|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 29th, 2010, 02:38 PM | #16 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,100
|
Quote:
720/30p (levels brought up in post): Capital Punishment Practice Skate (uncut) By Perrone Ford On ExposureRoom Same Location, previous day 720/24p (levels adjusted in post.. ignore jerkiness please): Lowered lights indoor test By Perrone Ford On ExposureRoom I am buying a T2i *JUST FOR THESE SITUATIONS* and let me tell you the EX1 isn't even in the same league. When I drop a 35mm F1.4 on that camera this will look like it's sunlit. (by the way, these are both at gain +6 on the EX1 which is as high as I dare go)
__________________
DVX100, PMW-EX1, Canon 550D, FigRig, Dell Octocore, Avid MC4/5, MB Looks, RedCineX, Matrox MX02 mini, GTech RAID, Edirol R-4, Senn. G2 Evo, Countryman, Moles and Lowels. |
|
March 29th, 2010, 02:50 PM | #17 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: College Park, Maryland
Posts: 913
|
Quote:
|
|
March 29th, 2010, 03:59 PM | #18 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Silverton Oregon
Posts: 93
|
Okay so just a thought here. If your outputing to DVD everything gets compressed to the same low bitrate. For me personally I would rather have more dynamic range with the illusion of a sharper image from the DSLR than highly compressed footage from a 3CCD camera.
|
March 29th, 2010, 05:36 PM | #19 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: new york city
Posts: 113
|
Quote:
The only point to my posting is simply that I did not expect the kit lens to look as bad as it does- that's all. I expected everything that I'm hearing from people, but not to that extreme. If it really is simply a matter of what lens is on that thing... well, holy crap, that's an amazing thing to me, that a lens can make THAT much difference. I didn't expect much from the kit lens, but I expected a bit more than totally unusable crap! I might as well use a flipcam! |
|
March 29th, 2010, 06:51 PM | #20 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,100
|
Quote:
__________________
DVX100, PMW-EX1, Canon 550D, FigRig, Dell Octocore, Avid MC4/5, MB Looks, RedCineX, Matrox MX02 mini, GTech RAID, Edirol R-4, Senn. G2 Evo, Countryman, Moles and Lowels. |
|
March 29th, 2010, 10:36 PM | #21 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: College Park, Maryland
Posts: 913
|
Quote:
|
|
March 29th, 2010, 11:03 PM | #22 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bozeman, MT
Posts: 79
|
Why, again, are we comparing a $799 camera body and kit lens (read: garbage) with a dedicated HD camcorder with fixed lens that costs 4X as much?
This just in: the Sony XDCAM series looks waaaaaay sharper than my Flip Mino HD. Anyone who needs proof that the T2i can produce beautiful HD imagery either doesn't know what they're doing or isn't looking hard enough on Vimeo. |
March 29th, 2010, 11:23 PM | #23 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: new york city
Posts: 113
|
We're comparing so that we can understand better what, exactly, this $800 camera can and can't do. The original question was pretty simple- not "why does this not look as good as an EX-1" but "should these images look as bad as they do, given the settings and lens?" Given the right conditions, I can make your Flipcam look pretty impressive. So what? As explained, I've seen what the 5D can do, I've produced some beautiful, sharp (or "sharp-seeming-but-technically-not-actually-sharp") images with it, and I was a bit surprised that the t2i performed as poorly as it did, even taking into account all the factors. If the answer lies mostly in the kit lens, I'm fine with that. If the answer is that the camera, regardless of lens, performs poorly in low light, this I wasn't expecting (not to that degree anyway) and it would definitely give me pause. Obviously opinions on DSLR's run the gamut from "they suck" to "they're the second coming" but I don't see much point in arguing our tastes and biases- I was just looking for some objective feedback to better understand what it is I'm holding here.
Thanks to all who have done just that. |
March 30th, 2010, 07:23 AM | #24 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 747
|
You've seen some good footage from it, but have you seen any good footage like the way you set up? no, nobody shooting book case like that with deep dof like you did and can make it looks good, the only way to make this scene looks good is shoot in from an angle and focus on only a few books or cd and blur out the rest by taking advantage of your shalow dof, you are comparing it biggest weakness to other smaller chip strongest feature, this camera is not for that, it is best use for shalow dof, strong point is good low light if you have fast lens, artisctic, cinematic is what it is best at, not video type shooting style.
|
March 30th, 2010, 08:42 AM | #25 |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 842
|
That's a good post, Khoi. I view these cameras as a way to fill some gaps that my video cameras have, not to replace them completly.
|
March 30th, 2010, 09:17 AM | #26 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 50
|
I would be inclined to blame the kit lens, though I freely admit I've never even attached mine to the cam. Went straight for the 50mm 1.4 and the 24-70mm 2.8. And as I pointed out in another thread, a 7D film just won the jury prize at SXSW, probably the second biggest film festival in the nation. So depending on your needs (and your ability to control your shooting environment), the T2i/7D cams can be a workhorse even when your work goes to the big screen -- it's not just speculation anymore.
|
March 30th, 2010, 09:38 AM | #27 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
That said, I like what Pham mentions above. Would any camera produce better results in that setting/framing/look? Also, if you are trying to make comparisons, it would be better to see the same shots with the EX-1 or 5d to see what performance other cameras achieve that the T2i is not.
__________________
Michael Rosenberger Sure I'll shoot your wedding, for two million dollars. |
|
March 30th, 2010, 09:51 AM | #28 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bothell, Washington
Posts: 195
|
thanks koi and mando for your responses...then my real question...am i going to get less aliasing and a considerably sharper picture with a canon xha1 than any if canons dslrs. i am talking about a wide angle shot of mountains, ocean waves hitting the rocky coast at sunset, slight movement in panos? having sold the xha1, would one of the smaller canon vixia hf s1 do just as well with iQ? and skip the rebel?
|
March 30th, 2010, 10:15 AM | #29 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: College Park, Maryland
Posts: 913
|
Quote:
|
|
March 30th, 2010, 10:16 AM | #30 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 747
|
Yeah no doubt my XH-A1 has more details and sharper than my 7D or T2i, and from the shot that you described it would be the right camera with sharper and almost undetectable aliasing, the newer consumver vixia should do just as good if not better than the XH-A1 especially outdoor when you have good light, from test review in the past I believe the A1 is around 900 lines and 7D is around 700 + aliasing/moire artifacts.
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|