Snapper123
Well-known member
Hey guys, I've had the T2i for a few months, and I keep getting the same problems. Before I mention any of these issues, keep in mind that I am not a amatuer who keeps the camera on auto, I rely very heavily on very specific apertures, shutter speeds, and ISO's for the types of videography I do. In extreme videography, if any of these specific settings are 'off center', even by stops, the shot/video will not look professional (too much noise, under exposure, glitches, ect ect).
1. After doing tests in my very, very well lit bedroom, I've concluded that for the ISO to be on 100 (the most important factor in making videos on the T2i), the aperture has to be 1.8 (almost the lowest they make in lenses), and the shutter has to be on 20. Since video mode has the shutter speed pretty much locked (either for camera specifics or general aesthetic reasons) at places between 30 and 60, you can see where natural indoor video shots using a 100 ISO is not possible. It usually has to be on 400 ISO, just to replicate the surrounding light.
For this problem, I propose that my camera's sensor is not recognizing alot of the light that the lens is letting in. When I look through the viewfinder, it's obvious that the lens is letting the 100% natural room's light in, there's nothing wrong with the lens. To replicate this crystal clear natural light image I see in the viewfinder, I know that I would have to have a shutter of 0, an aperture of 0, and a ISO of 0. At least, that's how digital camera sensors were in 1985....
Now, since ISO starts at 100, that means the image will be a good step or two lighter than naturally. Since the shutter has to be on 30 for video, that means the image will now be much darker than the natural light with keeping in mind the 100ISO addition. Finally, with the Aperture being 1.8, this would again darken the lens' light by a full stop or two. Overall, this means that if you have a shutter of 30 with a 1.8 lens, you'll most likely have to raise the ISO to 400 to even just replicate (not talking about enhancing, that's ISO 800-1600) the surrounding light.
But with that whole thoery in mind, do modern camera's really work like this? Hasn't camera sensor technology evolved to the point where these cameras generally accept light more than say, a digital camera from 1990? Or has the camera's sensor light technology remained exactly the same (in favor of daylight shots vs. indoor shots) so that people will buy $10,000 1.0 aperture lenses? I'm really wondering because either there's a problem with my specific camera, or there's a problem with the camera industry.
To add to that though, it's not that I have anything against using ISO's, the fact that ISO was invented is amazing, but it's the fact that at least on my specific camera, 200 ISO is the highest I can (in video mode) go before I get glitches in my footage (unprofessional pixelation, noise, lines, general bad quality), so that (too much noise) may even be the root of why I am dissapointed in my camera. It may not be that my sensor is not letting in light, it may just be that it creates too much noise for the specific ISO levels at hand, more-so than a normal T2i. ISO is not useful in any way for me unless it produces good, professional results. So far, after doing tests, I've concluded that in most indoor situations, I would have to have a 1.0 lens just make a crystal clear indoor 'replicate the light' video. Out of the question! It's bogus!
P.S. I don't mean Candlelight videography, I mean that in an extremely bright room, you'd have to have a 1.0 lens just to keep the ISO on 100, and not 400. That's exactly how it is on my camera. If you think "there's no way! I'm getting extremely bright videos on my camera at ISO 100!" please tell me!!!
1. After doing tests in my very, very well lit bedroom, I've concluded that for the ISO to be on 100 (the most important factor in making videos on the T2i), the aperture has to be 1.8 (almost the lowest they make in lenses), and the shutter has to be on 20. Since video mode has the shutter speed pretty much locked (either for camera specifics or general aesthetic reasons) at places between 30 and 60, you can see where natural indoor video shots using a 100 ISO is not possible. It usually has to be on 400 ISO, just to replicate the surrounding light.
For this problem, I propose that my camera's sensor is not recognizing alot of the light that the lens is letting in. When I look through the viewfinder, it's obvious that the lens is letting the 100% natural room's light in, there's nothing wrong with the lens. To replicate this crystal clear natural light image I see in the viewfinder, I know that I would have to have a shutter of 0, an aperture of 0, and a ISO of 0. At least, that's how digital camera sensors were in 1985....
Now, since ISO starts at 100, that means the image will be a good step or two lighter than naturally. Since the shutter has to be on 30 for video, that means the image will now be much darker than the natural light with keeping in mind the 100ISO addition. Finally, with the Aperture being 1.8, this would again darken the lens' light by a full stop or two. Overall, this means that if you have a shutter of 30 with a 1.8 lens, you'll most likely have to raise the ISO to 400 to even just replicate (not talking about enhancing, that's ISO 800-1600) the surrounding light.
But with that whole thoery in mind, do modern camera's really work like this? Hasn't camera sensor technology evolved to the point where these cameras generally accept light more than say, a digital camera from 1990? Or has the camera's sensor light technology remained exactly the same (in favor of daylight shots vs. indoor shots) so that people will buy $10,000 1.0 aperture lenses? I'm really wondering because either there's a problem with my specific camera, or there's a problem with the camera industry.
To add to that though, it's not that I have anything against using ISO's, the fact that ISO was invented is amazing, but it's the fact that at least on my specific camera, 200 ISO is the highest I can (in video mode) go before I get glitches in my footage (unprofessional pixelation, noise, lines, general bad quality), so that (too much noise) may even be the root of why I am dissapointed in my camera. It may not be that my sensor is not letting in light, it may just be that it creates too much noise for the specific ISO levels at hand, more-so than a normal T2i. ISO is not useful in any way for me unless it produces good, professional results. So far, after doing tests, I've concluded that in most indoor situations, I would have to have a 1.0 lens just make a crystal clear indoor 'replicate the light' video. Out of the question! It's bogus!
P.S. I don't mean Candlelight videography, I mean that in an extremely bright room, you'd have to have a 1.0 lens just to keep the ISO on 100, and not 400. That's exactly how it is on my camera. If you think "there's no way! I'm getting extremely bright videos on my camera at ISO 100!" please tell me!!!
Last edited:
