HV30 or T2i

[kaydawgy]

Don't buy either! Buy an Hv10

[Janke]

My t2i was quite shaky as my zoomlens had no IS.

Oh, certainly!

The hv20 was actually a little sharper and could zoom in a little more

The "sharpness" can be adjusted on both cameras.
The HV has a full-frame lens equivalent of 44-440mm, while the 70-210 on the T2i is equivalent to 112-336mm.

use the t2i primarily for pictures.

It's really good for video, too, but not in the circumstances you tested it. Is shooting videos at max tele what you will be doing mostly?

[jet]

This last weekend I did some comparison of my t2i with a 70-210 4.0 canon zoomlens and the hv20. I mostly shot fall tree foliage at about 300-1000 ft distance. Somehow I expected that the t2i would easily beat the hv20 but to my surprise, the difference was minimal. The hv20 was actually a little sharper and could zoom in a little more, and was certainly easier to hold steady. My t2i was quite shaky as my zoomlens had no IS. Made me feel much better about the HV20 and use the t2i primarily for pictures.

If you want sharper film from T2i/550Ds the sharpness setting has to be at least on number 5, on that setting i get as sharp film as my HVs, i use a tamron 24-300mm a lot and that has as wide a range as the HV.

[krewcial]

I'm currently shooting a BTS/making of for a feature film. Shooting everything with a T2i, mainly with a Sigma 24-70.
For really wide shots or cramped locations I use a Zenitar 16mm (the crop factor makes it less fisheye, which is a good thing), I also take a Mamiya Sekor 55mm 1.4 with me for early morning or night shots.

Being able to get the DOF I want when I want it, made me choose the T2i. I still have my HV30, but the only time I use it is as the overview camera when doing weddings or as the static camera recording the 2 dance shows I do per year.

I have a Steadicam JR and a shoulder rig for the T2i, but for my documentary work I always use my monopod ... I need to travel light since part of the shoot takes place in France and Spain.

If I had to choose 1 camera today I'd buy a T2i and deal with the shortcomings (the 12 minute limit, no manual control over audio). The image quality compensates those shortcomings to me. And of course the ability to change lenses.

[dWyZaK]

Ive been doing some behind the scenes 'making of' work with my HV20 and feel there is no way I could of been as creative and spontaneous if i'd been using my 550d, though now you have mentioned a monopod im intrigued as I can see myriad benefits, interesting.

[vince]

Maybe simple minded, but comparing a sucker of a telelens on a t2i and a regular hv20 easily creates the expectation that you would see a major difference in picture quality. Not so. We had locally the world equestrian games, so I was taping horse riding covering a distance from 50 feet to 300 feet. Having a manual zoom was workable but keeping the picture in focus and stable would have been easier with the hv20. Using a tripod as a monopod worked ok, but when the whole bleacher wobbles when everybody moves, a stable shot is going to require some work in after effects.

[Janke]

I agree. Autofocus and stabilization is quite necessary in a case like yours.

OTOH, the HV's lens has quite a bit of chromatic aberration at its longest tele setting; I've got much cleaner shots with my cheap 70-300 mm Tamron on the T2i. But that's with stationary subjects, and a tripod...

[krewcial]

Maybe simple minded, but comparing a sucker of a telelens on a t2i and a regular hv20 easily creates the expectation that you would see a major difference in picture quality. Not so. We had locally the world equestrian games, so I was taping horse riding covering a distance from 50 feet to 300 feet. Having a manual zoom was workable but keeping the picture in focus and stable would have been easier with the hv20. Using a tripod as a monopod worked ok, but when the whole bleacher wobbles when everybody moves, a stable shot is going to require some work in after effects.

For that kind of event you need a decent tripod with a good video head. Regardless of the camera.

[jptmedia]

Just to reiterate what others have said. I own an HV20 and an T2i. I prefer using the T2i overall, because it is the camera I bought first and learned to got used to. But it has its cons.

For audio I use a Azden SGM-1X into a Zoom H1. Which gives me very nice audio for under $250. But that also means I have to sync in post.

But sometimes I shoot freelance sports videos for the local news websites. And the T2i is terrible for that. I always have to use my HV20.

So I would agree, keep your HV30 and purchase a T2i if you can afford it. Its great for a lot of things and terrible for a lot of things.

[Charter]

I just finished a 11 minutes documentary using HV20 and a DSLR (Pentax K-X with the 50mm 1.4).
.
I ran a clip mic to the HV20 and used manual audio setting. I ended up using, out of many hours of recording (total 11 people) only 2 seconds of footage from the HV20 - no kidding! The crazy shallow DOF made the background not distracting so people can concentrate on the story. I have 2 HV20 and a HG10. I am thinking of buying either the T2i or 60D by selling the K-x and one HV20. But the built-in-camera-body Shake-Reduction of the K-x make me hesitate A LOT! I think I will wait until C'mas deals come long ...

[Janke]

and the built in mic is also very good

No.

[Timbit]

Much better than XSI's.

The XSi doesn't have video.

[Flipzide]

The XSi doesn't have video.

i'm pretty sure that he was referring to the LCD screen.

The t2i's lcd screen is amazing. Very vibrant and lots of pixels. Much better than XSI's.

[Timbit]

i'm pretty sure that he was referring to the LCD screen.

I get it now. It should have been compared to Canon's previous Rebel though, as the XSi is a few years older...

[jonesanderson13]

My friend has purchased the Canon T2i and I was just playing with his camera found the images just a bit too soft for me. Since image quality is the thing I was looking for I went with Canon. Along with best image quality some of the best point are ability to shoot HD video and also has excellent macro mode.
The camera is very small and light and It has Superb image quality in both photos and video and the built in mic is also very good.

[Janke]

the built in mic is also very good.

No.

[AJUK]

The main advantages of a DSLR are the ease of manual control and therefore the control over dof, and the superb low light performance.
A camcorder like the HV is an equally valid choice, and ideally you would have both cameras to give maximum flexability.

[Janke]

I was just playing with his camera found the images just a bit too soft for me

Entirely adjustable - both contrast and sharpness, as well as saturation. You didn't play enough!

[mkkid28]

No.

The built in mic is decent enough with AGC disabled but yeah it's no where near as a good as a good quality external microphone, I wouldn't use the built in mic for any serious video work though. The built in mic with AGC disabled could work well enough for run and gun style stuff though.

[Janke]

How come that new member post looks like spam for a website... we don't shoot portraits much, we shoot video!

And the built-in mic is NOT very good, by the way...

EDIT: I see a mod removed the post I referred to, so this does not apply to post #44 above...

[krewcial]

thanks to Magic Lantern, the choice has become a lot easier : the T2i now has manual audio control & can film almost continuously.
Recently, I compared my T2i and HV30 for teleshots, and the footage from the T2i is way better, with little or no distortion or chromatic aberration. The HV30 footage simply can't compete once you start zooming in.
The T2i has dropped in price too BTW, over here in Europe it now costs 575 EUR (body only).

[drapeama]

The built in mic is decent enough with AGC disabled but yeah it's no where near as a good as a good quality external microphone...

And the built-in mic is NOT very good, by the way...

Here's something I shot "on-the-fly" and all I had was the "built-in" mic of the T2i, with ML installed and AGC disabled. Analog Gain set to 32db and digital set to 0db (both L/R):


I think it doesn't sound "that bad" for something shot "on-the-fly".

[Janke]

I think it doesn't sound "that bad" for something shot "on-the-fly".

Dang, I've got better audio than that with my shirt-pocket Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5 ...

... and this even though its AGC is always on... uploading a demo right now:

[racer-x]

Dang.....Deep Purple. That song is easily twice as old as the kid playing it.

But seriously, I wouldn't use 32 decibels gain with AIG disabled, I would keep it at the default 6 decibels and amplify in post. Less chance of clipping that way.

[drapeama]

But seriously, I wouldn't use 32 decibels gain with AIG disabled, I would keep it at the default 6 decibels and amplify in post. Less chance of clipping that way.

Thanks for the tip. I'll try that. In fact I was affraid that being lower than this, it wouldn't be high enough and after normalization, it would be more noisy than anything else.
I'll try that.