Thoughts after my first "real" shoot with the T2i.

[Bryan McCullough]

At least in this case I prefer the sharpening done by the camera versus post. But only because it's so extreme to match the Z7. In actuality I don't see using both these cameras together much. There's such a clear difference in look that it will probably generally one or the other depending on the material.

[Khoi Pham]

What done is done you can not undo, so with me I like to get it as close as the way I want in camera, but some people like everything flat so they can work more in post.

[Khoi Pham]

Originally Posted by Bryan McCullough

At least in this case I prefer the sharpening done by the camera versus post. But only because it's so extreme to match the Z7. In actuality I don't see using both these cameras together much. There's such a clear difference in look that it will probably generally one or the other depending on the material.

If you mix them at the same time, I would use the Canon for closeup shot so you will have nice shalow dof and use the Z7 for wide shots with deep dof then it will be totally a different look.

[Bryan McCullough]

Yes, that's what I did in this case.

[Terry Lee]

It would be good to see some comparison footage of the T2i and Z7U so that we can really get a feel as to what you are explaining in terms of the difference of sharpness.

[Alister Chapman]

I posted some examples of the T2i and an EX1 on my blog:
XDCAM-USER.com Canon T2i, first impressions, initial tests (frame grabs and video supplied).

[Bryan McCullough]

Originally Posted by Terry Lee

It would be good to see some comparison footage of the T2i and Z7U so that we can really get a feel as to what you are explaining in terms of the difference of sharpness.

Yeah, I should be able to pull it out again next week on some shoots and get some examples that I can put online, but Alister's post shows pretty much what I saw.

[Michiel van Baasbank]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

I posted some examples of the T2i and an EX1 on my blog:
XDCAM-USER.com Canon T2i, first impressions, initial tests (frame grabs and video supplied).

Pfew, Alister. This makes me think twice (make that tripple) before taking the plunge and buying a T2i or 7D...

[Alister Chapman]

You do get a lot of camera for the money, it takes great stills and can be used for excellent timelapse!
In my opinion, IF you soften the image with a bit of diffusion you can prevent aliasing, but the camera as a 1080P camera is soft to start with. If you think of it more as a high end 720P camera you will find the resolution acceptable (you still need to shoot at 1080P). It's OK for web videos and other 720P shoots, and the shallow DoF can be very nice. But to really make it work well you do need to spend a fair bit of money on a range of fast lenses, viewfinder loupe, microphone (better still audio recorder) shoulder stock etc etc and this raises the true cost to something closer to a dedicated mid range 1080P video camera. Even after spending the money it still has limitations including short clips, a lot of jello, aliasing and far from ideal ergonomics.
IF super shallow DoF is your holy grail then it's very hard to beat. It's also very good at shooting in very low light. But to get the kind of images that Philip Bloom produces you will have to work hard and you must expect to get back from a shoot to find some shots spoilt by aliasing.
If you do think of it as a DSLR that also does video, then it's very good, but if your looking for an all-round HD camera you may be disappointed. Having played with a 7D and 5D Mk2 it's video performance is very, very close. It would be hard to tell the difference between the T2i and 7D, they both have the same issues and same DoF.

I'm not saying don't buy, just be aware of the issues and think about what it is that you really need.

[Michiel van Baasbank]

Difficult, difficult. Although it's strangely funny to see most 'wow'-videos are made in low-light or with super-shallow DoF, now I know why. But I still remember the first Ray Roman 7D wedding video, filmed in broad daylight, in which the sharpness (!) combined with the shallow DoF really stunned me.

Don't know if it's true, but I still do think that the subject in focus is perceived sharper due to the out of focus background, although when directly compared to a videocamera the image as a whole is softer. In the past everybody with a camcorder striving for the infamous filmlook was trying to unsharpen their footage, with diffusion filters etc. So now with the DSLRs you've got 24P, shallow DoF and a soft overall image: that is the holy grail!

And even if I'm watching Hollywood DVD's (okay, SD-quality ofcourse) it doesn't look supersharp to me. Maybe HD/Bluray changed the whole game, but as for sharpness, I think that's not a real problem for using a DSLR as an allround camera, because the obvious film(style) look is going to be a stunner everytime. Just take a look at the weddingfilms by Ray Roman, or that documentary in Iraq or Afghanistan; filmed in broad daylight, absolute stunning footage. So in here, the beauty once again is in the eye of the beholder.

Still, I agree that aliasing is a big problem, although I find it strange it never really hit me before as with your stills now. And even then... it's a big dilemma: go for the absolute killer film-look, and live with the aliasing problems... or perhaps just wait a little bit more...

Still I seriously consider just to buy the T2i, invest in good lenses, audio equipment, follow focus etc, learn to use it well and just hope Canon goes on improving or evolving their DSLR's for video use and let's pray they don't come up with something like your EX1 which would make all my equipment useless.

But coming from the humble HV30, the T2i is a major step up, in some aspects I'm already beginning to feel 'constrained' by the HV30. It's a great little allround camera, but even with the 25p (PAL), I feel it will be blown away by the T2i when I'm going for the film look.

[Bryan McCullough]

For the cost the T2i is insane. That's really all there is to it.

And since pretty much everything I shoot is not for broadcast my clients value the sweet film look over issues of aliasing. In fact I'd bet 9 out of 10 clients couldn't point it out if they tried. But all of them will drolol over the DOF the T2i gives.

[Michiel van Baasbank]

Look what this guy's been doing with just a HV30 and a DIY 35mm adapter... with enough lights AND lots of talent...

My first music video clip shot with my DIY 35mm adapter on Vimeo

Could this be the best of both worlds, Alister?

I reckon it's possible to buy a 35mm adapter for around $300-400 (about the same as the Tamron 17-50), about the same for the lights (this bloke built them himself). So then I'm set for the same price as the T2i, would need a follow focus anyway.

[Alister Chapman]

Forget the technology and consider why that video is good? It's well lit, very high contrast with strong deep blacks and vivid colors, creatively shot with some nice tracking shots, it's well thought out with shots cutting together well and a great music track (depending on your taste). Those are the primary reasons why that video looks good. The cinemascope aspect ratio gives it a film feel, much like 16:9 used to differentiate from 4:3. It's not all shallow DoF and the DoF is only a very small part of what makes it look good.

One of the things that DoF adapters and DSLR's tend to do is to make you think about the shot, simply because compared to a dedicated camcorder it isn't really "point and shoot" anymore. If you used any moderately good video camera to do that shoot and took the care and attention into the shots that has obviously gone into the clip, there is no reason why your videos won't look good.

Until the 70's movies were very rarely shot with shallow DoF, many of the very greatest movies excelled due to the amazing detail in the scenes, epic films such as Lawrence of Arabia for example. Then in the 80's the use of available light became trendy and this forced film makers to shoot with wide open, fast lenses.

When you go to a cinema to watch a film, you look at an image that is 30ft across, maybe more. A slight difference between in focus and out of focus is very obvious, scale that down to a small screen and much of the subtlety is lost. To compensate some people making clips that will primarily be viewed on the web or small screens are using massively shallow DoF to emulate on a small screen, the way a film looks on a big cinema screen. Show that web clip on a big screen and it's going to look very different.

I would love to be able to pick and choose my DoF, but not at the expense of image sharpness or other artifacts. It will come, probably sooner rather than later, maybe even as soon as NAB. If you have a spare $800 then the T2i is a nice toy, but just remember that it's not the camera that makes a movie, it's the crew.

[Nicholas de Kock]

I don't think aliasing will be a issue in a years time. When the EX1 was launched everyone was complaining about the rolling shutter and partially exposed flashes now it totally acceptable. Aliasing will also be accepted and film makers will concentrate more on producing quality work rather than worrying about technical details. Every single video I see lately all look the same, out of focus then in focus, hunting for focus. Hopefully in time professionals will learn that hunting for focus is like zooming. I'm looking forward to seeing more professional work done.

[Régine Weinberg]

for the rolling shutter there is a nice after effects work around to be found on the web.
Bending can be a problem as latitude sometimes, ok. Light to work out carefully will do the trick. Even with my aaton 16mm most work was done before the shot, so nothing changed so much. No telecine no wait time, a better workflow that is the great plus, some hitches as Canon wil not blow all his comcoders to the wind, but to pull focus and use literally quite any glass u can afford or will, opens a totally new way to low budget gorilla film, sexy.