550d/T2i Vs Rest of world(forget Audio)
 

Hello, I would like to know what can't be done with T2i+accessories compare to 7D,5D mark II and XF305 considering separate audio workflow,Crop factor I can manage by staging/framing+widelens.XF305 ,yes i know its videocamera still i want know what makes t2i inferior to XF305.
Thank you

A lot actually. I had a T2i and upgraded to a 7D (mainly for stills reasons) Shot a LOT of great stuff on the T2i and shoot great stuff on the 7D. I have the XF300 which only lacks the HDSDI output which is not a factor in my workflow.

Great image stabilization, NO moire, NO aliasing, and virtually unlimited continuous recording (dual CF slots) are the big advantages of the XF along with pro audio. Doubt the XF will ever overheat. (T2i is notorious for that and I've experienced it many times)

The codecs are quite different too and the XF records in a 4:2:2 color space which is nicer in a lot of situations. The XF has built in ND filters and manual iris control right on the lens. (I suppose you could get a manual control lens for the DSLR so that may not be as much an advantage) Zoom controls are another major advantage. Very difficult to get a smooth zoom on a photo lens plus it has to be a constant aperture lens to zoom properly at all!
The XF also has the equivalent of a 29-527mm lens. (I have from an 11mm to 400mm range on the 7D but it's several lenses which aren't always convenient to change!)

Price is something to consider but not the way you may think. With a decent rails system, good glass to cover a wide range, audio support and other accessories, you will easily spend the same as the XF300 which is pretty much ready out of the box.

NOW...all that said, I still love shooting video with the 7D (and did with the T2i) BUT it only comes out for b-roll or specialty shots where extreme DOF, super wide-angle, follow focus work, lightweight or stealth are required. Though there are products out there that can do both, I feel the best solution is to always have a true camcorder and the DSLR is a bonus. They cut together extremely well and provide unique looks.

As much as I love the DSLR game, the XF300/305 is a killer camera for the money and if I had to choose (which I don't HA HA!) the XF would win hands down.

Thanks a lot robert,if i understand correctly for video recording 7D,550D,Mark II (except for the crop factor) are same.XF I coniser mostly for eliminating moire & aliasing,smoother Zoom, 12min recording is not a concern for my case.But i wonder for scripts like changeling,swimming with sharks,12 angrymen i mean where not much action sequence(no fast panning ) Is moire & aliasing still a factor?

All the Canon Dslrs look very much the same picture-wise except the 5D. It definitely has a flavor and its one i like a lot. (too bad its my buddys camera...but I get to edit a lot of his footage so quite familiar with the looks) Treating it like an old-school film camera is the best idea for movie scripts. I've only run across bad moire twice, once it was an actors shirt. The other was a placemat on a table. Both had to be re-shot as it was horrible. Aliasing is another story, it sticks out to me but really depending on what the scene is. The public will probably never complain about aliasing.

Nicely said, Robert. That is one of the best explanations I've read that explains how a video camera can be preferable to a dslr

Ummmm
 

I just want to say that...I have and HVX200A...and a 5D mark ii....and I'm having a hard time picking up my HVX...mostly low light...but also the quality and resolution are so far apart.....so...I ordered a T2i as a second cam.


Even with super high isos, even with jellow..even with moire and aliasing...most of my clients will not even see them or no mind them that much....I tell you...all i get is wows.

Don't have experience with other video cameras so far...but you can't deny they have a strong impact.

my 1 cent

O

T2 - which continues to drop in price - remains the best bang for the buck camera in the world.

Here's the thing - get the T2 and start buying good glass. The glass will be keep its value, both money-wise and quality of use wise.

It makes pretty pictures, esp if you aren't trying to shoot LAWRENCE OF ARABIA style wide shots. People just like the way it looks - and that counts a ton. People here care about stats - most clients in the real world don't.

I'll add another 2 cents...up until a month ago, I'd say 90% of my projects were either web or DVD delivery. The dslrs and my previous camcorder (hmc150) were overkill and looked great scaled down. I have since picked up a pair of regular gigs for HD broadcast and that's what prompted the upgrade to the XF300. I have since become hyper-critical of the quality I'm pushing out the door and the dslrs do hold up except for the issues I've mentioned, but the main thing that keeps me tied to the camcorder is convenience and ease of use. I just finished editing one of the broadcast show segments which was shot on the XF, my 7D and a friends 5D. The big things I noticed on the dslr footage which was covering closeups (on a tripod) was that focusing was a bit off at times. Not by much but even at f5.6 it was a problem on certain shots and caused me to edit around them. For web, I'd say the shots were fine...but when viewing the HD on a 32" Sony LED, stuck right out!

That's what I also found using my Sony Z5 and my 550D. So much easier to just pick up my Z5 and start shooting where as it's a pain with the 550D. Of Course the quality of the 550D is great. As Robert said and I agree with him the DSLA is a supplementary camera.

Stelios