Please suggest me dslr with both photo and video preferences.
Best Dslr under 70k (for wedding and events) URGENT
I would definitely suggest canon 70D for your purpose as you need photo and good video too...but problem is the lens 18-55 STM is not sufficient for your purpose. you will need a 18-135 STM for wedding and events. Also a basic external flash will be good with tilting head.
With just one line [STRIKE]description[/STRIKE] query, you will likely to get all sorts of suggestion which will just confuse you and not gonna help you make buying decision. Try and give us information, like your name, DOB, PAN detail... No I am kidding. 
Like,
Are you used with digital cameras before esp. interchangeable lens camera?
Do you have any ILC now? If yes, what's the model/brand?
Do you already have lens collection? If yes, what are they? And would like to stick with the same lens family?
Are you open to mirrorless or want to stick with DSLR?
Is this budget just for body or for all the things like lens, accessories and all?
And more which you think would be helpful for us...
Like,
Are you used with digital cameras before esp. interchangeable lens camera?
Do you have any ILC now? If yes, what's the model/brand?
Do you already have lens collection? If yes, what are they? And would like to stick with the same lens family?
Are you open to mirrorless or want to stick with DSLR?
Is this budget just for body or for all the things like lens, accessories and all?
And more which you think would be helpful for us...
Its the Lens that matters in a wedding. Get the Canon 760D/750D and a good lens aka 24-105 F4L IS USM. But since that lens itself costs Rs 38K (Grey Market) youll have to invest a bit more. Its more about the lens than the body.
Canon EF 24 105mm F 4â–ºL Series IS USM Lens Brand NEWâ–º2YEARS Canon India Warranty | eBay
*paytm.com/shop/p/canon-ef-24-105-m...zOXvhGVL1C3fu188W4gzQMdwo9zsSGr1iYaApCH8P8HAQ
S
Conventions be damned. Or well maybe not.
I would recommend Sony ILC-6000, not a DSLR, but a capable mirrorless nevertheless. And I doubt any DSLR under 70K can provide you videos as good as A6000(and same goes for images, both Nikon D7200 and A6000 share same sensor).
Now there is problem of price, the body itself is around 38K-40K and as stated above, you need a good enough lens for shooting. For APS-C E mount, I think SEL18200(18-200, 3.5-6.3) is the best bet, since it can cover a wide focal length...just it is little bit pricey, with shop price around 43K to 45K.
Edit: You can also look for Sony 18-105mm F4 G OSS (SELP18105G). The good thing about this lens is that it is cheap, at 35K-33K range in shops, and comes with excellent image stabilization capabilities.
I would recommend Sony ILC-6000, not a DSLR, but a capable mirrorless nevertheless. And I doubt any DSLR under 70K can provide you videos as good as A6000(and same goes for images, both Nikon D7200 and A6000 share same sensor).
Now there is problem of price, the body itself is around 38K-40K and as stated above, you need a good enough lens for shooting. For APS-C E mount, I think SEL18200(18-200, 3.5-6.3) is the best bet, since it can cover a wide focal length...just it is little bit pricey, with shop price around 43K to 45K.
Edit: You can also look for Sony 18-105mm F4 G OSS (SELP18105G). The good thing about this lens is that it is cheap, at 35K-33K range in shops, and comes with excellent image stabilization capabilities.
I think you should go with a Canon 700D and a 17-50mm f2.8 from Sigma or Tamron. Use remaining cash for external flash, battery expansion/ AA conversion, memory cards, etc.
Let me give my reasons so that confusion doesn't occur. Mostly, marriages and events' photography suffers from low light. Photos may get blurred and useless. Cranking high ISO will increase light, but also image noise.
Inbuilt flash causes problems like background getting pitch black, red eye, plus it highlights any facial blemishes and defects on people, so it doesn't look good.
750D/760D are useless for most of us, they're only minting Canon some money for (mostly) a high 24 megapixel sensor. You mostly do not need this high MPs as the 700D already has 18 which is enough for even large A3+ prints at decent quality, unless you want to crop heavily.
Plus, lesser megapixels mean more light and lesser noise at high ISO.
Secondly, the f 2.8 zoom lens I recommended will ensure enough light for you in emergency, across the entire zoom range. The F4 lens recommended by someone else, will give significantly lesser light.
Plus, my recommended lens will cover a wide range of important focal lengths so you don't miss any moment.
Without good light, your photos get blurred which are totally useless and nothing on earth can make them proper again.
But in the market, believe me, you will get less customers.
Go with a Canon 1200D and try going in the market with a Sony A7 (Full frame), and you will get more customers in the first case while A7 is much superior, we all know that.
Sad but that's the truth about Indian market. Plus not much accessories exist for mirrorless cameras.
Let me give my reasons so that confusion doesn't occur. Mostly, marriages and events' photography suffers from low light. Photos may get blurred and useless. Cranking high ISO will increase light, but also image noise.
Inbuilt flash causes problems like background getting pitch black, red eye, plus it highlights any facial blemishes and defects on people, so it doesn't look good.
750D/760D are useless for most of us, they're only minting Canon some money for (mostly) a high 24 megapixel sensor. You mostly do not need this high MPs as the 700D already has 18 which is enough for even large A3+ prints at decent quality, unless you want to crop heavily.
Plus, lesser megapixels mean more light and lesser noise at high ISO.
Secondly, the f 2.8 zoom lens I recommended will ensure enough light for you in emergency, across the entire zoom range. The F4 lens recommended by someone else, will give significantly lesser light.
Plus, my recommended lens will cover a wide range of important focal lengths so you don't miss any moment.
Without good light, your photos get blurred which are totally useless and nothing on earth can make them proper again.
See, today's mirrorless' are indeed good technically (except for slower AF), I would not counter you on that.
But in the market, believe me, you will get less customers.
Go with a Canon 1200D and try going in the market with a Sony A7 (Full frame), and you will get more customers in the first case while A7 is much superior, we all know that.
Sad but that's the truth about Indian market. Plus not much accessories exist for mirrorless cameras.
[MENTION=276750]samarth[/MENTION] I have 2-3 point that counter your idea
1. 17-50 2.8 is just too less for any marriage ...with this you will never be able to take portrait shots or candids from 10 feet away...you will be missing a lot of beautiful portraits and end up shooting just group pics.
2. 17-50 2.8 although is nice for low light but problem is at f2.8 you cant take group pics and less will be in focus...soo you end up shooting at f5.6
3. 17-50 is a great lens for low light if combined with a full frame where ISO 1600 is clean...I found no advantage of 2.8 in very low light (in restaurants) as my ISO 1600 is still not clean in D7000 ...
4. no aperture can replace an external flash with diffuser...if you want light then get light ...big aperture can not magically brighten the picture (yaah ISO does that)
All points based on my experience of using tammy 17-50 for last 2 years .
1. 17-50 2.8 is just too less for any marriage ...with this you will never be able to take portrait shots or candids from 10 feet away...you will be missing a lot of beautiful portraits and end up shooting just group pics.
2. 17-50 2.8 although is nice for low light but problem is at f2.8 you cant take group pics and less will be in focus...soo you end up shooting at f5.6
3. 17-50 is a great lens for low light if combined with a full frame where ISO 1600 is clean...I found no advantage of 2.8 in very low light (in restaurants) as my ISO 1600 is still not clean in D7000 ...
4. no aperture can replace an external flash with diffuser...if you want light then get light ...big aperture can not magically brighten the picture (yaah ISO does that)
All points based on my experience of using tammy 17-50 for last 2 years .
[MENTION=39722]sujoyp[/MENTION] Yeah, but its better to crop later a little, than to miss a moment because it wasn't wide enough.
Reg, your point 2, I think at wide angle, f 2.8 won't be much of a problem, also because a group usually stands at the same distance from camera, and if their background is blurred, let it be, as long as subjects are clear.
On a Full frame, it would end up being a distortion playground. 17mm would be an artistic wide, with distortion clearly visible on a FF.
17-50 I believe is more relevant for crop sensors. In fact, many say that this lens is the 24-70 of the crop sensor world.
Reg. point no. 4, yes, one may have to resort to external flash, if it can be carried around and you have an assistant for handling that. Only then. If you're alone, and you have to cover a big area then you're pretty much on the natural light and aperture I guess, or maybe mounted flash, facing upwards, with paper/ card diffuser.
Consider if I reject 17-50, what other good choice do I have around this budget?
The next good quality+good light option in this series is Canon L-series 24-70mm f2.8 or Tamron with similar specs.
(The Canon's 1.5 Lacs rupees one is out of mostly anyone's budget, so you'll settle for a cheaper Tamron which is still expensive too).
Any other decent choices?
Reg, your point 2, I think at wide angle, f 2.8 won't be much of a problem, also because a group usually stands at the same distance from camera, and if their background is blurred, let it be, as long as subjects are clear.
On a Full frame, it would end up being a distortion playground. 17mm would be an artistic wide, with distortion clearly visible on a FF.
17-50 I believe is more relevant for crop sensors. In fact, many say that this lens is the 24-70 of the crop sensor world.
Reg. point no. 4, yes, one may have to resort to external flash, if it can be carried around and you have an assistant for handling that. Only then. If you're alone, and you have to cover a big area then you're pretty much on the natural light and aperture I guess, or maybe mounted flash, facing upwards, with paper/ card diffuser.
Consider if I reject 17-50, what other good choice do I have around this budget?
The next good quality+good light option in this series is Canon L-series 24-70mm f2.8 or Tamron with similar specs.
(The Canon's 1.5 Lacs rupees one is out of mostly anyone's budget, so you'll settle for a cheaper Tamron which is still expensive too).
Any other decent choices?
what I am suggesting is, if you are pro then better invest in good flash too...last time I met a wedding photographer at a sangeet function who had D90+18-105 with a SB800 flash and a diffuser. he said that he spent 25k for flash.
good flash have good metering, good auto functions, covers great distance, they are reliable and would not fail soon..longer battery life.
I think Nikon 18-140 or canon 18-135 STM are good alrounder under tight budget....else a combination of 17-50 & 80-200 on 2 cams are ideal.
good flash have good metering, good auto functions, covers great distance, they are reliable and would not fail soon..longer battery life.
I think Nikon 18-140 or canon 18-135 STM are good alrounder under tight budget....else a combination of 17-50 & 80-200 on 2 cams are ideal.
Sujoy already has commented, but still I am posting...
You didn't get the point. If you want to take head/waist level shot of bride and groom, this 17-50 won't be enough from 10' or more which is the case for photographers most of the time.
In theory it seems so. I am waiting for Sujoy's test shoot. No, they won't be in the same distance.
A wedding photographer has to have external flash, it shouldn't be a choice for him. If he has to pick only one between fast lens and external flash, fast lens sure can wait.
Hmm... I have a Canon 18-135 STM and its a good lens, no doubt. But I would love more natural light anyday than f/3.5 to 5.6 can give us...
Artificial light just doesn't cut it for me, and that may be because I'm not good at using it, I admit.
I have covered a gym event and used a Canon 50mm Prime, and it did a damn good job. No flash or anything, and yet no shaky photos. The client was impressed, no doubt. So, well, a lot depends on the kind of event we're covering.
The above gym event was a show on the stage... I covered mostly stage-events till now, so I knew the situation beforehand...
I have no experience about weddings... So, I'll agree with you guys about weddings, a flash+diffuser does enhance our result...
Artificial light just doesn't cut it for me, and that may be because I'm not good at using it, I admit.
I have covered a gym event and used a Canon 50mm Prime, and it did a damn good job. No flash or anything, and yet no shaky photos. The client was impressed, no doubt. So, well, a lot depends on the kind of event we're covering.
The above gym event was a show on the stage... I covered mostly stage-events till now, so I knew the situation beforehand...
I have no experience about weddings... So, I'll agree with you guys about weddings, a flash+diffuser does enhance our result...
So you're a PRO.
That's wonderful. Do you have any other profile other than the photobucket you shared? We would love to peep into some of your pro work (if it's alright to share 'em)
S
Is it just me, or the thread opened has abandoned the topic ?
I'm not exactly a pro. I work for friends, neighbors and their family on request. I don't charge money for it. This gym was where I went for my own bodybuilding for about an year or so.
So, I'm more of a talented amateur. A little fun here, a little there... I don't bookmark my pics much too... Because, my actual profession is that I'm a College Lecturer.
Most of my work is not on the internet, because I don't upload much... I just snap, and give the SD card to clients to copy. I do have a FB page for teaching photography though... Again, nothing much on it too.
*web.facebook.com/samarthsirphotography
Alright... back to the topic. Let the thread starter reply....
Perfect !
This is main requirement for family functions.
It's been a month, probably he's already started covering events and weddings...
And I should've hijacked the post... Sorry
Nice work...
I am bookmarking it...
yaar at least people should inform what they bought we are not going to argue after buying
we are not going to argue after buying