Hmm, a lot of stuff here I hadn't thought of, or hadn't thought about enough.

Would it really be "out of the question" for a single-person crew to use such a camera? In a narrative production, I mean. I simply don't have the experience... and it would be really unfortunate to invest in the camera only to find it practically unusable.

Then again, I'd think it would be more beneficial for my development as a filmmaker if I had a camera with potential for great images but is hard to use, than so-so images with a nice streamlined package.

I don't know, I'm still on the outskirts of this here.

Generally speaking when using a DSLR camera and a prime lens you
are getting closer to what a professional film or video camera
does. Which is why they are gaining in popularity. A professional
prime lens and the manual controls of a pro camera for less money.

They take more attention and more experience than a video camera
with a fixed lens - even a higher end prosumer model. You get a
better picture, less DoF and you give up the camcorders automatic
features.

To me a DSLR isnt a versatile camera for video production. They
are great cameras for still photos with a cool video feature. But
for me, I want a great video camera with no stills feature.

Ive used one and didnt like it. Even though the image was
outstanding. I was (an am) willing to use a video camera to shoot
my documentaries and movies knowing Im giving up the DoF of a
prime lens. Everything else, completely outweighs the look of a
prime lens. I have a camera with a lens mount. When I absolutely
need to use a prime lens I rent a set for the day. No real way for
you to know for sure until you use one to make the project you
want to make.

quote:

---

Originally posted by certified instigator

No real way for
you to know for sure until you use one to make the project you
want to make.

---

I think I'm going to take this advice CI. The place I'd be buying from has a two week return policy, so it would probably be a good idea to really try out the camera during that time frame and see if it works for me. Thanks. 🙂

Its such a hard decision to make, but I think I'm gonna go with the Rebel T2i. I've been watching a few videos on youtube, and right away I feel like I can see that the image quality is much less grainy in low light. You really never can base things off a youtube video, but I feel like at least I have decent proof of what the camera can achieve, and it seems amazing to me. I also realized from a certain video that having a DSLR fits another movie I plan on making in the future (not so much for my current film) and I feel like I should get a head start on using them.

Just a question though, it seems that in other countries, the Rebel Ti2 is called the 550D, and there seems to be a whole lot more info about the 550D. I just want to make sure these are truly the same cameras.

Anyway, I honestly feel very enthusiastic about trying out this camera (if it doesn't feel right for me, I'll just return it), but in all, I feel like a DSLR, with the right lens, will end up creating some truly unique shots.

The only thing I'm not looking foward to, is I was truly wanting a camera that can record normal home video as well (who knows when you'd just want to goof off and make a sloppy video) or even a hand-held horror film, and you certainly couldn't do those things with a DSLR it seems.

I just don't know, since my current movie doesn't need fancy shots, I'm wondering if I should just buy the Vixia S200, which is a very round-about camera, and then buy a DSLR once my career takes off just a bit better?

Yeah the T2i and 550D are the same cameras CSmitty. The only difference I think they might have is PAL support for the 550D, versus NTSC for the T2i.

I own the T2i now. And I think it's safe to say that I'll definitely be keeping it.

One of the big things for me is I wanted a still camera as well (photography is pretty cool), so this package seemed pretty elegant (and it does work well for the kind of stuff I do).

But apart from that, and as it is relevant to this discussion, I've found that most of the concerns outlined for these sort of cameras aren't that much to worry about.

Stability: comparing the videos I've done with the T2i with my previous videos, the image is a little less stable. But not by much. It could very well be attributed to simply having a larger sensor and image as well; more opportunity to capture shake.

Take a look: ?url="http://vimeo.com/11753977"?this?/url? video was all handheld, as well as ?url="http://vimeo.com/11838777"?this?/url? one.

Using the second one as an example in particular, check out the walking shot at the beginning. That's all handheld, just me holding the camera. Absolutely no accessories. The shakiest part is when we walk over a grate, and that's because my shoes kept getting caught in the grating and I stumbled significantly (haha, like I really stumbled. I'm impressed I kept the camera that level).

Yes that shot in particular would benefit from a rig of some sort, but that was my plan all along. I'm thinking it's just going to come down to having a counterweight to shift the centre of balance lower. My friend and I have been conceptualizing some super cheap rigs based on both professional and DIY rigs, I think it will be more than doable.

Audio: I was a bit surprised, but the on-board mic isn't actually that bad. I think it's better than my old camcorder mic actually, in terms of pure quality. Now, if you use auto-focus (which I never use), the audio will be completely unusable (the motor is so loud). Also when you zoom the shutter adjusts a bit and makes a bit of noise as well. Anything super close is somewhat distorted. The other thing is that the mic doesn't seem to work well when there's lots of background noise; it has trouble singling out a source, it seems. So I can't really recommend it for much. But it is not as bad as I was expecting.

Codec: something I hadn't thought of is the codec it captures in. The T2i saves in h.264 MOVs. Which I've appreciated so far, because I can actually edit them natively (unlike what I've experienced with AVCHD). I hear some people don't like the codec, but it works great for me so far (even though editing is unbelievably stuttery... but I've never worked with HD before, so I don't know what to compare to).

Ergonomics: linked to the Stability portion above, I've personally found that the ergonomics aren't too bad. You have to physically plan how you will approach a shot more (eg. "okay I need my left hand about here so I can rack focus smoothly and my right hand a bit lower to compensate"), but I don't quite see what the big complaints are about. If you're used to something else I could see why there would be some discontent with the camera's ergonomics, but I've used camcorders extensively (filmed a short doc and a few short films on the DVX100a, and my little Canon ZR camcorders were my constant companions for 4 years) and I still enjoy using the T2i. Sure it's not perfectly designed for video, but I feel like it's just a bit of a challenge to overcome.

Low-light sensitivity: this one is iffy for me. I was expecting much better from the camera. When you have a situation where it's super high contrast at night (like filming a man standing under a streetlight) the camera performs admirably, and I've really never seen anything like that in this price range. But in the mid-low light range it can get pretty noisy. But I've noticed patterns with it... for example, whenever I film someone on the computer in a non-sun drenched room, the camera hates the wood grain on the desk. I don't know quite why, but the wood grain just comes out overly noisy. The point is, your mileage may vary with the low-light sensitivity of this camera. I've wised up about things after my first few tests though, and now it's my strategy to open the iris as much as possible and have the highest possible exposure, trying to keep the ISO sensitivity no more than 800. If I really need to I go up to 1600, and it's mostly worked out so far. Again, you just got to do tests and really get to know the camera before a shoot.

Image: this is what it's all about. The image quality doesn't disappoint. Shooting in optimal lighting conditions the image is STUNNING. Low-light is still spectacular compared to other similarly priced camcorders. It's interesting, the image looks distinctly "Canon" to me (something about how high contrast situations look), which is just something I've noticed. The biggest thing is the control over the image. Now with the ability to actually change lenses, the new realms this opens up have become very apparent to me. I have a low shot of a character and I need the sky to feel more dynamic and stretching. Well, I need a wider lens! This wouldn't have even occurred to me as a possibility before. While I only have one lens accessible at the moment, the possibilities this entails to me are very very important. I can't wait until I get my hands on some other lenses to experiment with.

And having a focus ring... that never gets old. Manual focus is completely worth it. Again, for providing that extra control over the image. Even exposure is huge, to be able to control that.

I think this camera will work and is working for me. These are just my thoughts, but I thought it would benefit this thread to have some firsthand opinions on the subject camera.

Hey I'm thinking of getting a t2i as well and I just wanted people to see this rig that this guy built on youtube. This guy has great videos for the 550d(t2i) as well as the xh-a1. His rig pretty much takes care of the problems with stability, focus(adds auto focus), and potentially audio as well as he discusses adding a portable audio device to the back of the rig.

Very good video for potential and current t2i users.

Tryin' to live the dream, any advice?

About2Break,

I don't see a link in your post! :O

I'd be interested in seeing what's unique about this rig though, because pretty much every rig that I've seen does the things you mentioned (except auto-focus, which is a lens issue... I have no idea what solution could be provided for THAT).

Oops, sorry about that. I actually meant forward focus. The cost of this rig adds to the price but with the initial price being so low, I'm sure it's still worth it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq688Hh3_lI

The link should work.

Tryin' to live the dream, any advice?

Do you mean follow focus? 🙂 Yeah those things are kind of nice...

That link brings up a nice review and test of the T2i, but not for the rig, haha. But I know what you're talking about. 🙂

Did you see the part about his rig, it's like 5 mins in or so. He doesn't talk about it much, but you can see from its design and brief description that it covers much of the problems associated with a small DSLR camera. It basically fixes the stability issues by adding weight and the focus by adding the follow focus (lol sorry for calling it a forward focus, i know next nothing as far as camera terms:) Like he said it also allows ample room to add a portable audio device, though there isn't one in the video.

I'm about a week away from purchasing my own t2i and I'm also going to invest in the necessary parts to build a rig similar to the one he has in the video.

I haven't used a follow focus yet, but from looking at it, it seems like something one could get really good at using. Like throwing grenades in halo or shooting a rifle(in real life), it just seems like something I could "get a feel for." That's a totally arrogant statement but I believe it, and will test myself soon!

Took a bit of digging but I found it. Looks nice for making it himself. I've personally looked at oodles of rigs like that, DIY or otherwise, so it's not a new concept to me, but some nice features. Some serious expenses there though. Steadiness is one of the biggest issues with DSLRs, but so is monitoring. Buying a monitor like that isn't an option for me at least, but I've survived so far. I'll get an LCD hood and maybe a netbook hooked up to the cam if I'm doing a crazy shot and I'll be fine, I think.

All a follow focus does is make changing focus more ergonomic and controllable, virtually the same thing as focusing with a lens except easier. 🙂

Hey Corax do you think it's better to purchase the body only and then spend the savings on a better lens? or is the kit lens worth it? I have right around $1000 to spend.

Tryin' to live the dream, any advice?

Hey man,

I think it depends on what you want to do. If you wanted to save that $100 for another lens, the only kind of lens you'd be able to buy is a 50mm prime. Which could be worth your while, certainly (you know that review you linked to? That's a perfect example: his video he demonstrates is done with with the Nifty Fifty he bought, not using the stock lens).

But I think it's a good enough investment if you don't already have a lens. The 18-55 that's stock with it isn't amazing by any means, but it works. And that little bit of zoom IS useful, really. But the thing with the stock lens, which I'm sure you'll understand, is that it's a middleground lens that isn't spectacular at either end of the spectrum. At the widest setting it's not quite wide enough for me, and zoomed in you might as well just have a 50mm prime. But I don't have any other lenses, so it makes sense for me to have it. And being able to switch from wide to mid shot is useful, even if it's not the best quality.

So yes, I would recommend getting the stock lens if you don't have anything else, and the versatility (even if it's not the highest quality lens in the world) is good for the money. Personally, I'm already starting to get tired of it though. I want to invest in a wide angle (like 10mm) lens if I ever have the money, and a nifty fifty for sure. But I wouldn't have known that without the experience with this lens, and it's still working for me at the time being. 🙂