View Full Version : Canon 550D... will i regret it?


corpustle
11-28-2010, 06:34 PM
I'm considering buying a 550d but am worried i'll regret not spending more and getting the 7d. If anyone could give me their experiences of both that would be awesome!

I'm looking to mainly shoot shorts, possibly a feature and some corporate work.

Thanks :)

chilipie
11-28-2010, 06:57 PM
Main advantages of the 7D are better build quality/weatherproofing and HD out while recording, so you have high enough resolution to pull focus from a monitor. Have you considered meeting halfway with the 60D?

Grand Upper
11-28-2010, 06:59 PM
Yeah 60D or 5D are better if you can afford it, but I doubt you'd ever be disappointed w/ a 550d - they're exceptional value for money.

FrankLad
11-28-2010, 07:00 PM
Hi corpustle!

I own a Canon 7D. Purchased it back before I'd seen t2i vs. 7D video quality tests.

It seems the two are pretty much indistinguishable in terms of video quality.

For what it's worth, I halfway regret having not known more about the t2i then, because I would more than likely have purchased a t2i and put that extra $800 bucks toward a lens or 24-bit audio recorder.

Now, I can't say I totally regret the 7D. It is indeed built like a tank and feels quite substantial when holding it, and there are other benefits, but again - we're really only talking in terms of video capability. The t2i is a very capable camera!

Hope this info helps your decision.

Cracker Funk
11-28-2010, 08:09 PM
I've got a friend who owns the 7D. He regrets his purchase. We used both of our cameras (I have the T2i/550D) on our most recent shoot. Footage is indistinguishable.

Get the 7D if you're a serious photographer. If this is for filmmaking only, 550D.

NickClapper
11-28-2010, 08:15 PM
I think the crucial thing that it comes down to is what you want to use the camera for.

Filming- 550D (as value for money)
Stills- 7D

Pretty simple? :P

Sweeney Jet
11-28-2010, 09:04 PM
I'm sold. What type of lens should I get with t2i?

Grand Upper
11-28-2010, 09:08 PM
Kit lens is a good allrounder.

1.8 50mm Prime is a great first lens; although the 1.4 50mm is better if you can afford it.

Sweeney Jet
11-28-2010, 09:13 PM
I'm pretty new to photography. Can you link a good site that tells me what 1.8 50mm Prime and other lens I don't know is used for and for what type of feel? Thanks.

Grand Upper
11-28-2010, 09:20 PM
The 'prime' means it's a set look; there is no zooming on it.

The 1.8 50mm prime is great for low lighting (1.8 aperture - lower the more light comes in) and provides a very shallow depth of field (great for close ups etc). I have this lens on my 550d and I absolutely love it.

For more lens information, check out http://nofilmschool.com/dslr/lenses-primes-brands/

IndieBudget
11-28-2010, 09:27 PM
I'm pretty new to photography. Can you link a good site that tells me what 1.8 50mm Prime and other lens I don't know is used for and for what type of feel? Thanks.


here is what I shot today w/ my T2i. w/ a 24mm wide lens and a 135mm lens. I did not move the cam from one cut to the other. Notice the perspective compression in the 2nd half from using the long lens ( 135 )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCynmugeFK0

Cracker Funk
11-28-2010, 09:33 PM
I do think the 60D is at least worth considering.

Justice
11-28-2010, 11:36 PM
I do think the 60D is at least worth considering.

I wish the 60d was the price it is now when I got the 550d. Flip out LCD would be peachy keen.

escher
11-28-2010, 11:40 PM
Getting some decent prime lenses is a good idea but be warned that if you're shooting at a wide aperture like 2.0 or less you may have some trouble keeping your subjects in focus since the focus plane will be razor thin. (I had this problem with the 1.8 50mm lens even for stills.)

I have a Tameron 90mm f2.8 that gives absolutely beautiful imagery and highly recommend it for a medium telephoto lens for crop-factor cameras. A 50mm prime will give you great character shots and the cheaper 35mm prime is an excellent "normal" lens. I don't have a wide-angle prime yet since those tend to be quite expensive.

corpustle
11-29-2010, 06:33 AM
Very interesting guys! The 60D does seem like a very nice go between! I have a sony DSLR at the mo and LOVE having the tilting LCD screen and i can imagine it being hugely helpful while shooting video. I was wondering quickly about the kit lens', is there a noticeable quality difference between the 18-55, and the 18-135?

escher
11-29-2010, 10:58 AM
I was wondering quickly about the kit lens', is there a noticeable quality difference between the 18-55, and the 18-135?

In general, the less the range of the lens, the higher the quality of image you'll get. While the zoom lenses are more versatile, the best quality images will come from prime lenses that don't zoom at all. I've also noticed that the zoom lenses that go wide tend to have a little more distortion around the edges. I discovered this when comparing my 15-85 set at 35mm against my 35mm prime.

The 18-55 is a good little lens for the cost. The 50mm 2.8 macro is also a very good lower-cost lens and I strongly recommend it.

Be aware that it can be tough to keep proper focus when looking at the camera's LCD screen, so I'd stay away from apertures lower than 2.0. I've been trying to make a short by myself, and even with a tripod and focus target I've managed a lot of slightly-out-of-focus shots.

corpustle
11-29-2010, 02:49 PM
Yeah i got a few nice Nikon lens', the adapters any good?

Thanks for this though guys cause the 60D really looks like a good way for me to go!

IndieBudget
11-29-2010, 03:26 PM
I now know to stay away from the FD lenses for canon EOS. I have success w/ Contax / Yaschica adapters and I have read good stuff and seen impressive footage w/ Nikon adapters for Canon EOS cams

Sam K
11-29-2010, 05:27 PM
Of what I've seen this is the "low cost" camera to have.
Well for me it'd be the most expensive thing i'd have bought ever but that's not the point. Maan can't wait until next summer to work a few weeks to get this.

Milk
12-08-2010, 12:26 PM
bare in mind the 50 mm F1.4 on the 550D will actually be a 70mm because of the crop factor caused by the sensor being 4/3 and the lens being made for the full frame cameras

the 50mm F1.8 on the other hand is the ef-s lens and will give you 50mm, but you lose that 0.2 stops and there is nicer bokeh on the F1.4 due to more blades. but you'd expect that from a lens that is thrice the price.

i have the F1.4 and i'm getting the F1.8 from christmas for my 500D

the 1.4 cannon is a really nice lens, checkout my flickr for examples www.flickr.com/photos/bigmikeyeah (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigmikeyeah)
most of my recent stuff is with the 50 EF F1.4 prime lens, apart from the two most recent of the face in the water.

:)

chilipie
12-08-2010, 01:27 PM
bare in mind the 50 mm F1.4 on the 550D will actually be a 70mm because of the crop factor caused by the sensor being 4/3 and the lens being made for the full frame cameras

the 50mm F1.8 on the other hand is the ef-s lens and will give you 50mm, but you lose that 0.2 stops and there is nicer bokeh on the F1.4 due to more blades. but you'd expect that from a lens that is thrice the price.

i have the F1.4 and i'm getting the F1.8 from christmas for my 500D

the 1.4 cannon is a really nice lens, checkout my flickr for examples www.flickr.com/photos/bigmikeyeah (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigmikeyeah)
most of my recent stuff is with the 50 EF F1.4 prime lens, apart from the two most recent of the face in the water.

:)

Not true, I'm afraid. The 550D has an APS-C sensor (which is a bit bigger than 4/3" - a crop factor of 2x), with a crop factor of 1.6x over full frame. A 50mm lens on a 550D has the same field of view as an 80mm lens on a FF camera, though it's still a 50mm lens (with the same depth of field characteristics).

Canon do not make an EF-S 50mm lens. All of their 50mm lenses can be used on any EF camera, including full-frame ones. The crop factor still applies to EF-S lenses - the reason they are not usable on FF cameras is because they do not project a large enough image to cover the whole sensor, and so there would be severe vignetting. The 1.4 is two thirds of a stop faster than the 1.8, as the f-scale is a logarithmic rather than linear one.

Sorry, I feel a bit mean now, I just don't want people to end up buying things based on misinformation :) You have some lovely photos on your flickr account by the way, that icy face one is brilliant!

Milk
12-08-2010, 07:38 PM
Not true, I'm afraid. The 550D has an APS-C sensor (which is a bit bigger than 4/3" - a crop factor of 2x), with a crop factor of 1.6x over full frame. A 50mm lens on a 550D has the same field of view as an 80mm lens on a FF camera, though it's still a 50mm lens (with the same depth of field characteristics).

Canon do not make an EF-S 50mm lens. All of their 50mm lenses can be used on any EF camera, including full-frame ones. The crop factor still applies to EF-S lenses - the reason they are not usable on FF cameras is because they do not project a large enough image to cover the whole sensor, and so there would be severe vignetting. The 1.4 is two thirds of a stop faster than the 1.8, as the f-scale is a logarithmic rather than linear one.

Sorry, I feel a bit mean now, I just don't want people to end up buying things based on misinformation :) You have some lovely photos on your flickr account by the way, that icy face one is brilliant!

Touché sir. you are right, although now i am a bit gutted that it's not an ef-s :( don't want one anymore. Also thanks for clearing up the difference between 1.4 & 1.8 i wasn't sure how to word it, i guess it did seem misleading on retrospect, i'll just gtfo now :/

escher
12-08-2010, 07:57 PM
Hey, question here: for EF-S lenses, does the mm number actually correctly reflect what you see?

I don't have my camera handy, but would the 18-55 EF-S lens set to 50mm give you a different image than a 50mm EF lens?

BTW, the 50mm f1.8 is cheaply built and a lot of them have manufacturing defects. I threw mine away. The 50mm f1.4 is a beautiful lens and worth every penny.

chilipie
12-08-2010, 08:01 PM
Touché sir. you are right, although now i am a bit gutted that it's not an ef-s :( don't want one anymore. Also thanks for clearing up the difference between 1.4 & 1.8 i wasn't sure how to word it, i guess it did seem misleading on retrospect, i'll just gtfo now :/

Don't worry about it mate, just thought I should clear things up :) If you want a 50mm equivalent, have a look at the 35mm f/2, 28mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/1.8… I'm looking at getting the 1.8 when Warehouse Express get them back in stock. There's also a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, but it won't work on FF cameras and the Canon 1.8 is supposedly a bit better.


Hey, question here: for EF-S lenses, does the mm number actually correctly reflect what you see?

I don't have my camera handy, but would the 18-55 EF-S lens set to 50mm give you a different image than a 50mm EF lens?

BTW, the 50mm f1.8 is cheaply built and a lot of them have manufacturing defects. I threw mine away. The 50mm f1.4 is a beautiful lens and worth every penny.

It doesn't matter what the mount is, a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens. The number on the lens is its actual focal length, not the 35mm equivalent. Obviously things like distortion and colour fringing will vary (with both being more prevalent on zooms than on primes), but the field of view will not change.

I haven't heard anything about manufacturing defects in the 50mm f/1.8. They're certainly not very sturdy compared to their bigger brother, but optically it's great value for money.