wouldnt bother with and anything more is unnecessary and triple the expense at the least.

I just joined the forum today because I am going to be taking the plunge and buying a chameleon in the future but I want to make sure I know everything about it first and have everything setup. Yet I do video work for a living so....if you have questions about video stuff or photography I can help there ^_^;

YOU PREFER THIS HIGHLY TO THE 7d? what are you smoking? lol. The panny may be better video wise but if you are buying because of that buy a freaking hd video camera not the 7d. The 7d with a decent lens will blow the panasonic out of the water IMO. Yes I have seen photos of the gh1. It is a good camera if you don't want to spend the money but it does NOT hold its ground to a true dslr. Again this is just my opinion but photography has been a passion of mine for quite some time

 

[Jordan123]

Actually I have an XHA1 video camera....I prefer the GH1 to the 7D because yes I take a lot of video, but also because lens options are much cheaper and Im not rich. a 1500 lens on a 1500 camera vs the same thing for 300 on a 400 camera where a common person wont be able to notice the difference in result seems wiser to me. Also the reason people like DSLR vs normal video cameras is DEPTH OF FIELD control. Sensor size is larger on the 7D Ill give it that...but in the end the Gh1 is better for practical use in my opinion because the cost of the lens to get an aperture wide enough to offset it is way way cheaper than for the 7D.

A voigtlander 24mm F0.95 runs 800$ for the Gh1 / Gh2 there isnt even anything that bright available for the 7D...let alone the next comparable lens would be a 1.2 for an excessively high price...

If i was strictly a photographer and not using any video..and had an unlimited supply of money...id get a 7d or a 5d over a GH1 in half a heart beat...still quality is superior on the 7D no questions necessary...but in the real world...for practicality the Gh1 (or if youre going to spend more than 500$ get the Gh2 and smoke the Gh1 but still have cheap lenses) is a preferred route.

As a videographer also the moire effect of the 7D really bothers me whenever im shooting subjects like a chameleon with complex skin patters or interviewing people wearing button up shirts with stripes..

Also I film events all the time so...the 7D isnt even optional...having to reset the camera every 10~ minutes and then wait for it to cool off when it overheats out there makes it relativley useless... also fold out LCD....hallelujah

So yes I prefer it to the 7D because video is a huge part of my life. With you being strictly a photographer with thousands to pour into your setup...a 7D would make more sense for you...kind of.... Gh2 4tw though...you cant argue with having so many lens options available for a m4/3rds body. (again if you arent on an unlimited budget i mean)

For her purposes in the 500$ range... the Gh1 will be far better than the other recommendations...I think we can both agree on that.

 

[Chamifornia]

I don't have the 7d I mainly use a low budget dslr (xsi and old model 40d) and both do not have video. I was pretty much saying any beginner model dslr's take extremely good macro photos with a good macro lens and PICTURE wise will be much greater quality then the gh1. My setup would probably cost 650 used but it is only with the macro lens. the kit I suggested earlier has a great all around lens that works well for everything for 600-650. And from there I was recommending to save for a macro lens or go used. When I first started I got the best point and shoot camera out ( cant remember what it was) and quickly bought a dslr right after so I wasted alot of money. Anyway it pretty much comes down to budget and if you want better quality photos go dslr , if you are on a budget and don't care go the other route. But we spend alot on our chams so why not take the best photos of them
Either way, I am going crazy waiting for my kammers cham lol

 

[Chamifornia]

Also if you don't want to learn a dslr then what I posted shouldnt matter ha

 

[Jordan123]

I still dont understand the logic...first you are talking about film cameras which, is a different game entirely. Second most of the mentioned cameras (apart from the NEX 5) are DSLR's which essentially...are just like learning an SLR except you get your pictures quickly third.. by the time you compress these pictures down from 4000x3000 to the resolution of say...an HD monitor or TV screen...1920x1080 you wont be able to tell the difference anyway..... its like you said a few posts back... the LENS is what will make the most difference here.

In the 500$ range..the Gh1 because of lens flexibility is the most viable option. If you want to spend 1000$ then a T3i would be good...even with a 10minute video clip limit. Its a dramatic jump to say I have a kodak easy share which is a sub100$ camera...to requesting a 500$ recommendation and getting told to spend 1000$.

You could buy another few chameleons to take pictures of for that

Canon still image detail resolve etc is great... lenses expensive... a GH1 with the old school FD lenses which are excellent and cheap...is going to be the best bet if you plan on taking video and you dont want to spend 1000$ in the end. with the Gh1 you get all the old macro lenses as an option...

haha anyway to each their own....also for 7D money you can get the voitlander 0.95 and a GH2...... the voigtlander has a 6 inch focal distance.

 

[Ryan Jarosek]

YOU PREFER THIS HIGHLY TO THE 7d? what are you smoking? lol. The panny may be better video wise but if you are buying because of that buy a freaking hd video camera not the 7d. The 7d with a decent lens will blow the panasonic out of the water IMO. Yes I have seen photos of the gh1. It is a good camera if you don't want to spend the money but it does NOT hold its ground to a true dslr. Again this is just my opinion but photography has been a passion of mine for quite some time

Was kind of thinking the same thing. I happen to own a 7D as well as two other lower end DSLR bodies and the 7D is amazing.

Anyone see the movies shot with a 7D. Amazing quality at 1080p .

Edit :Reading furthur both of you have great points.

 

[Jordan123]

Was kind of thinking the same thing. I happen to own a 7D as well as two other lower end DSLR bodies and the 7D is amazing.

Anyone see the movies shot with a 7D. Amazing quality at 1080p .

Edit :Reading furthur both of you have great points.

Also the 7D is 1500$..for just the body..... and all GH1's can be hacked now to up the video bitrates and its superior video quality to the "amazing" 7D..... anyway for me as an event videographer the 7D was not optional because of the short video clip limit and overheating. Yet it is a wonderful camera...and if youve got the money to spend as you like...you wont be bummed out at all haha but if youre funding has a limit.... GH1 and some nice lenses would be better for practical use..... and a Gh2 for still 40% less money...wonderful also....with higher picture quality and the cheap lens options.

Another note... 1.2 lens for the 7D is 1500$ and for the Gh1 its 275. (canon FD) Lets not get started on actual Macro lenses... 1.4 lens Gh1 is 80$ 7D its 450$ 1.8 lens 7D is 150$ Gh1 30$... anyway we all know the best part about cameras is the subject you are shooting...so ill get back to perusing these wonderful chameleons

 

[Ryan Jarosek]

Also the 7D is 1500$..for just the body..... and all GH1's can be hacked now to up the video bitrates and its superior video quality to the "amazing" 7D..... anyway for me as an event videographer the 7D was not optional because of the short video clip limit and overheating. Yet it is a wonderful camera...and if youve got the money to spend as you like...you wont be bummed out at all haha but if youre funding has a limit.... GH1 and some nice lenses would be better for practical use..... and a Gh2 for still 40% less money...wonderful also....with higher picture quality and the cheap lens options.

Another note... 1.2 lens for the 7D is 1500$ and for the Gh1 its 275. (canon FD) Lets not get started on actual Macro lenses... 1.4 lens Gh1 is 80$ 7D its 450$ 1.8 lens 7D is 150$ Gh1 30$... anyway we all know the best part about cameras is the subject you are shooting...so ill get back to perusing these wonderful chameleons

I totally get your point and I rarely shoot video. I don't have a limit and I have a really cool collection of L series lenses and these macro's your are talking about.

I have had sigma and other types. Even non L series lenses or cheap canon lenses. It is all about the subject and the shooter I can agree with that but a lense that costs $1500 is that way for a reason. There is a difference and it can be seen.

It's also hard to beat 8 pics a second and when it comes to catching action that's hard to beat.

 

[Peter Kraemer]

Budget would be $500 or so. Anyone have any suggestions of a good camera to get?

Hi Dessirae,
i confess i´am a Canon-fan - but it has reasons.

You wanna have a suggestion for camera about 500 usd - i would recommand the Canon EOS Rebel like Chris Anderson use it. It is a good start in the world of DSLR and if you have fun with it you can "upgrade" with better lenses. And i think you will need some time (maybe 2-5 years ore more) until your skill "needs" a better body.
Remember - i think a simpler body (like the Rebel) with a good lens makes better pictures than a professional body with an starter lens.

I used my Canon EOS400 (like you Rebel-Series) for some years before i need the upgrade to the EOS 50D and two more years for the 5DmkII.


A little excursion to other brands.....
.... Nikon - have good cameras (tryed a D90 during last months) but the excellent lenses are more expensive than the same quality of Canon (i speak of lenses with more than 1.000 usd).
.... Sony - the cameras are not my way (handling) and it is difficult and really expensive to get a lens with a real excellent quality.
My résumé - only Nikon is for me an option to Canon and i will never think about brands like Sony, Panasonic or Olympus. But i´am really happy with Canon and have no reason to change.

Peter

 

[Ryan Jarosek]

Hi Dessirae,
i confess i´am a Canon-fan - but it has reasons.

You wanna have a suggestion for camera about 500 usd - i would recommand the Canon EOS Rebel like Chris Anderson use it. It is a good start in the world of DSLR and if you have fun with it you can "upgrade" with better lenses. And i think you will need some time (maybe 2-5 years ore more) until your skill "needs" a better body.
Remember - i think a simpler body (like the Rebel) with a good lens makes better pictures than a professional body with an starter lens.

I used my Canon EOS400 (like you Rebel-Series) for some years before i need the upgrade to the EOS 50D and two more years for the 5DmkII.


A little excursion to other brands.....
.... Nikon - have good cameras (tryed a D90 during last months) but the excellent lenses are more expensive than the same quality of Canon (i speak of lenses with more than 1.000 usd).
.... Sony - the cameras are not my way (handling) and it is difficult and really expensive to get a lens with a real excellent quality.
My résumé - only Nikon is for me an option to Canon and i will never think about brands like Sony, Panasonic or Olympus. But i´am really happy with Canon and have no reason to change.

Peter

Good post , I started with the Canon Xti and can admit I would have been lost starting with a 7D. All the settings change and get a little more complex. I also agree with the lower end body and a better lens. Makes all the difference.

ps. I am a canon fan too.

 

[Jordan123]

I hear ya, though at 4 megapixels the Gh2 does 40 frames per second burst shooting ^_^; but everything else is 5fps only. Also dont overlook the 800$ voigtlander 0.95 on the Gh2(or Gh1)...would easily give the 1500$ 1.2 lens a run for its......... money....but its hard for me to think in terms of not having a financial limit. Anyway I think we ran the gammut on cameras for a chameleons forum....

I suppose the panasonics do better for a blue lizard and the canons give more fire to the red and yellows.... rofl said to be a goofball but elements of truth regarding both lens coating and auto white balance....

Ill have to get a nosey be and you can get the ambilobe? (still dont know much about chameleons really hehe)


Now to make a post somewhere asking for a recommended breeder....

 

[Chamifornia]

I still dont understand the logic...first you are talking about film cameras which, is a different game .

I forgot to add a d before slr. I was never talking about film cameras. My logic was pretty much any lower model body with a good lens will be better picture wise then the gh1. I am now done with this thread. Lol

 

[Jordan123]

the Gh1 is a DSLR basically..they just removed the need for a mirror inside to make the body more compact and gave up some DoF but added the invaluable flexibility to use any lens from any camera with a m4/3rds sensor. Im not sure what youre trying to say

anyway google search pictures with all these cameras and find which one you like the best.

Most regular people will have trouble discerning a difference between the Gh1 and the 7D using similar lenses. By the time its compressed to fit on a website or send through a forum there really is no discernible difference aside from the lens you chose to use.