Is the T2i in the same league as the MarkII? at DVinfo.net

John Vincent · February 26th, 2010, 12:41 PM

And I mean only regardly the video recording capacity.

I know the Mark II is better in low light and overall resolution - but could you match footage between the two?

Or would it smack you in the face as wrong?

john

Fei Meng · February 26th, 2010, 01:12 PM

Tests have shown that footage from all EOS cameras is extremely similar in terms of look. The main point of difference with the 5D is that it uses a full-frame sensor, which changes the aesthetics of the image somewhat due to the difference in FOV. The 5D performs about one stop better in low light. The 5D does not have better resolution in video mode. Actually, the 5D doesn't even offer the best video resolution among DSLRs. The Panasonic GH1 does slightly better in that area.

The bottom line is that the 5D is only better for those who must have a full-frame sensor and every little bit of low-light sensitivity (without going to the 1D Mark IV).

Jon Fairhurst · February 26th, 2010, 01:18 PM

The other aspect about the 5D2 and low light is that you can use fast, wide primes on the 5D2. If you want to shoot wide at night, the 7D and T2i won't offer the same options. Also, the 5D2 will give a shallower DOF at the same settings.

Aside from that, the quality and look are quite similar.

Fei Meng · February 26th, 2010, 01:32 PM

Another thing: Since Canon's APS-C sensors are almost exactly the same size as a regular 35mm motion picture frame, crop-sensor cameras like the T2i and 7D are technically better for reproducing the vaunted "35mm movie" look.

John Vincent · February 27th, 2010, 06:29 PM

Interesting - was expecting totally different responses. So, different DOF and one stop of sensitivity eh?

And I suppose ease of use would goto the T2i...

jdv

Jon Fairhurst · February 27th, 2010, 06:45 PM

IMHO, the 7D wins the ease of use battle. It has more knobs and buttons for easy access, and is weatherproofed.

Daniel von Euw · February 27th, 2010, 07:03 PM

@John Vincent:

It is more complicat.

The 5D II is 1 stop better in lowlight - but especaly in Lowlight Situation the smaller DoF of the 5D II can make problems.

And if you will use the same DoF on a 5D II and a 7D / T2i you must close the aperture on the 5D II for about 1 2/3 stops or use a 1 2/3 stop higher ISO setting.

So the better lowlight performance of the 5D II is only given if the extrem shallow DoF of the 5D II make no problems for focus.

Only the 1D IV have a real advantage in lowlight situations.

Daniel

Alex Sava · February 27th, 2010, 07:20 PM

From what I gather, all of them are quite similar in terms of video (as someone here already said) so your main question should be... Should I go for the 7D, or settle for the 550D?

If you want video, there is no reason to buy the 7D unless you can really afford it. It is a better camera with a better build and more control, but if you strictly want it for video and especially if you are new at this, I don't think you should spend almost double the price on something that overall gets the same result. That, of course, if that's what you're asking -- what camera you should get.

Chris Hurd · February 27th, 2010, 07:35 PM

You get what you pay for. The 7D is big, beefy and hefty for a D-SLR. It's actually slightly chunkier than the 5D Mk. II. Only the 1D class of cameras are larger. Meanwhile, the 550D / Rebel T2i is a lot smaller, a lot lighter and not nearly as robust. It has a polycarbonate shell as opposed to magnesium allow on the 7D and 5D. The difference in terms of physical characteristics is fairly substantial.

Fei Meng · February 27th, 2010, 07:51 PM

And one of the most important things to consider: The 5D is more than three times the price of T2i. Nobody will say that it's a three-times better camera. But it does have advantages that could be deal-breakers/makers for some. Considering all of the other things that one could buy with that money, the argument over trade-offs and benefits needs to be extremely compelling for a prospective buyer to consider it.

David St. Juskow · February 27th, 2010, 10:41 PM

I didn't shoot in extremely low light situations with the 5D, but in the situations I did use it for it was great- really great- and that wasn't even at a super-high ISO. So the 1-stop difference on the Rebel, in practical terms... it seems like it still can go pretty darn dark without much noise- a typical indoor apartment at night with only a 60 watt bulb, for example... I mean, obviously it's going to look like what it looks like, but in terms of being able to get an image without a ton of noise, if the Rebel is only a stop darker (plus the speed of the lens of course) that doesn't seem like a big loss in 90% of the situations one might find oneself in...

...but I don't have enough experience to say this with certainty...

Floris van Eck · February 28th, 2010, 05:43 AM

My thoughts:

A lot of people are talking about the build quality of these cameras. People nowadays consume electronica like food. Most of us will buy a new camera again in 1-3 years. So I don't think the build quality is that important anymore. Unless you film like wildlife and are outside a lot in wet and humid conditions or your gear takes lots of abuse (climbing etc.). Handling is more important. But I am not sure if I like the 7D (bigger, easier to handle) or 550D (smaller, more stealth) to shoot video while travelling. Also, none of our videocameras are weatherproofed either.

The most important thing is that image quality is more or less the same in video mode.

John Vincent · March 1st, 2010, 04:04 AM

Seems like any DLSR is small when compared to a reular video cam. The lightness/smallness of the T2i would seem absolutely perfect for run and gun....

And I suppose when you trick out the T2i, it'll look close enough to its bigger brothers.

What I wnt is a cam small enough at it's core for run and gun, and big enough when ticked out to make "normal people" think that a "real" movie is being made.

john

Alex Sava · March 1st, 2010, 09:20 AM

I want to shoot an independent movie with my (upcoming) T2i, and I think the fact that it doesn't look like a video camera will help me. I'll obviously go all guerrilla so a photo camera attracts way less attention than a normal sized camcorder like a Z1 or EX-1 or the likes.

I reckon the actors will think it's a joke at first, but I'd much rather spend a bit of time explaining to them how good it is than having to explain to police why I'm filming a movie without a permit :D

John Vincent · March 1st, 2010, 03:14 PM

It will def affect actors - some in a good way, some bad. Some actors want a big-ol camera in their face; helps them get geeked up. Others are 180 dergees the other way.

It also influences the crew, most of whom in indie flicks are working on spec.

But I think there's enough extras for DSLRs now that you can make it as big as you want too(rails, mate box, etc).

john

February 26th, 2010, 12:41 PM	#1
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Is the T2i in the same league as the MarkII? And I mean only regardly the video recording capacity. I know the Mark II is better in low light and overall resolution - but could you match footage between the two? Or would it smack you in the face as wrong? john

February 26th, 2010, 01:18 PM	#3
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	The other aspect about the 5D2 and low light is that you can use fast, wide primes on the 5D2. If you want to shoot wide at night, the 7D and T2i won't offer the same options. Also, the 5D2 will give a shallower DOF at the same settings. Aside from that, the quality and look are quite similar. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

February 27th, 2010, 06:45 PM	#6
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	IMHO, the 7D wins the ease of use battle. It has more knobs and buttons for easy access, and is weatherproofed. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

February 27th, 2010, 07:35 PM	#9
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	You get what you pay for. The 7D is big, beefy and hefty for a D-SLR. It's actually slightly chunkier than the 5D Mk. II. Only the 1D class of cameras are larger. Meanwhile, the 550D / Rebel T2i is a lot smaller, a lot lighter and not nearly as robust. It has a polycarbonate shell as opposed to magnesium allow on the 7D and 5D. The difference in terms of physical characteristics is fairly substantial. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 28th, 2010, 05:43 AM	#12
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 993	My thoughts: A lot of people are talking about the build quality of these cameras. People nowadays consume electronica like food. Most of us will buy a new camera again in 1-3 years. So I don't think the build quality is that important anymore. Unless you film like wildlife and are outside a lot in wet and humid conditions or your gear takes lots of abuse (climbing etc.). Handling is more important. But I am not sure if I like the 7D (bigger, easier to handle) or 550D (smaller, more stealth) to shoot video while travelling. Also, none of our videocameras are weatherproofed either. The most important thing is that image quality is more or less the same in video mode. Last edited by Floris van Eck; February 28th, 2010 at 06:42 AM.

February 26th, 2010, 01:12 PM	#2
Fei Meng Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 78	Tests have shown that footage from all EOS cameras is extremely similar in terms of look. The main point of difference with the 5D is that it uses a full-frame sensor, which changes the aesthetics of the image somewhat due to the difference in FOV. The 5D performs about one stop better in low light. The 5D does not have better resolution in video mode. Actually, the 5D doesn't even offer the best video resolution among DSLRs. The Panasonic GH1 does slightly better in that area. The bottom line is that the 5D is only better for those who must have a full-frame sensor and every little bit of low-light sensitivity (without going to the 1D Mark IV).

February 26th, 2010, 01:32 PM	#4
Fei Meng Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 78	Another thing: Since Canon's APS-C sensors are almost exactly the same size as a regular 35mm motion picture frame, crop-sensor cameras like the T2i and 7D are technically better for reproducing the vaunted "35mm movie" look.

February 27th, 2010, 06:29 PM	#5
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Interesting - was expecting totally different responses. So, different DOF and one stop of sensitivity eh? And I suppose ease of use would goto the T2i... jdv

February 27th, 2010, 07:03 PM	#7
Daniel von Euw Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Köln, NRW, Germany Posts: 70	@John Vincent: It is more complicat. The 5D II is 1 stop better in lowlight - but especaly in Lowlight Situation the smaller DoF of the 5D II can make problems. And if you will use the same DoF on a 5D II and a 7D / T2i you must close the aperture on the 5D II for about 1 2/3 stops or use a 1 2/3 stop higher ISO setting. So the better lowlight performance of the 5D II is only given if the extrem shallow DoF of the 5D II make no problems for focus. Only the 1D IV have a real advantage in lowlight situations. Daniel

February 27th, 2010, 07:20 PM	#8
Alex Sava Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 37	From what I gather, all of them are quite similar in terms of video (as someone here already said) so your main question should be... Should I go for the 7D, or settle for the 550D? If you want video, there is no reason to buy the 7D unless you can really afford it. It is a better camera with a better build and more control, but if you strictly want it for video and especially if you are new at this, I don't think you should spend almost double the price on something that overall gets the same result. That, of course, if that's what you're asking -- what camera you should get.

February 27th, 2010, 07:51 PM	#10
Fei Meng Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 78	And one of the most important things to consider: The 5D is more than three times the price of T2i. Nobody will say that it's a three-times better camera. But it does have advantages that could be deal-breakers/makers for some. Considering all of the other things that one could buy with that money, the argument over trade-offs and benefits needs to be extremely compelling for a prospective buyer to consider it.

February 27th, 2010, 10:41 PM	#11
David St. Juskow Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: new york city Posts: 113	I didn't shoot in extremely low light situations with the 5D, but in the situations I did use it for it was great- really great- and that wasn't even at a super-high ISO. So the 1-stop difference on the Rebel, in practical terms... it seems like it still can go pretty darn dark without much noise- a typical indoor apartment at night with only a 60 watt bulb, for example... I mean, obviously it's going to look like what it looks like, but in terms of being able to get an image without a ton of noise, if the Rebel is only a stop darker (plus the speed of the lens of course) that doesn't seem like a big loss in 90% of the situations one might find oneself in... ...but I don't have enough experience to say this with certainty...

March 1st, 2010, 04:04 AM	#13
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Seems like any DLSR is small when compared to a reular video cam. The lightness/smallness of the T2i would seem absolutely perfect for run and gun.... And I suppose when you trick out the T2i, it'll look close enough to its bigger brothers. What I wnt is a cam small enough at it's core for run and gun, and big enough when ticked out to make "normal people" think that a "real" movie is being made. john

March 1st, 2010, 09:20 AM	#14
Alex Sava Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 37	I want to shoot an independent movie with my (upcoming) T2i, and I think the fact that it doesn't look like a video camera will help me. I'll obviously go all guerrilla so a photo camera attracts way less attention than a normal sized camcorder like a Z1 or EX-1 or the likes. I reckon the actors will think it's a joke at first, but I'd much rather spend a bit of time explaining to them how good it is than having to explain to police why I'm filming a movie without a permit :D

March 1st, 2010, 03:14 PM	#15
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	It will def affect actors - some in a good way, some bad. Some actors want a big-ol camera in their face; helps them get geeked up. Others are 180 dergees the other way. It also influences the crew, most of whom in indie flicks are working on spec. But I think there's enough extras for DSLRs now that you can make it as big as you want too(rails, mate box, etc). john