Raw video file comparison

Snapper123

Well-known member
Hey guys, something that could really help me out:

Right now, I'm trying to decide on two cameras, the Vixia HF S20 and the T2i. Based on their specific technical details, the format of the video is the same on both of these camcorders (native 24P), but of coarse, the nature of DSLR vs. Camcorder have their own seperate flaws.

Thing is, though, I've seen quite a bit of raw footage from the t2i, and I haven't seen it from the S200. Personally, I think it'd be a miracle if anything shot on the t2i could be useful for a big-screen production (as the raw footage always looks so flat and blurry when you see it at it's true big size) but what do I know. I think it'd make it easier though if someone had some raw Vixia S20/S200 footage to show. What a miracle it'd be if someone actually had both cameras and shot the same thing with them. If not, I just wish to see whatever footage someone could very kindly provide from either the S20/S200 or T2i =].

It's just that these two cameras are pretty much the exact equal in price range, brand, and video format, so I'm truly just trying to decide which is truly "better" for very large video.

Also, just for a quick question, could bad lenses be the reason the raw footage from the t2i I have seen so far is so bad at it's native resolution? I'm not exactly saying the raw files I've seen so far were 'horrible' but they truly were very blurry where things were supposed to look sharp *as in I knew the camera was focused in on the subject as much as it could* and it just looked like the footage was 'stretched' compared to something that was shot at true 1080.
 
Last edited:
These are two radically different cameras.

The Canon HF20/200 is a consumer camcorder with a 6.01Mp CMOS censor that records AVCHD.
The T2i (I have a 7D, not a T2i) is a DSLR with an 18Mp CMOS censor that records 50Mb/s H264.

However, its not the pixel counting that makes these cameras so different. The camcorder is a "point & shoot" video camera that has all the good things and all the bad things associated with that. It probably has good image stabilization, records decent audio, exposure is for the most part automatic and the image looks about as good as its going to coming straight out of the camera.

Hardly any of that statement is true for the 7D/T2i. If you've seen bad footage from the T2i it was most likely because the person using it didn't know how to shoot video on a DSLR.

Its not my intention to get on your case about this, its not a Pro vs Consumer thing, I know there will be people who produce wonderful video's with the HF20/200. But judging from your statement/questions the better choice for you might be the HF20/200. Actually if your considering this level of camcorder you might want to check out the Panasonic HDC-TM700: http://www.trustedreviews.com/camcorders/review/2010/03/22/Panasonic-HDC-TM700/p1

The 7D/T2i are not point and shoot, in fact if you don't know a lot about proper exposure, HD video production and have the right HD application available for post, your probably going to be disappointed with anything you produce with it. If you want to take the time to learn it can be a fun and rewarding experience but it will end up costing you a lot more than just the initial cost of the camera.
 
I'm not sure what you're really talking about. I have a T2i and a Vixea HG 20 (which I THINK is the same as the HF20 but with a hard drive instead of flash cards)
The T2is image is much better than the hg20. (IMHO)
I've seen tons of T2i footage on the web that looked great. (which is why I bought it in the first place)
 
I've screened Canon DSLR in the theatre... as in projected on a 40ft screen, and was quite pleased with it. No, it's not 4k, but given the choice between that, and a handycam, I'll take the T2i EVERY time.
 
LOL...Snapper c'mon man. This thread seems like a spark in a dry forrest doused with rocket fuel.
 
Back
Top