Upgrading T2i Body..

I guess you're right, I assumed the 17-55 worked but now I realize thats an ef-s lens. I just dont think this kid even know what the fuck he's doing when hes OUTSIDE DURING THE DAY and he's having lowlight problems. I was born in the PWN I know what a dark forest looks like, its still the fucking day time. People used to shoot that shit with old ass cameras that did NOT have the low light ability of the t2i.
 
the numbers he's saying seem legit, the exposure chart I looked at backs it up. Getting f1.4 primes would be cool, but expensive and likely impractical (if they are not in the same range). fs100 with a metabones adapter is probably the best solution if he is doing mostly available light shooting.
 
buying a 35mm 1.4 or an old vintage 50mm 1.4 would be a hell of alot easier than buying a whole new setup. For super wide stuff, ya its more limited but I feel like this kid is just trying to cop out and buy a new setup when he doesn't need one. Just frustrating to see kids who don't really know what they're doing NOT heeding the advice of the people who do. oh well, let him spend 5k on a new setup. Apparently he doesn't need to pay for anything else in his life, which is the only thing i'm jealous about.
 
But you don't need a fuckjng fs100 either. You know it's okay to shoot at ISO 1600 or 3200 if you have to.... You probably had it at 50, lol.
 
Honestly, m4/3 is better than Canon's APS-C sensors. I sold my 7D for a GH2 and I don't regret it one minute. The m4/3 sensor is much better/cleaner in low light, and the noise in general is monochromatic and more natural looking than the typical rainbow noise Canon is infamous for. Plus you can use Canon FD lenses which are dirt cheap and remarkable.
 
This is a indeed a huge deal. That's the only thing I don't like about my 5D. The noise has so many colors; I think rainbow noise is a great term.

Really looking forward to getting a GH2. The only thing I don't know yet is how I'm going to shoot wide shots. Or maybe borrow a APS-C sized DSLR or something.
 
Have you picked up a 2nd body for photo? I really want the GH2, but I love taking pictures/doing timelapse every once in a while. And to be honest, i dont want to carry around 2 bodies. This is what makes me want to wait for the GH3. Options...options...options..
 
I haven't tried timelapse, but I took some photos with it for the first time and I was impressed. I don't know why people think a t2i is better for photos... I was at a nearly pitch-black bar shooting at ISO 160 an the image came out super clean. Very fs100-y, only not quite as sensitive. And even if you need that sensitivity, you can do the noise hack and get fs100 lowlight capabilities.

The GH3 is supposed to be a better still camera, and because of that there are certain video aspects that are inferior to the GH2, so I'm not really interested.
 
What are those aspects that are inferior? Im guessing worse low light performance, but i cant really think of anything else.
 
Because they had to implement a higher MP sensor, they also had to change their scaling methods for video mode. It doesn't use the same organic sampling method as the GH2, instead it uses line skipping like the Canons, although much more efficiently.

Of course, I will withhold judgment until I actually work with one, and from the reports it isn't nearly as bad as the Canons, but still kind of a bummer since with the GH2 I can shoot deep focus on just about anything and be 100% confident that there will be no moiré. With the GH3 you at least need to be somewhat mindful of it when working with fine detail. And while there are other obvious strengths over the GH2 such as smoother gradients, If I had to pick between dealing with banding or dealing with moiré I would personally choose banding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top