I really really want to get a camera so I can starting shooting on my own and am seriously considering a T2i. The footage I have seen looks incredible and for less than $800 the camera seems like a steal. I am ok with the 12 minute shoot limit. I just want to know if the camera is ready to shoot out of the box? Will I have to buy a lens immediately or is it something I can hold off on while I learn my camera?
T2i Shootable out of box?
- Thread starter Columbus
- Start date
Think of the camera as a brain. And the lens as an eye.
You're brain needs an eye connected to it to see an image.
So, as chili said, you need at least one.
Usually, the more expensive the lens, the better it sees.
You're brain needs an eye connected to it to see an image.
So, as chili said, you need at least one.
Usually, the more expensive the lens, the better it sees.
Thanks. I was looking at bhphoto at the t2i body and wasn't sure if it absolutely needed a lens or not. The camera that comes with the kit lens is only $800 which is a steal in my book. Severely tempted to purchase it just hesitant to transfer funds. Might sleep on it for 24 hours. I've been watching videos on youtube all day from this camera and all the images are sooo beautiful.
No harm in thinking about it for a couple of days.
Just remember, to get great pics out of it, ull need a better lens than the kit lens. But with good lighting, you can get impressive results out of it.
What you can do is type t2i and a specific lens into google, youtube, vimeo and check out the difference between them. This way you'll have a better idea of what kind of quality you can expect with which lens (providing you know your lighting.)
Just remember, to get great pics out of it, ull need a better lens than the kit lens. But with good lighting, you can get impressive results out of it.
What you can do is type t2i and a specific lens into google, youtube, vimeo and check out the difference between them. This way you'll have a better idea of what kind of quality you can expect with which lens (providing you know your lighting.)
Thanks a lot. I probably won't get a good lens for a while as I need to save up for a new computer and some editing software. Plus I need to figure out how the camera works since I am still new to actually filming I still don't really have an eye for it yet and probably wouldn't be able to appreciate the difference between the kit lens and a $1000 super deluxe ultra lens. That is one thing I do like about this camera though is that as my skills grow I can upgrade and let this camera grow with me.
You're welcome. Sounds like you have a good approach.
Goodluck and i look forward to seeing some tests and shorts by you in the future.
Goodluck and i look forward to seeing some tests and shorts by you in the future.
Actually, now that I think about it, can I talk you into spending just $100 more?
If you were, for some reason, limited to only one lens, there are many people on this forum who would argue for the Canon 50mm f1.8. With that lower f-stop, you'll be able to get a more shallow depth of field, and the ability to shoot in lower light. And aren't those two major reasons why everybody is swooping up these cameras?
Me however, in this nifty fifty vs. kit lens debate, I would side on the kit lens. Personally, I just can't imagine doing a shoot without a wide lens. In my book, it's just flat-out a necessity. Especially as an ultra-low-budget filmmaker, your location isn't always ideal; you often have to settle for what's available, not what you want. And in those situations, you might be in cramped quarters, or maybe you want a shot from a particular angle, and the only way to get it is with a wide lens. I wouldn't want to go without it, ever.
Thing is, though, do you really need to limit yourself to one lens? We're talking a measly stinking $100. Even if you're a minimum-wage worker, that's just a couple days' work. So, my vote is for both.
If you were, for some reason, limited to only one lens, there are many people on this forum who would argue for the Canon 50mm f1.8. With that lower f-stop, you'll be able to get a more shallow depth of field, and the ability to shoot in lower light. And aren't those two major reasons why everybody is swooping up these cameras?
Me however, in this nifty fifty vs. kit lens debate, I would side on the kit lens. Personally, I just can't imagine doing a shoot without a wide lens. In my book, it's just flat-out a necessity. Especially as an ultra-low-budget filmmaker, your location isn't always ideal; you often have to settle for what's available, not what you want. And in those situations, you might be in cramped quarters, or maybe you want a shot from a particular angle, and the only way to get it is with a wide lens. I wouldn't want to go without it, ever.
Thing is, though, do you really need to limit yourself to one lens? We're talking a measly stinking $100. Even if you're a minimum-wage worker, that's just a couple days' work. So, my vote is for both.
I've got both the kit & the 1.8 50mm. They both have uses, but tbh 80%+ of the time I'll use the 50mm. I just think it's plain better.
+1 for the body + 50mm f/1.8 lens if $800 is the budget.
Don't forget a memory card.
Also, don't plan on having good audio with that camera. Audio requires a separate recorder+microphone.
Don't forget a memory card.
Also, don't plan on having good audio with that camera. Audio requires a separate recorder+microphone.
Is this the 50 mm lens you were talking about http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html ?
Probably.
Neat lens, didn't realize it was such a pancake. Anyone with one care to share their focus pulling tricks with it? There are other 50s, but they cost more and don't offer much more ring than this one (and a couple are slower, interestingly enough).
As far as "Out of the Box." As long as your box came with a lens, you can "Com-mence Ta' Jigglin!!!" (bonus points for recognizing that quote). I will say though that I would almost just work with the kit zoom for your first few tries, then start spending cash on extras like that lens.
FWIW:
Just about any prime (single focal length) lens is going to make a "nicer" image than the kit zoom - but since you are just starting out you might get more mileage tackling some of the other shortfalls of the platform, like sound. Lenses can come later. Lenses, when bought over time, will FAR outstrip the price of your camera body, and with a bit of forethought should last you from one camera body to the next. It's great to grab a few, but as a total newbie - managing lens changes is just going to slow you down and make you think about it too much. Plenty of other aks that you will want as well - tripod with a decent fluid drag head, or maybe some sort rigging for adding hand-held stability, and so on. Extra batteries, a decent case of some sort, perhaps a bit of low-budget lighting equipment. AKS will fill up that $100 bucks pretty quickly.
Honestly if it were a choice between an inexpensive 50mm lens to add to the kit, or a used boom mic and breakoutbox that will let you take said mic and plug it into the t2i - I'd probably go for the audio first just for usability. If you really start wanting more range in your glass, shops will rent you lenses as you need, many of which will apply some level of the rental to a purchase. You could still get that lens (it *is* only $100 bucks after all), but not the end of the world if you wait a bit for a nicer one while filling in the gaps on the other aspects of the camera.
Last edited:
The 50mm's a great, cheap lens, but there's no way I'd have it as the only one - on the 550D it's a moderate telephoto, so no use at all if you want a wide shot indoors. David gives very good advice; get the kit lens, sort out audio and a tripod and then have a think about upgrading your lenses.
Even thought the prime may be better, if you are going to have just one lens, i would make it the kit lens, because even though it may be worse, it will give you more range to begin with.
EDIT: Eh, i just realized David said this. But yeah. Actually if you can spare another 99usd, get the kit and the 50mm 1.8. It'll be a good starting point.
EDIT: Eh, i just realized David said this. But yeah. Actually if you can spare another 99usd, get the kit and the 50mm 1.8. It'll be a good starting point.
Last edited:
Oh, I kind of assumed tripod was already taken care of. If you have to choose between a good tripod, and a second lens, tripod wins, hands-down.
So, when I was first learning the ropes, I captured audio by running a $30 mic directly into my camera, unbalanced. It certainly didn't sound good, but it sounded less-worse than the in-cam mic (and it wasn't so bad as to be distracting -- I won local festival awards with this setup). But that was a prosumer camcorder, with better audio than the T2i. I'm curious to hear what this same setup would sound like, on the T2i.
So, when I was first learning the ropes, I captured audio by running a $30 mic directly into my camera, unbalanced. It certainly didn't sound good, but it sounded less-worse than the in-cam mic (and it wasn't so bad as to be distracting -- I won local festival awards with this setup). But that was a prosumer camcorder, with better audio than the T2i. I'm curious to hear what this same setup would sound like, on the T2i.