Upgrading T2i Body..

openmindportrait

openmindportrait

Active member
I have been considering a 7D for some time now as well as a 5D Mk3. I mainly shoot video and have also had my eyes on the Panasonic AF100 but I dont know if I want to use a 4/3rds sensor. Do any of you guys have any solid recommendations
 
Oh and to add! I am mainly looking for better build quality and better light sensitivity... Not necessarily for expanded video options past what a T2i has to offer. Preferably not a fullframe simply because I dont want to sell my Tokina 11-16 which would be less than ideal on a fullframe body.
 
You realize the 5d m3 is a full frame right? also, the cost difference between the 7d and 5d m3, even 5d m2 is significant...
 
the t2i build quality really isn't that bad, it's also weather-proof as far as I'm concerned. Mine's been really wet filming skiing and I've never had a problem. I can understand upgrading because you want better low-light performance, but to me, the only situations that you'd need good low-light are when the subject should be lit anyways. I vote to keep the t2i and invest in better glass
 
You don't seem to have much of a justification here, you just want your image/video to get better so you're upgrading. Fuck that. t2i is the same as the 7d, not even worth it. Then, you're talking about like a $3k price jump, can you even afford it? Do you NEED it? the t2i with a fast lens is solid in low light IMO.

If you're actually serious about an upgrade, post your budget, post what you're going to be doing and why you think the t2i doesn't work for you and we can have a more serious talk. Otherwise, keep your t2i.
 
for the love of god don't upgrade from a T2i to a 7D if you're doing video. and yeah, it doesn't seem like you actually know why you need to upgrade.

and don't buy the af100, what a waste of money.
 
My budget is 4 - 5k and I will be shooting action sports primarily mountain biking. My T2i is not handling the dark environment presented by the forests at all the trails I shoot athletes at so low light capability is key. I would always like 1080 at 60 and would like to save some of that budget for another lens.
 
Alright Abe lets play nice. I understand that and I wasn't quite clear in my explanation in what I was looking for in an upgrade. Better build quality is always nice but from experience in having my t2i drenched in rain I understand it isn't 100% necessary.
 
WTF lens are you using? You shouldn't be having lowlight issues during the day, even in the forest...

If you really wanna upgrade, id get the gh3 if I were you.
 
the af100 sucks for low light, the 7d is not an upgrade, the 5d2 is better, the 5d3 or fs100 will fit your needs best. I'd suggest the fs100 as it has 1080p60, and you can use your 11-16 using the metabones adapter!
 
Really about the Af100... I have a friend who absolutely adores his and shoots MTB up in BC and is coming from a T2i. He couldnt shut up about the lowlight. Thanks for the good answer. Dont get many of those!
 
Yeah I'm also wondering what lens you're using. As long as you're outside in the daylight, you should be having no problems whatsoever getting enough light. You'll get better low light with a full frame or something like the FS100, but it's not going to be THAT much better.
 
Lets not kid ourselves will... lol. t2i iso 1600 max or fs100 iso 8000 max (10,000 or 12800 if you de-noise)
 
yeah but I mean if somebody is struggling to get enough light (in daylight) with the T2i, I think there's a different problem going on there that the FS100 won't suddenly fix
 
ah for sure, it was believable considering there are some situations where you can get a reasonably decent image out of the FS100 but wouldn't be able to see shit with a T2i
 
I've seen some of your edits on pinkbike and don't exactly think your quality of work justifies you dropping 4-5k on your equipment just yet...
 
I don't understand the harm. I have personal finances to do so??? Also if you kept track recently my latest edit was featured on the front cover of pinkbike thee other day??? I can see where your coming from but at the same time I dont see why that would be of your concern.
 
11-16 f/2.8 70-200 f/4 and 17-55 f/2.8 and not exactly in daylight. Your from the NW so just think deep rainy forest. It was dark enough to the point where even 1600 ISO at 2.8 wasn't cutting it. I know that sounds ridiculous but yeah.
 
because everyone on ns who doesn't have the money to upgrade on a whim is jealous of those who do
 
It was its own article. Look for Kevin Littlefield World Cup Aspirations... I had great light when shooting that but limited time made for some compromising on some of the shots quality... Not my best work by any means but ehh I got front cover! Stoked for sure!
 
I liked the style it was shoot in but could have been executed better. Getting any thing on the front page is an achievement.
 
My thoughts exactly... There were time constraints and as stoked as I am I wish I could have had a few more hours to perfect a few of those shots.
 
or because we are doubting whether someone really knows what they are doing when considering a switch from a t2i to a 7d as un upgrade.
 
I'm sure there are a few people out there who don't keep up with camera tech, not saying OP is one but not everyone knows the 7d is no different from the t2i for video
 
That puts you down around EV 7 if you are properly exposed with those settings, kinda makes sense because it says bottom of rainforest canopy as a place where you would encounter this. How much low light shooting do you do? It doesn't seem like a lighting kit will be all that practical in your situation
 
Well I did know that they were the same for video before creating the thread... That is well known. I really just wanted to get more or less a confirmation that even with the money to upgrade that a 7D should be ruled out...
 
Yeah a 7D would just make your light situation worse, poor noise handling.

Honestly based on what you've said, I think you're going to have to go the route of a 5D mk3 or an FS100. I would take the FS100 over the 5D any day, but that's up to you.
 
-_________________-

You own 3 nice canon lenses and you're saying the fs100 is more justifiable than the 5d? dude you fucking suck.

Yeah, you can use canon lenses on the fs100, but its expensive. The 5d is like 3k while the fs100 is 4100. I dont think you should just be getting an fs100, but if thats what you really want then go for it.
 
Evan he owns crop lenses, if he went 5d3 he'd have to get rid of everything other than his 70-200.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top