Let's not forget the Kiefer Test!

^ Hahaha, that is brilliant. Imagine the fit he'd throw if the production on 24 would switch to 7Ds :P

Well, Rodney Charters, the DP, is a fan of the Canon HDSLRs, so you never know!

Well, he's the most (in)famous example for sure, but he's far from the only one. Actors are such finicky creatures, you never know what will set them off.

The one really nice thing about the JVC 100/200's is that they look like a movie camera, but remain relatively small.

john

Can you please elaborate for those who don't know what you're talking about?

Read under "Fun Facts": http://www.buddytv.com/info/kiefer-sutherland-info.aspx

Just finished shooting with the 2Ti and find it very similar, if not exactly equal in image quality to the 7D. No slouch here. 7D is a little more convenient and definitely has more substantial build quality but the 2Ti is very nice and the lightness to me is a good thing for many applications. Having both cameras, had I not already purchased a 7D, I would be perfectly comfortable with the 2Ti for both video and stills. I rarely need to shoot 8 frames per second and try not to drop my cameras whenever I can help it. I do like the extra controls on the 7D, but it is a minor thing.

The T2i is an incredible bargain and coupled with the Tamron VC 17-50mm f2.8 lens, I find it very capable.

550d vs 7D
 

Roger S.

Thank you for your impressions on the 7D vs 550d. I was able to test the beta of the 7D and I figure that it should basically be the same as far as video goes with the 7D. It's nice of you validating that. I'm just now in the process of selling my 400d kit and the 55-250 IS with the bg-e3 to raise at least half the funds to get the 550d. :-)

Like you, I also plan to get the tamron 17-50 f2.8 di-2 VC. I already have the non-VC and it is very good optically. It is also smaller and cheaper compared to the 17-55 IS. I also have the 50 f1.4 usm, 70-200 f2.8L IS, 100 f2 usm. So as far as lenses go I am set. But I'll get the T2i with the 18-55 IS kit lens as it will be some time before I can afford the 17-50 VC, unless I sell the non-VC.

Let us know your other comments as on your camera as you use it.

So why wouldn't you sell the non-VC?

17-50 tamron
 

Fei Meng,

It's a sharp copy with no AF problems. Also partly sentimental reasons as I've used this lens for about 3 years with all sort of projects and it is rock solid. Hard to find something like it and the only weakness is lack of VC.

Also, if the photo-video with a prospective partner pushes through in the province, we are going to need a good lens for that branch. Might as well use the non-VC for those projects as fast lenses other than the kit is going to be needed. I'll keep the VC with me and the non-VC will go to the branch.

Fei and Mel,

Here's a take on the Tamron VC 17-50 (I have 2):

Pros: Very, very sharp. Great images. Focus reasonably fast in good light, has to hunt a while in marginal light. While not cheap, it's a bargain compared to Canon 17-55 and has a much more generous focus ring for video. Color is great. Bokeh is good, but not great.

Cons: Both copies exhibit a slightly sticky focus ring. When trying to make very small or slow focus adjustments the focus ring is a little jumpy. No problem for fast focus pulls.

The VC is effective, but quite noisy on the camera's built in audio (not very noticeable to the ear while shooting, so I think its the vibrations inside the camera and the tight proximity and mechanical connectedness of the mic). I haven't yet tried it with the Rode videomic, but I imagine it will greatly reduce or eliminate the noise.

The VC also turns off for stills, so every time you adjust the shutter button after being idle for more than a few seconds, the VC kicks in, the image "wobbles" for a fraction of a second, then all is good. This isn't even worth mentioning unless you are a pro photographer and have the skills to point, focus, and shoot your camera instictively in less than 1/2 a second. Sounds crazy, but a few cover pages are exactly that. I'm not there, so a 1/2 of a second wobble is worth $400 in my pocket. For video the VC runs constantly, so turn of camera between long pauses to save your battery.

If I made my living at this, I'd want to look at the Canon lens more carefully.

tamron 17-50 VC
 

Roger,

Thanks for posting your impression on the tamron 17-50 VC. Looks like a winner to me. I just have to note what you have written there about the limitations I have to work around with.

Thank you again!

Can anyone comment on how important IS is at 17-50? The non VC version of the lens is obviously cheaper but is the VC worth it for video?

Cheers

Fergus,

For tripod work, VC isn't needed and is even slightly negative. For hand held work, assuming you aren't using the internal camera mic, VC effectively helps take out the small shakes, especially on the long end. Heavier and more expensive but I've also heard the VC model has some slight improvements in Bokeh over the non-VC lens.