Canon T2i with L Glass vs RED Camera

[draven4]

Why don't you do what the big budgets do. Shoot some tests footage from both cameras and have them decide visually. Shoot the strengths and weaknesses from both cameras. Lower costs shooting is always an option a production will go for. The question is is it good enough for what they need? It is in your job as a DP to give them options and give them a realistic idea of what is the outcome of what you can produce with each camera. You might end up getting a red and not knowing how to get the best out of it.. make the shoot look worse then if you had just used a DSLR.

More people are becoming open to the use of DSLR. Personally I try to sell producers on the idea of using it all the time but make them aware of the restrictions. I take them into a bay and show them footage. Otherwise it's just all talk.

I had a producer who saw that I am shooting on the 7d and asked me if I would use it for a feature and I told him without a doubt for the reason that what I can get from it is great in my opinion and I wouldn't want to spend the extra money on a red. He asked if the red was better and I told him that it has less restrictions and that technically what you can do with the color space and the rawness of the image is what makes it "better". But I feel that "better" isn't really the right word. For me the 7d is "better" in so many ways. May not be technically but for what it has to offer for me personally is "better". Sorry if I went on too long with this response.

Never do a shoot with a camera you do not know.

Back to what I was saying about the tests shots. Make sure you shoot a range of tests. Some people with just set up a talking head shot with a three point set up and call it a test...done. Not right. You gotta shoot all kinds of stuff... overlit underlit, different types of wardrobe colors and makeup if necessary, with different lighting ratios, different lens. Challenge each camera and see what performs better. Shoot indoor outdoor all kinds of stuff. You get the idea.

On a side note: I work as a freelancer in an online bay and I can tell you that crap can also be produced with a Red. I've seen some real bad Red shoots in my day. No joke. I've seen 24p mini DV look way better than some stuff I've seen with DP's who don't know what they heck they are doing.

 

[Rick Burnett]

I've seen BEAUTIFUL shots with a Canon HV30 with a home built lens adapter (and I have one that I built and an HV30 as well). But I think this misses a huge point that if I were you I'd consider.

You know the T2I, as you've said, and the BIG issue is limitations in shooting. You can't go deep focus without painfully checking the image on an HD monitor at the resolution you are going to release at because the display on the back of the camera CANNOT do 1:1 and hides the Moire/Aliasing since it is just a subset of the image.

This is one of the BIG things I tell people. If you are doing tricky shots, with stunts or fighting, do you want to risk loosing a shot because there are rainbows in the image that are VERY hard to remove? EVERY shot I've done, there are images with rainbows at least somewhere in the production that I've had to work around. This is why I bought the external monitor.

Like I said, this is the one HUGE headache of ALL DLSRs right now. With the GH1 at least the Moire isn't rainbow colored!

But, I still use my 7D because I like the lenses and the sensor size. But, this freedom you get with the other cameras that do not have this issue, it IS a plus. A huge plus. Time is money, and DSLR shooting DOES take more time when you want very dynamic images. I think the risk is worth it right now, but believe me, Canon makes a 7D2 even at twice the body cost and I am OUT THE DOOR to get one!

 

[Cieloent]

Why don't you do what the big budgets do. Shoot some tests footage from both cameras and have them decide visually. Shoot the strengths and weaknesses from both cameras. Lower costs shooting is always an option a production will go for. The question is is it good enough for what they need? It is in your job as a DP to give them options and give them a realistic idea of what is the outcome of what you can produce with each camera. You might end up getting a red and not knowing how to get the best out of it.. make the shoot look worse then if you had just used a DSLR.

More people are becoming open to the use of DSLR. Personally I try to sell producers on the idea of using it all the time but make them aware of the restrictions. I take them into a bay and show them footage. Otherwise it's just all talk.

I had a producer who saw that I am shooting on the 7d and asked me if I would use it for a feature and I told him without a doubt for the reason that what I can get from it is great in my opinion and I wouldn't want to spend the extra money on a red. He asked if the red was better and I told him that it has less restrictions and that technically what you can do with the color space and the rawness of the image is what makes it "better". But I feel that "better" isn't really the right word. For me the 7d is "better" in so many ways. May not be technically but for what it has to offer for me personally is "better". Sorry if I went on too long with this response.

Never do a shoot with a camera you do not know.

Great post, also to the other user I just seen the footage of City Of Lakes and I still don't believe it was shot on a HDSLR but according to the director it was. So to the rain film guy don't be mad at the example I posted that basically made you spin around in your chair. IF you posted everything you needed to then there is no place for you here any longer, go out and shoot something with your camera as I know that I can achieve amazing results with these HDSLRs just by digging the net during the coarse of this thread.



The footage you posted of "The Raven" looks very good, but obviously it is an entirely different kind of look involving 3d animation, models, special fx, etc. Also in the information section the director states the budget was only $5k. So just judging by what you told me through PMs this would contradict everything you said "Budget Wise"


At the end of the day and my final post in this thread was not that any HDSLR camera was better than the RED or Film camera but more on that the image quality definitely looks amazing and can hold it's own against the big boys as shown in the examples I posted. "City Of Lakes" looks amazing and that is the bar now I need to reach............


Back to work ,

peace

 

[Kholi]

Great post, also to the other user I just seen the footage of City Of Lakes and I still don't believe it was shot on a HDSLR but according to the director it was. So to the rain film guy don't be mad at the example I posted that basically made you spin around in your chair. IF you posted everything you needed to then there is no place for you here any longer, go out and shoot something with your camera as I know that I can achieve amazing results with these HDSLRs just by digging the net during the coarse of this thread ,

peace

I can tell you haven't been in production long, furthermore on the boards long. Trolls belong under bridges, not in virtual classrooms. You'll find out quickly how true that is if you keep that up.

Good luck with whatever you end up producing.

 

[Kholi]

The footage you posted of "The Raven" looks very good, but obviously it is an entirely different kind of look involving 3d animation, models, special fx, etc. Also in the information section the director states the budget was only $5k. So just judging by what you told me through PMs this would contradict everything you said "Budget Wise"

You PM'd me asking me to help you on a music video, post wise, for one-to-five thousand dollars. I told you that you should shoot the video first and see if anyone's willing to help you at that rate.

It's a lowball for my company, period.

The people who did this are experienced, know VFX themselves and have connections. I am very positive that if you sought the help of the people who did VFX and Color, etc on The Raven, you definitely would not be given a quote that matches what they spent. You would probably have to pay those guys a good 20K or more to reproduce what they did. Personal projects are not the same as work-for-hire.

Most of the time when I reveal how much we've completed our personal projects for I'm greeted with lip-smacks and accusations of being a liar.

Our West Fest entry cost less than the Raven...

At the end of the day and my final post in this thread was not that any HDSLR camera was better than the RED or Film camera but more on that the image quality definitely looks amazing and can hold it's own against the big boys as shown in the examples I posted. "City Of Lakes" looks amazing and that is the bar now I need to reach............


peace

We're all very glad that you think City of Lakes is the pinnacle. At this point, and before you even posted, I think we all understood that you had your mind made up and you were looking to validate your choice. That's fine.

I believe that, since this is an open forum, the posts made here weren't even aimed at you, but to educate and offer opinions to those reading the thread.

Please, as always, make sure that you post material when you're done to help those that need the information decide.

That's what the community is about.

 

[ChuckS]

Why is it that the people who know little to nothing about the business, assume that those who are at the very top, are stupid and don't know what they're doing? It boggles the mind...

C'mon Barry. How do you know which people on this forum are knowledgeable about "the business?" And how is the view from the very top?

I've been editing film and video since before Avid, on editing systems that most people have never heard of, I've worked on some of the biggest movies produced, probably forgotten more than most will know about "the business" and I'm not at the top of anything.

Over the years you have been a wealth of information on this forum, in fact I remember how faithfully you and many others defended that cute little DVX100 when the Red came out.

When you champion a technology, the manufacturer of that equipment asks you to demonstrate it in their booth, then you leverage that into work where you experience some notoriety, your asked to speak at trade shows, write articles for trade publications and you think life is good at the top. Until you hit bottom, knocked off your perch by someone, or some idiot that doesn't know the business and you didn't see coming.

The funny thing is that after the dust settles you start shooting cute little videos, that you share with other people doing the same sort of thing, of your niece, your wife riding horses and driving cars etc.. Then you remember why you did this in the first place, because you love it. And these people are using cameras that no self respecting DP at the top would use but their passion trumps the technology. You know, kind of like when the Red was first being released the mantra on this site was that it was all about the story. How quickly we forget.

For as long as I've been in this business I am amazed and humbled by the content currently being produced regardless of what it was produce with. These are exciting times and we should welcome and mentor those idiots that don't know anything about OUR business. Remember you need them to pay into social security so you can enjoy your golden years.

One more thing, someone made a quality comparison using Mp3 and CD's, now that's funny. How we've become the iPod generation, there's nothing high quality about CD's!

 

[Ian-T]

Hey, Ian, if you had a project to shoot, would you shoot with an HF100 or a 7D?

he hehe he...um....let me think.... HF100:undecided7D..


ok..u got me here. rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[UltimoJP]

Great thread!

It's crazy how a huge percentage of this forum is on gear. I can understand why, I love a good gear talk, but the bottom line to success is not gear. I really got to sharpen my skills and work ethic.

 

[Alex H.]

Why is it that the people who know little to nothing about the business, assume that those who are at the very top, are stupid and don't know what they're doing? It boggles the mind...

Insecurity, plain and simple. They read a book, or took a class, or watched a how-to video and suddenly feel empowered. Unfortunately, they feel empowered to use that little bit of pertinent information to sound edumacated in criticizing those who have been able to build a viable career, rather than feeling empowered to use that information to tell their own stories.

Which is easier: build yourself up with hard work and creative output, or attempt to make yourself look bigger by attempting to bring others down?

It's the priest fresh out of seminary who suddenly knows more than God. And I work for a Church, and I have seen that happen (arrogant sermons that come out of that). Likewise, there are those who are fresh out of (or still in the midst of, or even just aspiring to enter) film school who think they have more insight from their professors and textbooks. The ability to spout out a few technical terms can mask lack of experience (well... not really).

It reminds me of one of our esteemed Bronze Members who is in film school, and was quite fond of jumping on his soapboxes of "Spielberg is a hack" and "Lucas is a hack." It's easy to call some one who is hugely successful a hack. It's not easy to prove it, but it sure is easy to say it.

 

[BLUESPIDER]

I shot both RED and T2i. It's simple, if you have a micro budget the T2i can work if you know what the hell you're doing. If you got the money, use it on RED.


Here's our first T2i short film test. For a camera that's under a grand, it's not too bad. I apologize for the bad audio since this was only a visual test.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.

I AGREE

 

[Ian-T]

One more thing, someone made a quality comparison using Mp3 and CD's, now that's funny. How we've become the iPod generation, there's nothing high quality about CD's!

That was me and the bolded portion of what you said was my part of my point. But in regards to CD vs MP3 one can argue that Vinyl records are even better (analog or not)....but you must look at the point I made....that we've come a long way from what is acceptable to folks. I've also been "in the business" for a number of years....music that is. And just like MP3's are considered low quality but acceptable to the masses so will videos shot on DSLRs. Most folks will not be able to tell....or even care about the differences. Only us nerds!! rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[bwwd]

yes thats true,but i always felt that comparison of mp3's and CD's are done by CD selling companies to save their product.We listened songs in bad quality so many times recorded in shi*ty conditions and it was acceptable.
Now with DSLR's its the same thing,they dont resolve their resolution but they resemble film very very much and for untrained eyes they look no different than very expensive film and thats the point,they changed a lot even if they would be SD believe me they would change a lot too,because its not only about resolution its about ability to shoot filmic looking footage fast with almost no setup ,no film rolls and no crew and it still can look as good as your regular 720x304 dvds.Some people dont really need to see every hair on the head of actors,they accept DVD quality and history proved that,even you pixel counters bought DVDs ,with only 720x304 resolution ,how could you accept that then ? If you cant accept higher resolution in DSLR's now.
I think many peoples are scared a bit,many things are changing i see many guys who shot with adapters are shooting with DSLR's ,some guys dont like it because... oh because thats their nature ,but it is how it is.You wouldnt dream about shooting footage with filmic depth of field 2 years ago with such tiny cam.
I personally im excited to see where DLR's will go next,but after this house episode i wondering do they really need something more to prove themselves ,they can look fantastic and they aired on TV.This is sometimes hard to believe after reading all posts about problems with aliasing and resolving resolution not good enough etc.
Yes they dont look like professional cameras,but i wondering if shape would be changed to some cube like RED camera ,would they be taken into consideration as video cameras
? RED doesnt look like film camera for sure ,but it is.Very nice video camera which have its own problems too.Film have problems too,its expensive,thats biggest problem for film makers ,now DLSR's opened the world which was unreachable a couple of years ago.Its a big thing for amateur film makers,maybe its annoying for RED owners,maybe people who bought DSLR's didnt had the chance to shoot with RED and RED isnt so expensive to rent,but with RED you need crew,DSLR's changed that and you dont need many people to get very similar images(that is if you know what youre doing,because theres a lot of bad DSLR stuff... also a lot of bad RED stuff).

 

[Barry_Green]

C'mon Barry. How do you know which people on this forum are knowledgeable about "the business?" And how is the view from the very top?

I am referring to those who lambaste and roast Hollywood, claiming that they're stupid, ignorant, don't have a clue, etc. I don't know what any one particular person does or doesn't know, and I'm certainly not in a position to comment on the view from the top, but I do know that this industry seems to be rather unique in newcomers rampaging against, disparaging, discrediting, and fighting against the very people who are in the most position to help them.

For as long as I've been in this business I am amazed and humbled by the content currently being produced regardless of what it was produce with. These are exciting times and we should welcome and mentor those idiots that don't know anything about OUR business.

Um, read my posts. That's what I'm trying to do. And I'm expressing a bit of frustration that they won't listen. I haven't really ever found an institution that seems, collectively, to reject all that's gone before. Art students study artists and their works. Lawyers study law. But it seems like there's a trend among (well, let's generalize here) "the aspiring filmmaker", especially right at this moment, seems to want to reject any idea that they haven't sprung out of the womb, fully formed, knowing everything that they need to know, and now -- because of the arrival of some $500 camera or something -- they're ready to "take on Hollywood". Instead of learning about it, learning from those who have been through it, and doing what they've done, they seem to think that rejecting everything that has come before is somehow making them smarter? How many times have you heard it said here on this very forum "forget going to film school, just grab a camera and shoot!" Anyone can grab a camera and go and shoot. But is that really going to help them? The ratio of submissions to Sundance, vs. acceptances, is -- what, 3,000 to 1?

Chuck, I'm not so sure we're disagreeing; I think you may have misunderstood my tone.

 

[Blaine]

Instead of learning about it, learning from those who have been through it, and doing what they've done, they seem to think that rejecting everything that has come before is somehow making them smarter? How many times have you heard it said here on this very forum "forget going to film school, just grab a camera and shoot!" Anyone can grab a camera and go and shoot. But is that really going to help them? The ratio of submissions to Sundance, vs. acceptances, is -- what, 3,000 to 1?

Sounds like you're describing teenagers.rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[stephenvv]

I think much objectivity has been lost in this thread which seems to be either or. But having shot with a 7D and a Red One as well as worked with T2i and Red MX footage, it's not that simple of decision.

I'm updating some 1080p commercials originally show with a Red One using a 7D. At 1080p, the 7D footage needs less light, has lower noise and better dynamic range especially under Tungsten lighting. It's also much easier to work with in post. The Red One is big, heavy and a beast for handheld-shoulder work in tight spaces.

However, the Red MX sensor is a major upgrade and I think as good if not better noise wise and dynamic range as Canon DSLR sensors (although I can't test side by side). And obviously does not suffer from the same aliasing/moire issues.

And if your output is higher than 1080p, Red One etc. have clear advantage. But at 1080p, the advantage is unclear.

And if cost is factored in, even on higher end jobs, the total workflow cost of a Red is pretty high by time lenses, supports, DIT, post etc. are factored in.

But more importantly, the most important gear on a set is between the ears of the key people using the tools.

I've seen horrible footage shot on 15/70mm and beautiful stuff shot with a FlipCam. I always look at how gear faciliates getting the best out of the people on set, not a spec war or silly arguments about what gear is "most professional".

 

[Angry Leprechaun]

Would you shoot on a Red Camera or Canon T2i?

Okay, this was your original question. So how come everytime someone (especially Kholi) has said their opinion you completely turn their statement around and call them biased.

If you have the budget, and a good DIT working with you, and you don't need to use the camera in ultra tight spaces, you would be completely stupid to not use the RED.

Don't get me wrong. Getting the T2i has been the best decision I've ever made. What I've shot on the T2i has actually looked better than what I've shot on the RED. But it has nothing to do with what camera I was using. My skills have just gotten better since the last time I used the RED.

I know if I was in your situation and I had the chance to use a RED on a production, I would totally pick the RED. Not even just for quality, but for experience too. If you have a T2i, you can use it whenever you want on any production you want. Don't just learn how to use a DSLR, learn how to use a RED. Learn how to use an HVX500. Learn how to use a Genesis, or an F35, or your grand-dad's 8mm. Like Barry said, knowledge and skill will get you hired a lot quicker than what camera you have.

Sorry for pretty much regurgitating everything everyone else has said, it just seems like this guy's a little thick skulled (no offense).

 

[Rick Burnett]

The truth is there are stubborn people who "do it the old way" just as there are in the audio world as well. That said, as the saying goes, if it isn't broke, don't fix it. People will continue to shoot in ways that are older, slower, etc, but that's fine. As long as they produce amazing material that the world wants to devour with delicious delight, they are relevant. Plain and simple.

 

[Kholi]

I'm updating some 1080p commercials originally show with a Red One using a 7D. At 1080p, the 7D footage needs less light, has lower noise and better dynamic range especially under Tungsten lighting. It's also much easier to work with in post. The Red One is big, heavy and a beast for handheld-shoulder work in tight spaces.

Honestly, no offense Stephen, this is not true at all. The original RED is no less light sensitive @ 320 ISO than the 7D is @ 320 ISO. And certainly, undoubtedly, RED is cleaner @ 320 ISO than the 7D is.

Tungsten stopped being an issue back several builds ago.

As far as camera work goes, well, a camera is supposed to be heavy. See an example of what a camera that is improperly built looks like in Robert Rodriguez's music video 40 Dogs. I'm very surprised that he or anyone else even let those quaky shots go into a finished product.

Tight Spaces, sure. There's one advantage of DSLRs.

However, the Red MX sensor is a major upgrade and I think as good if not better noise wise and dynamic range as Canon DSLR sensors (although I can't test side by side). And obviously does not suffer from the same aliasing/moire issues.

Somewhat true. The Dynamic Range extension is still quite bogus a claim, to me. I have yet to see any increase in latitude, and have worked ritually with MX'd cameras since the first batch hit the streets.

I do not believe any of the Canon sensors deliver any more latitude than an original Mysterium RED. The claims, like most, were from people that had never shot with RED and/or had no clue how to properly process R3D files or shoot raw.

However, the noise floor is very accurate.

And if your output is higher than 1080p, Red One etc. have clear advantage. But at 1080p, the advantage is unclear.

There's still a very clear advantage. Aliasing and Moire first and foremost. Factual 1080 lines of resolved detail versus the faux 1080 of a DSLR. On a large screen, which is swiftly becoming a staple of home entertainment viewing thanks to technological advancements in television technology, the difference is startlingly clear.

And if cost is factored in, even on higher end jobs, the total workflow cost of a Red is pretty high by time lenses, supports, DIT, post etc. are factored in.

This is another bogus claim, but only because of face value. What I mean is that people see a smaller camera and assume that it takes less manpower to produce a proper image.

RED........DSLR

x............ x - Requires Focus Puller for optimal efficiency.
x ............x - Requires DIT
x............ x - Requires Different lenses or can take a Zoom
x............ x - Requires Post conversion process to editable format.
x............ x - Requires proper support for optimal camera operation.


The only thing that changes any of this, cost wise, is if you want to OWN the gear. It just sounds like everyone's talking about OWNING, but again, the cost to produce top-tier quality is not much different.

And, as much as ANYONE wants to say "I can do all of that myself...", let me be the first to say that I've pushed a dolly, fully operated a RED and pulled focus by HAND off of a lens all at the same time. SEVERAL TIMES. Can you do it? Yes, but even I recognize how the shot suffers from doing too much by yourself. Every time I have at least SOMEONE behind me, one person (preferably Geoff or Matty_G) my work is recognizably better.

But more importantly, the most important gear on a set is between the ears of the key people using the tools.

No discrepancy here.

 

[Kholi]

Okay, this was your original question. So how come everytime someone (especially Kholi) has said their opinion you completely turn their statement around and call them biased.

If you have the budget, and a good DIT working with you, and you don't need to use the camera in ultra tight spaces, you would be completely stupid to not use the RED.

Don't get me wrong. Getting the T2i has been the best decision I've ever made. What I've shot on the T2i has actually looked better than what I've shot on the RED. But it has nothing to do with what camera I was using. My skills have just gotten better since the last time I used the RED.

I know if I was in your situation and I had the chance to use a RED on a production, I would totally pick the RED. Not even just for quality, but for experience too. If you have a T2i, you can use it whenever you want on any production you want. Don't just learn how to use a DSLR, learn how to use a RED. Learn how to use an HVX500. Learn how to use a Genesis, or an F35, or your grand-dad's 8mm. Like Barry said, knowledge and skill will get you hired a lot quicker than what camera you have.

Sorry for pretty much regurgitating everything everyone else has said, it just seems like this guy's a little thick skulled (no offense).

I don't regret investing my hard-earned (long-earned) cash into the DSLR revolution. I learned a LOT about myself, shooting style, cinematography and more just through owning so many of them.

Only thing I try to do is slip a bit of ground beneath the floating realities, like ChuckS implored Barry to do earlier. However, if it keeps ending up like this I guarantee you that a lot of excellent information that's helped me grow to where I am--specifically FROM DVXUSER, because this place pretty much birthed me and my career--is about to vanish.

Not saying from me, either, but people who aren't willing to deal with the attacks from the newcomers around here.

 

[saneproductions]

There are so many other considerations besides just the camera. You need to hire crew and rent gear. You will be better off using a lower end camera with all of the parts in place. People always blow their wad on the camera and don't plan for the other stuff. I would take a t2i with lens rentals a gaffer, dolly and 5 ton grip truck with some hmis and kinos over the red day rate + insufficient lighting and less experienced crew. Now if you have the money to get both, by all means go red.