Canon Rebel T2i
- Thread starter roxics
- Start date
Yeah, but it IS the 550D/T2i. Dont know why they filmed some guys juggling.. But anyway, cant wait for some real tests!
Buy a decent monopod for $50 & a decent tripod for $100. Simplest is best
You can buy 2 T2Is for the price of more expensive Cameras. Even an HVX has limited recording time due to the P2 Cards limited recording space
Roberto Suarez
Active member
I think the 30 min limit is for the european model: if record more time for shot, have to pay more taxes as a video cam
shaocaholica
Well-known member
You would still have to deal with registration distance.
Interestingly none of the footage so far seems to have a shallow dof. I wonder if that's an aesthetic or a product of the camera. I think it's just an APS-C 1.6x crop sensor right? As in the same as the 7D, nearly S35? In which case it should be the same in that regard.
Barry_Green
Moderator
From camcorders, probably not. But perhaps c-mount lenses from 16mm movie cameras.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
550D low light footy: http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/eosmovie/index.html
Not too shabby.
They call the camera "Kiss" in Japan (WTF?) - so make sure you see the right clip.
Frank
Not too shabby.
They call the camera "Kiss" in Japan (WTF?) - so make sure you see the right clip.
Frank
Norman99
Well-known member
Let's face it the Canon T2i is a great camera. If that file size limit is lifted, I can now have one tool that does pro photography and pro HD video. Serious event videographers will think twice before forking out 3K $ for a 3 chip video camera. The RED is above affordability when you consider the accessories. The T2i is just the camera, in the right hands to really make a good HD impression on the clients. The camera is not small when coupled with a proper bracket, compendium shade, and a led video light with on board battery. It will look quite impressive in front of a bride who will never comment about the size (camera) being too small !!
Chris Watson
Well-known member
Which one is it? Kiss x3 or Kiss x4 or both?
EDIT: Never mind. I googled it. For what it's worth, the X3 (or the t1i) has the better demo on there.
this is not a fair comparison.
youre comparing a $6000 video camera to a entry level <$1000 dslr.
if youre going to make comparisons at least do it within a similar price range.
there are many filmmakers that cannot afford $6000 but will spend $1000 easy.
take into account all the filmmakers that until now have used consumer camcorders (who now can use something like the d550) and i think the numbers of PJs vs filmmakers is similar
Barry_Green
Moderator
Okay, seriously? We are talking about the same group of guys who insist on comparing a $1700 DSLR against a $30,000 Red here, are we not?!!
Anyway, my comparison was well thought out and done specifically on purpose. I compared a popular low-end professional video camera, against a stills camera. What else should I have compared it against? We were talking about how much market presence the professional video shooters have, so I used a professional video camera as the point of reference.
And your point is? We already HAVE the under $1,000 filmmaker-appropriate camera, so -- buy one and shoot.
The discussion was what the market size would be like if they were to cater specifically to the filmmaker market -- and that's not gonna happen on a $1000 still camera.
roxics
Veteran
I'll agree with you here to a certain point. There are a lot of out-of-pocket indie filmmakers and aspiring college kids shooting movies with their friends. Even middle aged guys who go shoot a low budget horror flick for a lark who would never pay $3-6k for a camera. Hobbyist filmmakers.
That said, at what point does this camera cross the line from something a pro would consider and something you'd buy to shoot your kids birthday with? The problem is it shares the ghostly aesthetics of 35mm film without the "meat" of the image behind it.
So will indie filmmakers described above buy it? You bet. Will pros buy it? Few will. Will consumers buy it. Yeah.
Had the HVX200 been $800 four years ago (brand new) I'm sure the same answers would have applied. Because something at the $6k level would have made the HVX200 not quite pro enough for the pros. But the price would have made even soccer moms buy it.
In other words, you get what you pay for.
It just so happens that we are getting such high quality stuff at such a great price lately because technology is moving so fast. It's not decades anymore, it's years.
My point being. The pros will by the pro stuff and their market is in fact small. The consumers will buy the consumer stuff and their market is bigger. The problem here are a select few consumers who want pro features at a consumer price. These DSLR's give them a taste of it, but can't deliver everything. At least not until prices fall.
Last edited:
shaocaholica
Well-known member
You know, the RED One market is pretty small but the sub $1500 indie market is growing pretty quick. Just because a market didn't exist years ago doesn't mean its not here now. All these people who have 5Ds, 7Ds, GH1s, D90s, T2is, etc will eventually gain enough mass that these companies will here them out. I'm sure they will be much more vocal than PJs. You've got all these people on the sidelines who can't afford gear in the pro video and RED space but wan't to aspire to that. They want to create content that looks close to that. When you dangle a DSLR with video tacked on for $1500/$800 in front of their faces, they will bite and these are folks who would not have otherwise saved up for a pro video cam or RED cam.
OK...Let's all understand that while that is TYPICALLY TRUE....it is NOT the case for VIDEO on DSLRs. Let me explain:
(all pricing from imaging-resource)
2700.00 for the 5d Mark II
1700.00 for the 7d
"You get what you pay for"
The video is the same...or so close to it no one can tell the difference. (Except for the fact that the cheaper/newer camera has 24P and additional frame rates.) This is NOT the first time this has happened...it's not the last...
1800.00 for the D300s
1300.00 for the D90
850.00 for the D5000
Many would argue that they are (all three) IDENTICAL VIDEO QUALITY. I'll give the D300s the benefit of the doubt, but NO QUESTION the D90 is IDENTICAL.
"You get what you pay for?" FOR VIDEO on DSLRs that is simply NOT TRUE. I hope and pray that this trend continues.
Not like anyone cares, but my theory is simple: Video is a SIDE NOTE on these devices. Therefore, any additional functionality (like additional frame rates, 24P - instead of 30P)....they are just throwing it in because it won't be the difference for someone to buy it?!
Let's hope we continue to fly under the radar. I'll NEVER forget the SHOCK and SURPRISE in this forum when the 7d's specs were revealed. No one could BELIEVE that it costed LESS than the 5d...when it had MORE functionality. "You get what you pay for..."
True...just not when comparing VIDEO on DSLRs...may that trend continue for all of our sakes.
Here we go again: People CAN'T BELIEVE that the T2i has the same video as the 7d. At first glance (not definative)...it appears to be the case...and by extension (if true) we are buying a 800 camera and shooting video that is the same as a 2700 camera. THE SAME VIDEO. THE SAME. SAME.
Let's all hold hands and pray that they don't find out that Kholi will give his left nut for a 7d without aliasing.
(Kholi's girlfriend will be VERY mad....expecially when Canon is too dumb to know that we'd all happily pay more for a 7d than a 5d Mark II...just for 24P, let alone variable frame rates.)FOR NOW...you DON'T GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR! ....you get what Canon will give away, not knowing an entire market place would pay much more than they are asking...
Last edited:
shaocaholica
Well-known member
Maybe its not Canon being dumb but someone in the stills dept. has a heart and isn't a greedy bottom liner. Typically, still cameras charge proportionately for features depending on their difficulty to implement, not how much the target market is willing to pay. So something like 24p, to the stills guys, is a "cheap" feature, not a marketing ploy to suck more money from 24p shooters. Still cameras have never charged extra for RAW even though thats something they could very well exploit. However, its hard to do that when they also need everyone else to do the same or else it won't work. What would keep these video features cheap for us is if other camera systems also offered them at the same price point. Otherwise, Canon can take them away without worrying about the competition stealing sales.