Shall I go with t2i/t3i or a consumer like tm900?

George,

I don't mean to be rude but you've asked a lot of similar questions to this all over the forum in the last few weeks and had a lot of good advice. My advice to you now is decide what's important to you, draw up a list of pros and cons for the cameras on your shortlist, read some reviews, go try them out in a shop(s) and then just buy one and use it. The perfect camera does not exist and we ALL (me included!) spend hours deliberating which one to purchase.

I hope you have a lot of fun with whatever you decide to buy but only you can decide what that might be.

Good luck making that decision George!

Sorry.

This will be my final question. Have tried both and in my opinion the main difference is the lenses and the rolling shutter on the t2i, also the luck of good sound on the same which means I need to invest a lot of money. If I go for a semi-pro camcorder I might be able not to buy external mixers for now and only use my h1n. The thing is if I want to make something more professional, will I be ok with a high consumer camcorder instead of a t2i/t3i or shall I go for something like the canon xf-100 for example?

What kind of productions are you planning to make?

If you're intent is to shoot primarily video and not stills, I'd suggest you start with the right tool for the job. The T2i/T3i are nice still cameras, that shoot very nice video....but they are purpose built for stills, not video.

Your concerns about audio are valid concerns to a point; one thing I can almost guarantee you is that resolving poor audio will take more time, money, effort and frustration with any DLSR than it will with even a consumer grade camcorder.

Today you can get into a VERY capable video camera for under $1000. your zoom will handle a surprising amount of your audio needs in the short to mid term...I've just finished a couple of commercial productions that all audio was recorded with the zoom or the on camera mics...all of it.

It seems to me that DSLR shooting is sort of the "in" thing to do right now. I have a couple of DSLR bodies that shoot extremely good video, but at best I would only use them for that function if my video cameras were otherwise unavailable. For me the difference between shooting video with a dedicated video camera or shooting with a DSLR is simple; the first is fun...the second is work. If you start out of the gate with things that are going to frustrate you right away ( which DSLR video shooting is rife with), you're less likely to actually enjoy the process, and the end result will suffer.

I've shot stills for far longer than video, and still enjoy it more. I also get more work with stills than video, but that's another matter. For each, I have appropriate tools to do the job. it's easier, more productive, more satisfying, more creative and more fun.

reallly take a hard objective look at what you want to shoot, and why. then short list the products that fit your budget and go test them out. I think you may be a bit surprised at the end results

The thing is if I want to make something more professional, will I be ok with a high consumer camcorder instead of a t2i/t3i or shall I go for something like the canon xf-100 for example?
George, first of, don't get me wrong, i am not trying to teach anybody, I'm just thinking out loud:)
over and over again the same question, DSLR or camcorder? nobody can give you perfect advice on buying a camera without knowing you, knowing your interests and your experience level, not that I am interested:), I'm just trying to tell that only you can pick the camera that will be right for you;
If you don't know what camera to buy - means you just don't know what to do with it, if know what you want to do with the camera, but still don't know what camera to buy - means you don't have enough information or experience, so you need to do your research and your tests, and that you have to do yourself; don't rely solely on other people test results, and reviews, sometimes they're misleading;
in my work I use both, DSLRs and camcorders, but if i had to choose to shoot with either or, the choice would be based on what do I need to film; my personal guidelines are simple: lot's of action, live event, no chance for multiple takes - camcorder; documentary, narrative, or just creative shot - DSLR, but as always, there are some exceptions;
On a side note I can tell that we all seen amazing videos shot with HV20 and not so amazing shot on epic:)

George,
If you want professional results, get a professional camera. They cost more, most times a LOT more than consumer grade gear, but there's a reason for it. And a reason people using them are "professional" - it's their livelihood.
Since you're just starting out, there are many options for cheaper pro or pro-sumer gear. Look into used gear as well. I've bought two used pro cameras that work great.
As far as a T2i (there is the new T3i now) or a TM900 - why not get both? Cost wise, they're relatively cheap, far cheaper than the camera I just bought. Each fills a niche in their own way. You could have the benefit of two tools to choose from.
Or, for the cost of both those cameras, you can get a used Panasonic HVX200 or a Canon XH-A1. Both are true professional camcorders, with XLR inputs (never forget the importance of good audio!). But remember, any equipment you buy has to be backed up with tripods, lighting, audio, etc.

But as a professional, I offer this advice - if you want to impress your clients, I wouldn't show up with cameras that look like you bought them from the local Best Buy and double as your home movie camera. Appearances really do matter in our profession. The bigger the camera, the more clients will think you're for real, and that their investment in your services is well spent. Happy clients are more likely to hire you again.

The bottom line is - if the camera makes you money, it's a damn good camera!

What kind of productions are you planning to make?

Hope that with this answer I reply to all.
Going initially for fiction/art and then for docu/weddings.
Have tripod and got sound.

Think it's been said clear in above posts what the pro/cons are of a dslr/dedicated videocamera. A dslr can give you very nice looking footage but I would never do a full wedding on my own with it, it's much more difficult to handle in realtime then a dedicated camera.

If you have the time to set up everything right and if you have a set of nice lenses then a dslr might be a better choice, like Glen said, to customers appearances matter and I can for instance do a paid job with my dslr because that's something generally considered as a "pro" tool. A tm900 on the other hand will make you look like uncle Sam, even though the result in certain circumstances will be better..

Personally myself I would recommend the Panasonic HDC-SD700 or Panasonic TM900 for video, theyre amazing prosumer cameras which have excellent reviews. With both of these cameras I have just made a professional broadcast quality TV Music Video, which has been service checks and quality checks with IMD (they publish and do thorough checks throughout).
I was in the same position as you when I bought my first camera, and in fairness like people have said Canon's are for photo stills not video. If you want a video camera, buy a video. Without a mic in fairness you wont get good audio, but for the panasonic range accessories are fairly cheap. We got a mic for my panasonic for £30 a think and it really does the job,
Believe me even tv shows like the gadget show in the UK have bigged up panasonic's video camcorders and theres a reason why.

I actually hired a Sony Z1 which people lick the ass off. Its apparently a 'broadcast' camera and TV quality what ITV/BBC use and arguable HDV format (the top range ARGUABLY).The quality was so disappointing with this camera I felt hiring it for £300 I had been ripped off.

In comparison to my Panasonic HDC-SD700 footage, the Panaosonic is superior in quality and resolution.

Just goes to show that prosumer can beat 'pro' sometimes.

I agree with Marcus the TM900 is a good camera as are other AVCHD camera's such as the canon HF11 that I have. The Z1 is only ever used in broadcast for SD production in the UK as the HDV codec is not the best and is no where near broadcast HD standard.

AVCHD can be problematic for editing but if you trancode it to pro res LT in FCP it is easy to use, one other note is that none of these small camera's do progressive recording very well in the camera and I find that it is better to shoot 1920x1080i 50i and then do the progressive conversion in software as it cuts down on the skew and smeary shooting caused by the small cmos chips.