T2i - 1st impressions

jdv

Well-known member
I did a wee bit of experimenting with the camera before the battery died ( I always run a new battery dead, even though it always happens at the worst time).

And the results are very pleasing. Like all DSLRs, the camera is a stills camera first. And it takes very pretty pictures (which will be of use for press kits, groups photos, headshots, etc), but I really want it for it's HD 1080p images.

I didn't shoot much - there's lots to learn first - but the learning curve, while steep at first, seemed to come a bit easier as the night went on. It's my first LSR/DSLR.

Full review later, but here's just a few 1st impressions:

1. It's small. Coming from the fairly large JVC 100, it's quite a shock. The battery pack alone from the JVC is probably about the same size - and heavier. Will make it much easier to move around, but much harder to impress a 100 extras to run around at 2am in the rain.

2. The viewfinder isn't a "video cam" finder, but rather a HD 3" screen (the best in the biz - better even then the Mark II). Absolutely need a Zacuto for daylight shooting. Focusing was no problem with this screen, which leads me to the next point...

3. Depth of field is genius. It's 35mm. It's film. It's what every indie film maker has strove to obtain since video cameras becomae the norm. Depending on the lens, it's much easier to achieve a "movie-ish" look with this camera. Right out of the box, it was easier to achieve selective DOF then with the 1/3" chip set JVC 100.

4. Work flow. 2 words - it works. I bought a 3rd party 16gb (Adata) SDHC class 6 card for $40 and an eight dollar "50-1" card reader (ecotrend/sakar) to connect the card to my PC. It didn't see it at first, but after I kicked my PC a few times, lo and behold - the footage I shot was there. Then, crossing my fingers, I opened Premiere Pro 3 and opened a new timeline. Without much hope, I imported the footage and dragged it onto the timeline.

And it worked - it "saw" the footage. I rendered it, and it played fine. I couldn't believe it. With the JVC, I'd have to first play back the tape while digitizing it first with Vegas, then bringing it in to Premiere after it was conformed with cincefiorm. So essentially, this camera eliminates 3 huge pain in the ass steps. I'm almost crying I'm so happy.

For the first time in years, I can shoot some footage and be editing it within minutes. Awesome. Now, I haven't tried exporting it or anything, and there might be some hidden pitfalls, but so far so good.

5. Battery took about an hour and a half to charge, which I'd say is decent - prolly get 2 more batteries, assuming they last an hour with heavy usage.

5. Kit lens is "medium" zoom lens. Not terribly fast, but fine for the $100 it cost. Worked well, and responded quickly and accuarately for manual focusing. The autofocus (a feature I rarely use) worked well and all in all, it felt like a very well thought out package.

More latter, but so far so good!

john
 
3. Depth of field is genius. It's 35mm. It's film. It's what every indie film maker has strove to obtain since video cameras becomae the norm. Depending on the lens, it's much easier to achieve a "movie-ish" look with this camera. Right out of the box, it was easier to achieve selective DOF then with the 1/3" chip set JVC 100.

I agree, its pretty awesome.

4. Work flow. 2 words - it works. I bought a 3rd party 16gb (Adata) SDHC class 6 card for $40 and an eight dollar "50-1" card reader (ecotrend/sakar) to connect the card to my PC. It didn't see it at first, but after I kicked my PC a few times, lo and behold - the footage I shot was there.

Laughed out loud on this one. You kicked your computer?! :laugh:
 
We have a love/hate relationship - it loves to hate me.

But, I'll give it one thing - it can take a beating.
:happy:

john
 
Just wait until you put better glass on it (the kit lens is crap. I know, I purchased it as well. :happy:). the difference with fast glass on your camera is night and day.

So far I'm shooting with the Canon 50mm 1.4 prime (great lens. but better suited for photos or specialty video. Holding focus is a bear.), and a Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC (Vibration Control) lens (Love, love, love this lens. It's currently my everyday lens of choice). Next I'm going to look into the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS USM lens, and I should be set for a while. Although I was thinking about getting a Sigma 30mm 1.4 lens (to get me to a 55mm equivalent). This one's not as much of a need becuase I already have the 17-50 lens.

Did I say that I love the Tamron 17-50 lens. :happy:
 
So far I'm shooting with the Canon 50mm 1.4 prime (great lens. but better suited for photos or specialty video. Holding focus is a bear.),

Uh Oh. I just bought a 50 1.8 (the cheap one) Is this newby gonna have problems with focus?
(I mean ME, not the lens)
 
Uh Oh. I just bought a 50 1.8 (the cheap one) Is this newby gonna have problems with focus?
(I mean ME, not the lens)
That's the one that I have, and it is a nice lens.
Since it's a prime lens and has no zoomability to it, you have to move closer or father away to frame your image. no big deal.

However the problem focusing appears when you're running the lens at the largest aperture 1.8. Your DOF is razor thin, leaving you very little room to hold focus.
In other words, if you move the slightest inwards or outwards, your focus will slip.

This is why I mentioned that I like it better for photos. As I frame my image, focus, and take the picture.

For video if your filming a stationary object and moving your camera like on a slider, then it's great.
If you're filming a moving subject, say dancing people, then you're going to have to decrease your FOV and open up the aperture to around f4.5-5.6 to maintain good focus.

As I said I like the lens is nice, but I think of it as more of a specialty lens on a cropped sensor camera like the 550D.
Remember your 50mm becomes a 80mm lens on the 550D.
For more general shooting I would prefer a wider FOV, more attune to the natural eye, say 55mm. So to achieve this I would go down to something like a Sigma 30mm 1.4, which on a cropped sensor would give me the equivalent of a 48mm lens. Thus giving me the ability to run the lens wider and a little more leeway to shoot with.
 
Last edited:
Did I say that I love the Tamron 17-50 lens. :happy:

I'm hoping to get this lens also for 'everyday' use - 2.8 through the zoom is what I want. The kits lens is ok, but its not great indoors. I also noticed when zooming, the exposure obviously changes due to the aperture changing.

I've just ordered a Nikkor lens convertor so I can use my existing Nikkor 50mm and 35mm primes. I hope I can still make use of these.

Overall, I love the camera. I'm also coming from a JVC HD100, so manual focus isn't new to me, though the DoF makes focusing a little more difficult. I can certainly live with that DoF!!

C
 
I'm hoping to get this lens also for 'everyday' use - 2.8 through the zoom is what I want. The kits lens is ok, but its not great indoors. I also noticed when zooming, the exposure obviously changes due to the aperture changing.
C

I take it that the apeture changing on zoom (like the kit Lens) is something that isn't specific to ALL zoom lens?
(humor me, I'm new to dslr)
 
I take it that the apeture changing on zoom (like the kit Lens) is something that isn't specific to ALL zoom lens?
(humor me, I'm new to dslr)

No, lenses like the Tamron 17-55 f2.8 (or more expensive Canon or Nikon versions) are designed to remain at an aperture of F2.8 as the zoom changes from 17 to 55mm. The kit lens on the other hand changes from F3.5 to F5.6 as you zoom from 18 to 55mm, causing the amount of light entering the lens to change as the aperture opens and closes. The Tamron can be classified as a 'fast' lens, and is a lot better indoors and in low light at all zoom levels.

Clear as mud? ;)

C
 
Also keep in mind, like I said before that the larger your aperture f1.8, f2.8 etc. the lesser the DOF. So your window for holding focus is narrower.

The sweet spot for DOF is around 4.5-5.6.
This will enable you to get greater DOF and hold your subjects in focus for more movement. This of course means less light for low light situations, unless you bump up your ISO to sompensate for the light loss due to greater desired DOF.

There are times where you want less DOF, like interviews and when you want your subject to be the center of attention, could having first dance with guests being blurred behind them. So for slow segements liek this running at higher f stops are great. But fro section like guests daning a ta wedding reception I prefer grester DOF to get more subjects in focus for longer periods. So I either stop down the lens to 4.5-5.6 and bump up the ISO. What I won't do though is stop down the shutter below 6ofps when I'm shooting NTSC video.
 
"Did I say that I love the Tamron 17-50 lens."

You did, you did!

And now I'll be looking at one as well.....

john
 
Try getting solid focus at f1.2 with the Canon 50mm L and no monitor or Z-Finder. Now that's some tough focusing. :D

Since you brought it up (and I think this might be a slight problem because of my eyesite) I have quite an interest in the Z finder, because of ease of mobility, but I'm not realy sure how well it would work with my glasses.
(and does it actually work well? I mean, how much resolution do you actually get off the LCD) Would it be easier for me to work with a monitor at SD and suffer the lack of mobility?
 
Since you brought it up (and I think this might be a slight problem because of my eyesite) I have quite an interest in the Z finder, because of ease of mobility, but I'm not realy sure how well it would work with my glasses.
(and does it actually work well? I mean, how much resolution do you actually get off the LCD) Would it be easier for me to work with a monitor at SD and suffer the lack of mobility?

I think it largely depends on how you shoot. Most of my work involves run-and-gun shooting, traveling light, shooting on boats, planes, in jungles, etc. A monitor would be near-useless for me. So in my situation, the Z-Finder is a bargain at twice the price.

For critical focusing, with the focus-assist/zoom function, the LCD and Z-Finder are more than enough for me. There are cheaper alternatives, certainly, and I'm sure they work acceptably well. I just happened to get the Z-Finder first and for the Zacuto service.

Since I don't wear glasses, I can't really speak to how well it would work for you, but the diopter adjustment on the Z-Finder works very well, and the eyecup is nice and comfortable.
 
Back
Top