oh no so with the stock lens the 550D i have ordered does not give good PQs,no mre money for extra lenses.

The kit or stock lens will take good pictures and if the light is not to low, it will get good video as well. Good enough to get you going and allow you to learn a great deal on how this camera will work for you. The Nifty 50mm would be a good buy for you at around $99 US. when you can do it, its by far the best bang for the buck. You can built out from there.

Clayton is right in the spot here.

Thank you very much Clayton as you can tell i am a bit worried maybe having spent more money than i should have only to maybe be a bit dissapointed, but i am am a bit encouraged by the film with the kit lens i showed,The nifty 50mm you mention can you show it to me as i live in the uk i will check it out for price.
Also will the Rode stereo mic i use with my HV30 be ok to use with the 550D ,thanks

Only if you insist on getting Canon lenses or need the autofocus for stills. The best bang for the buck video-wise would be an old nikon, pentax, etc 50. Similar price but much better construction and ergonomics, especially for focusing. I have a variety of lenses but my old pentax smc 50 1.4 is my favorite by far for video.

The 50 1.8 is a nice sharp lens, however the focus ring is awful. Also because its not multicoated it doesn't render colors as nicely as some of the more modern, more expensive 50mms

Thanks for clarifying George, I only reacted because your initial response sounded different. You are right that in some cases it looks like a DSLR has more resolution although that is not the case.
Same for low light difference, with a right lens there is no comparison between a hv30 and a DSLR, the difference is almost like night and day.

I noticed that's another big difference between cheap and expensive lenses, I have 2 old nikon nikkor lenses and one has a very smooth and solid focus ring and the other one feels like cheap plastic.
Once you have set the focus and leave it alone then it's no problem but if you are changing focus in the middle of a shot you even can get some wiggle in the image on cheap lenses.

The video from Canon HVs has more resolution than 550Ds my tests have proved.

The HV30 is a surprisingly good camera in good lighting. We got one as a backup to our XH-A1s & discovered that the picture quality was as good if not better in some circumstances.

Good HDV definitely has greater resolution that the Canon DSLRs which may look 'sharper' but that is an illusion & is not the same thing.

Beside the fact that a dslr has less resolution then cheap hd cams it does a damn good job in hiding it if you use it under the right circumstances.
On a wedding I did a while ago I got a very clear example when a dslr sucks and when not; a wedding that took place at a old theater that was rebuild but leaving it in it's authentic state, it was quite dark and there were several blue spots used and lots of candle light) I used a 10-22mm canon lens to capture a major part of that theater in one tilt shot (there was a enormous chandelier on the ceiling) and it looked amazing. But then I used that same lens earlier on that day in a very small town hall (with very good light) where I used my xh-a1 as main cam and used my dslr with the 10-22 lens to get a much wider view as b-roll. The walls however were made of small bricks and the moire was all over the place making the footage useless. It was so distracting because I made a slow pan movement and you could see the lines dancing in the background, a problem my xh-a1 did not have at all.

Anyway... i bought the canon 50mm 1.8 (cheapo lens), and it does a much better videojob than the stocklens.
Next step: matching the dslr-footage with the hv-30 footage.

Martyn.
Check out my post, re old lenses, here. http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...om-lenses.html