Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Hi--I have a Canon HV20. I'm looking to step up a notch. Wondered if anyone thinks of the Rebel T3i or other EOS cams are a significant step up from the HV 20 and why.
Thanks!
Thanks!
General Canon T3i, DSLR cams vs ?
- Thread starter Elmer_Lang
- Start date
maranfilms
Veteran
Hey elmer, let me start off saying, I have been a fan of your work for a while now. I like the gritty look you tend to use, and therefore I honestly don't think the t3i would be a great choice for your style, yeah it's better in low light, and you can get a shallow dof. But i'm use to your look, and think it's working for you. Now the question is? is it working for you? What do you want out of a new cam? I suppose you can always combine the two. I have done it plenty times, they cut well together. The glass you will need is another battle all to it's self.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Hey maranfilms, thanks for posting and I appreciate the kind words and info.
Basically, I want a new camera and always like to step up in quality if possible re my budget. The HV20 is a great little cam but kinda crappy in low light and therefore limiting in what you can do to get a decent pic, especially if seen on a screen bigger than web size.
Also, I may be embarking on a project that will require interviewing some folks and am somewhat terrified of expending enormous effort (traveling far from home, setting up in conditions I may not be able to adequately control) and finding the result has lots of blocky grain in the picture. So I'm not so much looking to get 'pretty' pictures as feeling confident I can get usable video if conditions aren't perfect.
Already, I've been advised the 60D is superior to the T3i in a few ways including the effect of Magic Bullet in adding control.
Also, B&H has a 60D with Canon EF-S 18-135mm Lens for $1177 and with Canon EF-S 18-200mm Lens for $1298. Someone advised just getting the body, but being a complete novice, would you mind saying a thing or two about your statement above re glass and the above 2 lenses if you know anything about them?
However, the manual controls, aperture, shutter speed, etc do appear a bit daunting, not so much in applying, but in knowing why. Almost seems like I'd need a photography course to really know what I'm doing.
Anyhow, thanks for the post, I prefer not getting too complicated with my setups but I do want to check out the possibilities of dslr before turning elsewhere.
Basically, I want a new camera and always like to step up in quality if possible re my budget. The HV20 is a great little cam but kinda crappy in low light and therefore limiting in what you can do to get a decent pic, especially if seen on a screen bigger than web size.
Also, I may be embarking on a project that will require interviewing some folks and am somewhat terrified of expending enormous effort (traveling far from home, setting up in conditions I may not be able to adequately control) and finding the result has lots of blocky grain in the picture. So I'm not so much looking to get 'pretty' pictures as feeling confident I can get usable video if conditions aren't perfect.
Already, I've been advised the 60D is superior to the T3i in a few ways including the effect of Magic Bullet in adding control.
Also, B&H has a 60D with Canon EF-S 18-135mm Lens for $1177 and with Canon EF-S 18-200mm Lens for $1298. Someone advised just getting the body, but being a complete novice, would you mind saying a thing or two about your statement above re glass and the above 2 lenses if you know anything about them?
However, the manual controls, aperture, shutter speed, etc do appear a bit daunting, not so much in applying, but in knowing why. Almost seems like I'd need a photography course to really know what I'm doing.
Anyhow, thanks for the post, I prefer not getting too complicated with my setups but I do want to check out the possibilities of dslr before turning elsewhere.
Last edited:
Victor Nhat Nguyen
Well-known member
I always use DSLR. In my production class we have a few xha1, but I found the look of those cameras not as filmic as DSLR. Whoever advice you that the 60d is superior to the t3i; they are wrong. The video mode are the same. Magic Bullet is apply in post production so how can it affect the video of the camera? Whoever advice you just to get the body, they are right. You already said the reason you want a DSLR was for low light. You can't get low light unless you have a lens with a f stop of about 2.8 and lower. Now those zoom lens you put up are probably f 3.5 and higher. Those lens are not going to help you for low light situation. Because DSLR are all manual, you need to have a few weeks of studying before you know what you're doing. Also, keep in mind that you might end up buying more accessories.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Thanks for the reply! Sorry, I meant Magic Lantern, which is a firmware fix, I believe. Why I was told the 60D was better was not because of lens but construction and some other minor things. Appreciate the info on lenses, it helps!
Last edited:
Bruce Foreman
Veteran
Hi, Elmer. I too have appreciated a lot of your work and the often "gritty" style to it.
Now, on to cameras: I have had the T2i, the T3i, 7D (sold off all of those), and still have and use a 60D. The video quality on all of those is just about the same, I could tell no real difference. I've kept the 60D because of the articulating LCD and the lenses I have for it.
But I'm moving to a smaller lighter weight setup based on Micro Four Thirds system and will likely be doing most of my work with the Panasonic GH2.
The Canon T3i is a super good introductory start in the Canon DSLR system, for a fairly low price you get an 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 "kit" lens with it. Despite what "lens snobs" will say about it this is an amazingly useful and pretty good performing lens that covers "workhorse" wide angle (28mm full frame equiv) to "portrait perspective" moderate telephoto.
This is a combination you can start using right away to get familiar with both amazing still photography and video. The first additional lens most get is the very low cost ($100-$125) EF 50mm f1.8, the perspective is good for portrait but not close in or in confined spaces. The low price almost makes it a "no brainer" and it is a very crisp sharp lens. The one I use the most for video work is Canon's EF 28mm f1.8, a tad pricey at $509 (current B&H price) but more than well worth it (I paid $549 for mine if I remember correctly).
It gives you a "normal" perspective (what the 50mm used to give us on 35mm film cameras), allows working in somewhat close to your subjects, excellent low light performance, and is a nice clean sharp lens overall. Although it's listed as a wide angle (which would be true on full frame), on the T3i, 60D, and 7D it would be "normal" and not wide.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/102851-USA/Canon_2510A003_Wide_Angle_EF_28mm.html
The 18-135mm and 18-200mm lenses will be "compromises" in quality to achieve the long zoom range. Better would be the EF-S 55-250mm telephoto zoom from B&H at $255. This lens "picks up" where the "kit" lens leaves off at 55mm and serves well as an inexpensive telephoto zoom.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/543923-USA/Canon_2044B002AA_EF_S_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_IS.html
You could substitute the 60D for the T3i and since it comes without a "kit" lens, you could do what I did and watch forum ads for someone selling one at a low price (I paid $70 and got one in brand new condition). Some people already have a collection of good "glass" and take the "kit" lens off and list it.
My basic Canon DSLR lens kit is the EF 28mm f1.8, the EF 50mm f1.8 and if I need "wider" I mount the 18-55mm "kit" lens and stay at the 18mm end, I do need more light for that.
With the Panasonic GH2 I work mostly with prime lenses, a 14mm f2.5, 20mm f1.7, and 45mm f1.8 which in the very slightly smaller sensor size gives me wide angle (28mm equiv), slightly wide "normal", and "portrait" tele, all with good low light performance.
Don't let manual exposure settings in video put you off. I wrote a short article on an easy systematic approach to doing that on Canons and if you want it send me your email address in a PM I'll send you a copy.
Good luck.
Bruce Foreman
Now, on to cameras: I have had the T2i, the T3i, 7D (sold off all of those), and still have and use a 60D. The video quality on all of those is just about the same, I could tell no real difference. I've kept the 60D because of the articulating LCD and the lenses I have for it.
But I'm moving to a smaller lighter weight setup based on Micro Four Thirds system and will likely be doing most of my work with the Panasonic GH2.
The Canon T3i is a super good introductory start in the Canon DSLR system, for a fairly low price you get an 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 "kit" lens with it. Despite what "lens snobs" will say about it this is an amazingly useful and pretty good performing lens that covers "workhorse" wide angle (28mm full frame equiv) to "portrait perspective" moderate telephoto.
This is a combination you can start using right away to get familiar with both amazing still photography and video. The first additional lens most get is the very low cost ($100-$125) EF 50mm f1.8, the perspective is good for portrait but not close in or in confined spaces. The low price almost makes it a "no brainer" and it is a very crisp sharp lens. The one I use the most for video work is Canon's EF 28mm f1.8, a tad pricey at $509 (current B&H price) but more than well worth it (I paid $549 for mine if I remember correctly).
It gives you a "normal" perspective (what the 50mm used to give us on 35mm film cameras), allows working in somewhat close to your subjects, excellent low light performance, and is a nice clean sharp lens overall. Although it's listed as a wide angle (which would be true on full frame), on the T3i, 60D, and 7D it would be "normal" and not wide.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/102851-USA/Canon_2510A003_Wide_Angle_EF_28mm.html
The 18-135mm and 18-200mm lenses will be "compromises" in quality to achieve the long zoom range. Better would be the EF-S 55-250mm telephoto zoom from B&H at $255. This lens "picks up" where the "kit" lens leaves off at 55mm and serves well as an inexpensive telephoto zoom.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/543923-USA/Canon_2044B002AA_EF_S_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_IS.html
You could substitute the 60D for the T3i and since it comes without a "kit" lens, you could do what I did and watch forum ads for someone selling one at a low price (I paid $70 and got one in brand new condition). Some people already have a collection of good "glass" and take the "kit" lens off and list it.
My basic Canon DSLR lens kit is the EF 28mm f1.8, the EF 50mm f1.8 and if I need "wider" I mount the 18-55mm "kit" lens and stay at the 18mm end, I do need more light for that.
With the Panasonic GH2 I work mostly with prime lenses, a 14mm f2.5, 20mm f1.7, and 45mm f1.8 which in the very slightly smaller sensor size gives me wide angle (28mm equiv), slightly wide "normal", and "portrait" tele, all with good low light performance.
Don't let manual exposure settings in video put you off. I wrote a short article on an easy systematic approach to doing that on Canons and if you want it send me your email address in a PM I'll send you a copy.
Good luck.
Bruce Foreman
Last edited:
Victor Nhat Nguyen
Well-known member
How are you liking the gh2 Bruce? thinking of switching to gh2 when gh3 came out.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Bif! Hey, man, thanks for all the excellent info, I appreciate it very much. I will PM you, every good bit helps.
ps odd, just before I started this thread I was reading one with an excellent post of yours.
ps odd, just before I started this thread I was reading one with an excellent post of yours.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
UPDATE:
I'm still stupit.
I was at a point thinking it was just too tough to self-shoot with the 60D, so went to B&H looked again at some prosumers, wasn't happy, got talking to another guy in the Pro Vid dept and to demonstrate Premiere Pro which handles AVCHD better than my FCP, he used clips from his new Pana GH2 that can shoot continuously, has continuous auto-focus which could be very useful for self-shooting of myself moving esp. till I get the hang of manual, is flexible with glass usable, etc. He did the shots in auto just to test things out (so he said) and they looked lovely and he had shots of his dad walking to and from the cam, exactly what I had used as an example question here. They looked great.
Any opinions on Canon vs Pana GH2? Just curious, I always take a while to get to where I want to go, I'm a natural born hitchhiker.
Thanks all for your previous input!
elmerio de las noches
I'm still stupit.
I was at a point thinking it was just too tough to self-shoot with the 60D, so went to B&H looked again at some prosumers, wasn't happy, got talking to another guy in the Pro Vid dept and to demonstrate Premiere Pro which handles AVCHD better than my FCP, he used clips from his new Pana GH2 that can shoot continuously, has continuous auto-focus which could be very useful for self-shooting of myself moving esp. till I get the hang of manual, is flexible with glass usable, etc. He did the shots in auto just to test things out (so he said) and they looked lovely and he had shots of his dad walking to and from the cam, exactly what I had used as an example question here. They looked great.
Any opinions on Canon vs Pana GH2? Just curious, I always take a while to get to where I want to go, I'm a natural born hitchhiker.
Thanks all for your previous input!
elmerio de las noches
I personally went with Canon because of the lens selection without the use of an adapter.
A lot of people like the GH2 because of the 50Mbps hack you can use to create the really clean image out of it.
If you can, I'd say go to the store and play with the different cameras. See which feels better in your hand, which lenses you'd want to go with, etc. There are some objective things to go with here, but in general everything is subjective and some people will like certain things better than others will for various reasons.
A lot of people like the GH2 because of the 50Mbps hack you can use to create the really clean image out of it.
If you can, I'd say go to the store and play with the different cameras. See which feels better in your hand, which lenses you'd want to go with, etc. There are some objective things to go with here, but in general everything is subjective and some people will like certain things better than others will for various reasons.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
GH2 is an excellent camera in many ways (I own one and a GH1, and use both more often than I do my Canons), but I still keep at least a Canon or two in my bag. The colors out of the box with a Canon are excellent, and although the GH series has sharper images, the color just never wows me as much as Canon does. The Canons also are compatible with the Magic Lantern suite of firmware tools (aside from the 7d), which introduce some amazing features such as custom crop marks, focus peaking, false colors, and more all right on the camera's LCD. I honestly miss Magic Lantern tremendously when I'm not using it.
That being said, the Canon DSLRs are notorious for actually up sampling to HD (due to technical reasons, widely believed to be a limitation of the Digic4 processor speed), which results in a softer image not to mention moire and aliasing when resampling fine patterns. So, to be perfectly honest, I can't say I'd be happy with either one on its own.
The GH offers continuous recording, autofocus (with lenses that support it), and a MUCH sharper image. With the hack applied, the sharpness can rival cameras that cost exponentially more. AVCHD is also a much better codec IMO. But the Canon colors and feature set with Magic Lantern installed are really hard to give up. I can't honestly say which I'd prefer- good thing a T2i and GH1 are relatively cheap, you can technically just buy both.
That being said, the Canon DSLRs are notorious for actually up sampling to HD (due to technical reasons, widely believed to be a limitation of the Digic4 processor speed), which results in a softer image not to mention moire and aliasing when resampling fine patterns. So, to be perfectly honest, I can't say I'd be happy with either one on its own.
The GH offers continuous recording, autofocus (with lenses that support it), and a MUCH sharper image. With the hack applied, the sharpness can rival cameras that cost exponentially more. AVCHD is also a much better codec IMO. But the Canon colors and feature set with Magic Lantern installed are really hard to give up. I can't honestly say which I'd prefer- good thing a T2i and GH1 are relatively cheap, you can technically just buy both.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Thanks guys for the replies. I live in NYC, the great thing about B&H is their return policy. I could buy, play around, shoot a little vid and decide to keep or return for another. I wanna buy a cam, it seems the likeliest candidate, but if not...
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
@M.Gilden (or anyone) -- What glass do you use with the GH2 or might even recommend?
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
EVERYTHING.
Hah, no but kidding aside, one of the nice things about the mirrorless mounts is that they allow almost any kind of glass to be adapted to it. Even the old Canon FD lenses which aren't compatible with modern Canons due to flange distance (which would cause focus issues if adapted). That's great because they are generally super cheap on account of their limited use for much else. I recently picked up a 135mm F/2.8 in FD/FL mount for about $7 + shipping (came out to just under $15 if I recall correctly)!
Most of my lenses are in my sig below, but my personal favorites are the Nikon 50mm F/1.4 (works a treat on both my Canon and GH cameras with an appropriate adapter) followed by the Tamron 17-50mm non-VC F/2.8. When I want a medium-telephoto, the FD 35-105mm is plenty sharp wide open at a constant F/3.5.
Kit lenses are nice for outdoor shoots and when image stabilization comes in handy, so I keep them around as well. As Bruce mentioned earlier, you could get away with a starter set of a kit lens and one fast prime (50mm F/1.8, etc). That should cover most of your bases at first. After that, you'll probably want a constant aperture zoom or at least fast primes at more focal lengths. And once the lens bug bites, there's no turning back. I'm currently looking into the SLR Magic 12mm hyperprime for doing super wide night shots, but also considering one of the lumix pancake lenses for autofocus in low light. *sigh*
This discussion could go on forever!
Anyway- yeah, B&H is a great store (some of my good friends work there). I originally bought my gear from there because of their fantastic return policy. Turns out I have never needed to use it...
Back to your original topic, however:
Instead of the T3i, also consider a refurbished T2i if you are considering Canons. They are super cheap and almost identical to the T3i minus the fold out LCD and crop video mode. Otherwise, the quality of footage is the same, but you'll save a lot of money that could be used towards glass (last I checked, street price for a t2i was around $400-500, about half of what the GH2 is going for in stores if you can actually find it in stock). Almost any lenses you get for the Canon will also be able to retrofit to the GH2 if you decide to do that route in the future.
Things to think about.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
Thanks for the replies, gents!
Today at B&H, I was walking past the SONY stand and stopped for a chat. We got to talking about the A57, just out, with some improvements to their censor, some kinda tracking system, a very nice AF (don't scream, was just curious, you know me). For some reason he didn't show me the A65 but back home on the internet, I guess since the A57 (upgrade on A55) is so new, the A65 kept popping up. Will check out some more.
So, folks, anybody have anything nasty or nice to say about Sony, the A65 or A57? The A57 was very impressive.
At B&H I shot some video on an SD card from Canon's M500, HF G10, XA10, Panasonic's TM900, Pana GH2 and Sony's A57 and will be looking at it (I've watched plenty on the 60D and kinda feel like I know what it is).
Thanks for all the help...
Today at B&H, I was walking past the SONY stand and stopped for a chat. We got to talking about the A57, just out, with some improvements to their censor, some kinda tracking system, a very nice AF (don't scream, was just curious, you know me). For some reason he didn't show me the A65 but back home on the internet, I guess since the A57 (upgrade on A55) is so new, the A65 kept popping up. Will check out some more.
So, folks, anybody have anything nasty or nice to say about Sony, the A65 or A57? The A57 was very impressive.
At B&H I shot some video on an SD card from Canon's M500, HF G10, XA10, Panasonic's TM900, Pana GH2 and Sony's A57 and will be looking at it (I've watched plenty on the 60D and kinda feel like I know what it is).
Thanks for all the help...
Last edited: