Wow! Finally compared my new Canon T2i (550D) to my Canon HV20 Camcorders! Holy Crap!

skital said:
Haha! Yeah, I know. lol. It's just that I had been quite impressed with the HV20 and didn't expect quite this much of a difference head on. My HV20 was an upgrade to the original and supposedly first progressive scan SLR style Canon Optura. The difference between the two was amazing; the hv20 annihlated it and I thought gave me close to that DVX100 quality I had been wanting for years, so between the T2i and HV20 I was expecting a difference in low light quality and maybe sharpness, but it just exceeded expectations in all areas. The T2i simply stomps it....at least indoors it does. Still can't wait to shoot some outdoors stuff.

I just thought the HV20 would hold up better against it (even though I still thought the T2i would still look noticeably better, just not to the degree that it did. lol), but I'm very happy to be wrong in this case! lol.

The HV20 does much better outdoors than indoors though. I'm gonna shoot some comparison videos for youtube and vimeo and then put the HV20 on Ebay most likely. :D
Click to expand...

owning both like you i agree the T2i/550D that i have does give a better overall pq outdoors and huge increase indoors, i would never compare my HV in cinemode as this is a very soft picture look, i also plan to do some comparison checks but will not use cinemode on the HV it would not be fair.How resolution compares i dont know but in 1920P the 550 looks sharper to me,but i have always and still love my HV,making films and filming with it is so easy.
 
Last edited:
flinty said:
owning both like you i agree the T2i/550D that i have does give a better overall pq outdoors and huge increase indoors, i would never compare my HV in cinemode as this is a very soft picture look, i also plan to do some comparison checks but will not use cinemode on the HV it would not be fair.How resolution compares i dont know but in 1920P the 550 looks sharper to me,but i have always and still love my HV,making films and filming with it is so easy.
Click to expand...

IMO, it's less fair in other modes. Cinemode is softer, but it has higher dynamic range; better dark detail and highlight detail. It makes skin tones look far more natural and doesn't accentuate skin flaws nearly as bad as the other modes that lack dynamic range. For me, the difference in the T2i with a custom picture style vs HV20 in any mode other than cinemode only makes that difference in quality MORE startling. Sure, the sharpness will be more comparable when not in cinemode, but the dynamic range difference will become even more apparent....which is IMO, is a much bigger deal than a softer image....which actually makes for more flattering skin.

I really dislike the other modes compared to cinemode. Can't shoot in them. I noticed time and time again how bad the lack or dynamic range can make peoples' skin look far worse than in reality, while cinemode creates a far more natural looking image that doesn't accentuate blemishes and such nearly as much. I happily live with the softer image for the increase in highlight/dark detail and the more natural pleasing skin.
 
aituv said:
idk where this came from. if you light it up good you have no problems, at least i didn't. with good light nothing is forcing you to shoot at 1.2/f or 11/f depending on lens.
Click to expand...

no matter how good the lighting or how stopped down the lens and sharp the image
h264 macro blocking and chromakey is a combination thats gonna bite you in the ass
 
J Davis said:
no matter how good the lighting or how stopped down the lens and sharp the image
h264 macro blocking and chromakey is a combination thats gonna bite you in the ass
Click to expand...

i tend to disagree with whatever you're saying, because i myself shot (subject in front of a green screen) and keyed out in post no problem...in fact better from my previous experience with z1u. im not trying to start a batch, simply saying all of your technical words don't make up for the lack of experience you gained with DSLR + chroma key... go set up, shoot, edit, and then tell us your experience :) and if you say you already have, then obviously you struggled in some area(s).

P.S. here's something i pulled off google within a one minute browse, nothing but good things about DSLR + keying, you just need to know what to do, see it for yourself:

http://www.thec47.com/gearbox/feeling-green-pt5.html
 
As J-Davis says, a talking head in front of a greenscreen should look pretty good on all but the worst of cameras. It's when things start to get more tricky that the limitations begin to show. Add a blond subject with hair blowing. A model with a sheer gown. A closeup with a 105mm or 135mm lens. Life gets MUCH more tricky in those instances.

Shoot some tests like these:

http://www.hollywoodcamerawork.us/greenscreenplates.html

And get back to us on the ability of the Canon DSLRs. They are great for the money, don't get me wrong. But they aren't film by a long shot.
 
Jason Ramsey said:
would you be offended if someone called the t2i "just a toy" b/c to some, for video purposes, it is...since it wasn't designed for that in the first place...

I've seen some pretty stellar footage from both cams... Sure...hv20 is pretty long in the tooth these days though, but it was the first budget 24p cam that I can think of and was pretty revolutionary to the no-budget filmmakers as the large sensor video enabled dslr's are today....

under a grand for 24p was a pretty big deal to a healthy demographic of no-budget/micro budget filmmakers, just as S35 for under a grand is today...

not trying to start anything :) just think toy is a bit of an overstatement from a historical perspective (well, if a few years is "historical" :) ) so in context, it's no more a toy than the t2i... Though, I don't think either are toys, per se....
Click to expand...

You're so right man... Things are moving so quickly.

Kids we'll be filming pranks on school in 8K with their cellphones by 2020, if not less.
 
skital said:
IMO, it's less fair in other modes. Cinemode is softer, but it has higher dynamic range; better dark detail and highlight detail. It makes skin tones look far more natural and doesn't accentuate skin flaws nearly as bad as the other modes that lack dynamic range. For me, the difference in the T2i with a custom picture style vs HV20 in any mode other than cinemode only makes that difference in quality MORE startling. Sure, the sharpness will be more comparable when not in cinemode, but the dynamic range difference will become even more apparent....which is IMO, is a much bigger deal than a softer image....which actually makes for more flattering skin.

I really dislike the other modes compared to cinemode. Can't shoot in them. I noticed time and time again how bad the lack or dynamic range can make peoples' skin look far worse than in reality, while cinemode creates a far more natural looking image that doesn't accentuate blemishes and such nearly as much. I happily live with the softer image for the increase in highlight/dark detail and the more natural pleasing skin.
Click to expand...

Well maybe we like the different look,when i accasionaly use cinemode it is on a sunny day when most in the film is natural green,by upping the sharpness contrast and brightness to max it can then look better than the P or TV mode,with my 550D i like the neutral setting with the colour down a bit,so for me in most curcumstances HV cinimode is a no,not sure what making peoples skin look far
worse than in reality meens if they have spots and pimples they have them nothing wrong with that.Anyway it seems we both like our cams even if in a bit different ways.:thumbsup:
 
flinty said:
Well maybe we like the different look,when i accasionaly use cinemode it is on a sunny day when most in the film is natural green,by upping the sharpness contrast and brightness to max it can then look better than the P or TV mode,with my 550D i like the neutral setting with the colour down a bit,so for me in most curcumstances HV cinimode is a no,not sure what making peoples skin look far
worse than in reality meens if they have spots and pimples they have them nothing wrong with that.Anyway it seems we both like our cams even if in a bit different ways.:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

What I mean is that if someone does have a red spot or some sort of facial blemish (especially a red one) the camera when not in cinemode causes it to looking about 10x worse on any somewhat close shot on the face than it does in person and this is clearly due to how the human eyes see vs the camcorder. Huge difference in dynamic range. Compared to the human eye there is a huge compression on dynamic range, which causes certain blemishes to look far more pronounced and obvious (not to mentions skin looks more artificial to me...highlights blowing out too quickly and such)....drawing too much attention to blemishes; I despise it. I found that cinemode extended the dynamic range enough that these types of blemishes were not nearly as harsh and unflattering; the skin takes on a more natural gradation in less than ideal lighting....highlights not blowing out as quick....harsh shadows not as bad....etc.

But yeah, to each their own. I really just don't like the harshness of the other modes....not enough dynamic range for me. I don't like neutral mode or any of the modes on the T2i either really. I use a custom style I created called "Film Style 1". If not that I use Superflat or Marvel Cine.
 
I put some of the footage on my computer to view finally instead of the LCD monitor and while the footage is very nice I am now seeing the Macroblocking in certain areas that can be pretty ugly. I never recall seeing this issues on Vimeo videos when full screened. It's not everywhere, but when I was filming I notice macroblock city on this purple towel.

For the most part I'm not seeing it much anywhere else, but the T2i fell apart on the area of the purple towel.....it was just like macroblocking on the towel like crazy! Any way to improve this?

Everywhere else looked fine though...just not the towel. Hope I don't run into this too often.
 
I went from the HV20 to 7D to GH-1(3) and I will say I do miss the cinemode on the HV20. It looked so filmic but just softened the image a tad much....which sometimes was a good thing especially for skin tones. I used it a lot to get the shadows raised up and highlights down. When I got the 7D I was hoping it had that feature (or something like it). But the custom curves helped a great deal.
 
In a related note, I compared my 7D to a picture I drew of a tree and the 7D was waaaayyyyyyy better.
 
Pietro Impagliazzo said:
Go learn to draw properly...
Click to expand...

you obviously misunderstood his analogy... and btw what the heck is wrong with this thread? hv20 and 7D? Oh the RED one i shoot with produces a little better quality than my iPhone 4 UGH and I was gonna make my feature film with the iPhone 4 now I can't make up my mind... because I want the debate to be in the camera who cares if I suck as a film maker and have no creativity in me whatsoever, if I have an expensive camera I'll be awesome!
 
Just a good natured ribbing. But really the newer camera's images are almost always going to be better than the older cameras...I mean I could list off thirty cameras off the top of my head that it is better than. The real challenge is comparing it to cameras more expensive and that are standards in shooting.
 
skital said:
What I mean is that if someone does have a red spot or some sort of facial blemish (especially a red one) the camera when not in cinemode causes it to looking about 10x worse on any somewhat close shot on the face than it does in person and this is clearly due to how the human eyes see vs the camcorder. Huge difference in dynamic range. Compared to the human eye there is a huge compression on dynamic range, which causes certain blemishes to look far more pronounced and obvious (not to mentions skin looks more artificial to me...highlights blowing out too quickly and such)....drawing too much attention to blemishes; I despise it. I found that cinemode extended the dynamic range enough that these types of blemishes were not nearly as harsh and unflattering; the skin takes on a more natural gradation in less than ideal lighting....highlights not blowing out as quick....harsh shadows not as bad....etc.

But yeah, to each their own. I really just don't like the harshness of the other modes....not enough dynamic range for me. I don't like neutral mode or any of the modes on the T2i either really. I use a custom style I created called "Film Style 1". If not that I use Superflat or Marvel Cine.
Click to expand...

:huh: You dont like the neutral mode on T2s :grin: custom mode on mine is gross vastly oversaturated totaly unlike the washed out cini mode on HVs, all i can say is cams and dslrs must vary a lot .Pal and ntsc ?
 
aituv said:
you obviously misunderstood his analogy... and btw what the heck is wrong with this thread? hv20 and 7D? Oh the RED one i shoot with produces a little better quality than my iPhone 4 UGH and I was gonna make my feature film with the iPhone 4 now I can't make up my mind... because I want the debate to be in the camera who cares if I suck as a film maker and have no creativity in me whatsoever, if I have an expensive camera I'll be awesome!
Click to expand...

I understood his analogy and I thought it was a little bit extreme so I used a little sarcasm for comedy's sake.

As a matter of fact the thread is very informative for me given how much badmouthing of the DSLRs codec we see out there.

And by his words I judge colorimetry is on another level in the DSLRs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top