Nikon D3200 or Nikon D5100
 

Looking for an entry level DSLR with huge emphasis on shooting video. Which of these two camera are the better one?

the D5100 has a much higher res screen (920k vs 230k on the 3100)

-lower noise at higher ISO
-external mic jack (3100 doesn't have one)
-flip out screen (easier to shoot video)
- D5100 has the same processor as D7000

D5100.

Both are relatively the same in terms of sensor, but the D5100 has extra features you won't find in the lower-class D3200.

If you're going to be shooting primarily video, then forget about Nikon, get any Canon DSLR, or if you want even better video, but don't care if still image quality suffers a bit, then get a Panasonic GH2 or GH3.

Was looking at the Canon, the cheapest Canon is the T3i series but thats out of my price range.

Nikon Dslr have auto focus during video

The only canon that does is t4i or t5i

Read up on kenrockwell.com. He says time and time again, if you want to shoot proper video, buy a video camera. The autofocus features even on the newest SLR's are not great. Maybe one day, but not now.

That being said, you can shoot some nice looking video with good lenses, but you might want a focusing rig depending on what you're doing.

I have a D5000, about 3 years old, pics are good but video blows. I think if I were to start again, I'd go with Canon.

Are there video cameras (that is around $500, the cost of a D5100) that can give that blurry-background DOF look & feel from a DSLR video?

In my previous research a few years ago for a camera to do company Youtube videos and interviews, the video from an entry level DSLR just looks more 'pro' because of the control I have with focus and aperture etc. than you can with a camcorder (of the same price) which always has a 'home-movie' ish look to them.

x2 for the GH2/3. Hack it and you'll get a fantastic video camera in dSLR form.

For $500, not really. Your best bet at that price range is a dSLR. My guerrilla shooting video camera is one of the cheapest interchangable lens cameras out there (the Sony VG10) and even that set me back around $2000. At the $500 range, you're looking at fixed lens consumer cameras. That said, many of these cameras have a fairly high optical zoom, so if you want to try and replicate a shallow DOF, you can just set up your camera farther away from your subject and zoom in. It's not quite the same effect but most people wont really be able to tell the difference.

ok I figured. I am in the same market as the OP and was confused at the suggestions since they were looking for an entry level DSLR, and the cameras he listed are around $500, whereas the suggestions of the GH2/GH3 or a video camera are more than that (GH2 starts at $600 USD new and not many used available).

I grabbed the Nikon D5100 at futureshop. Will test it out on the weekend.

^
Sweet! Congrats on your new toy. Post some videos :)

Kenrockwell is an excellent place to get shitty information from a sub-par photographer.. you should definitely go there.

There are many production companies filming extremely high quality cinema using DSLR's.

btw, you don't need autofocus for shooting video.. you just need to know how to focus properly.

And OP, if you're primarily shooting video, I'd ditch the Nikon and go for Canon.

^^^ Agreed. Ken Rockwell can go suck a bag of dicks.

AF during video looks very amateurish and looks really bad. MF all the way. You'll need to know your gear well enough to be able to get good results though. You won't be churning out Oscar winning material right away.

I see alot of people from /p/ and kenny lolwell :ifyouknow:

If you read all the ken rockwell pages, every nikon camera is great except for d3000. :lol