Time lapse cameras too much choice
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e07a0/e07a04b6acf597dfd057aab2847f253a45ac1b50" alt="ryan s ryan s"
I'm looking at buying a camcorder. I want one that has a time lapse feature but don't want to spend too much! Also i want one that is quite ggod at filming in low light.
i have though about buying a dslr, of the nikon type as i have a dslr and could use the lenses, but i'm not sure which, if any, nikon dslr's have a time lapse filming option.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/013a6/013a6781076345a4837a0a39e4204072a9c13b48" alt="Home Sweet Seattle Home Sweet Seattle"
Nice!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c39d2/c39d24715db7bfdd7a831c3511aff16eb1f2820a" alt="Mmm J Mmm J"
If you want to capture still images, use a still image capture device - in this case the dSLR. Video capture is a "convenience feature".
If you want to capture video, use a video capture device - in this case, a camcorder. Still image capture is a "convenience feature".
For time lapse, it depends what you want to do. Using a camcorder, I shot 8 hours of video, imported the video to my computer and used a video editor to speed it up so the finished product of driving from southern California to northern California plays back in under 7 minutes.
It would have taken a lot longer using still images to import the thousands of stills needed and importing them to a video editor…
If you still want to do this with stills and a dSLR, just download the manual of the dSLR that interests you and look for the feature you want.