# Canon T2i



## NPostalwait (Apr 16, 2012)

Thinking about upgrading my point n shoot to a Canon T2i. I am somewhat of a beginner to the DSLR cameras. before I move onto my question, going to let you all know what I do on a daily basis, also I am just making sure I am getting the correct camera for the job. I work for a local car dealership and am in the market for a new camera. I take about 300-500 photos a day, and that number can jump up to 800-900 easily, and have a photo booth setup as well. Now this is on a daily basis and our point and shoot cameras have been lasting us for about a year. This is why I am wanting to go to a professional grade camera, but is it going to be worth it in the long run? Or is there a better choice in camera, the reliability and quality is what I am looking for as well as price, not looking for the cheapest camera, but not the most expensive either.


----------



## fotomumma09 (Apr 16, 2012)

The T2i is NOT a professional dslr. It's an entry level camera.


----------



## nmoody (Apr 16, 2012)

As stated above the T2i is a entry level consumer DSLR camera. Its by no means bad, if fact I find it to be one of the better values for your dollar. Its just not technically professional. The difference between the T2i and professional are more advanced features, better build quality (metal bodies and sometimes weather sealing). 

Considering you have been using a P&S this is will more the exceeded your requirements. I dont think you will need any of the professional series features.


----------



## Jeff92 (Apr 16, 2012)

You failed to mention that the t2i has a crop sensor (1.6x) I believe compared to a full frame sensor in high end cameras such as the 7d and mark cameras.

Edit: my noob is showing.  Disregard this entire post as it is not here


----------



## NPostalwait (Apr 16, 2012)

Ok, well that is good to know. And I do not need a professional grade camera, just something that is going to last me longer than a point and shoot. Also I would like to have control over how my photo turns out. The point and shoot I have now has no options as far as shutter speed or aperture, or anything. The only option I have of course is the ISO. But for the money, if this T2i lasts at least 5 years, I can show my company the worth in going to a DSLR instead of a point and shoot. So would this be better money wise to go with a DSLR rather than a point and shoot? I am looking at about 300-400 every year on a point and shoot versus 650 ish on a DSLR every 5. That is of course if the DSLR will last that long. Or do you all have any opinions on a camera I should go with other than a DSLR?


----------



## Hickeydog (Apr 16, 2012)

Jeff92 said:


> You failed to mention that the t2i has a crop sensor (1.6x) I believe compared to a full frame sensor in high end cameras such as the 7d and mark cameras.



The 7D and T2i share the exact same sensor.  The only full frame cameras in the Canon lineup are the 1D and 5D series.

With that said, the difference between a "pro" camera and the T2i (as stated above) are the extra, dedicated buttons, metal frame, bigger body (the T2i is pretty small), and faster burst shooting, just to name a few.  However, you are far better off getting a T2i and getting some good glass instead of buying a more expensive body and cheaping out on the lens.

For "Studio" type work, where you can adjust, and reshoot and adjust some more, the T2i is just fine.  If you're going to be shooting sports indoors, then a pro grade camera (like the 5D) would be in order.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 16, 2012)

Consider this setup for versatility shooting cars and people:

T2i
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8

Cheap but effective.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 16, 2012)

Jeff92 said:


> You failed to mention that the t2i has a crop sensor (1.6x) I believe compared to a full frame sensor in high end cameras such as the 7d and mark cameras.


That is pretty much irrelevant to this thread.  Also, the 7D does not have a full frame sensor, and 'Mark' is not necessarily a indication of quality or level...just that it's the newer version of a camera with the same model number.



> Ok, well that is good to know. And I do not need a professional grade camera, just something that is going to last me longer than a point and shoot. Also I would like to have control over how my photo turns out. The point and shoot I have now has no options as far as shutter speed or aperture, or anything. The only option I have of course is the ISO. But for the money, if this T2i lasts at least 5 years, I can show my company the worth in going to a DSLR instead of a point and shoot. So would this be better money wise to go with a DSLR rather than a point and shoot? I am looking at about 300-400 every year on a point and shoot versus 650 ish on a DSLR every 5. That is of course if the DSLR will last that long. Or do you all have any opinions on a camera I should go with other than a DSLR?



Going with a DSLR does have many advantages, but most of them may or may not be directly applicable to your situation.  Although, one thing to keep in mind is that a typical DSLR is part of a system.  So the lens will be interchangeable and you could upgrade or replace the lens if needed.  On that point, the moving parts of a DSLR camera (the shutter & the mirror) can be serviced, repaired or replaced....usually for much less than the replacement value of the camera itself.  So as a long term investment, it's a much better option.  Also, a DSLR (and the lens, especially high quality lenses) will hold their value quite well.  So if the camera had to be sold in 3-5 years, it would still hold some value.  Where as a 3-5 year old point & shoot is practically worthless on the used market.

To be fair, most point & shoot cameras don't have mechanical shutters or mirrors, so they don't have the same moving parts to wear out.  I guess we should ask what it is that is causing you to replace the P&S cameras every year?

It sounds like you may be focused on quantity (of images) over quality...so like I said, many of the advantages of a DSLR might be wasted.  But you did mention full control over the camera, and any DSLR will certainly give you that.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 16, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Consider this setup for versatility shooting cars and people:
> 
> T2i
> Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8
> ...


I'd suggest that that combination would not be wide enough to shoot car interiors.  Heck, even the T2i with an 18-55mm might be tricky at times.


----------



## NPostalwait (Apr 16, 2012)

Thank you Mike, that helped out a lot. One of the selling points to me on a DSLR is that it can be serviced and be bought for cheaper than spending 300 a year on a P&S. Now that problems I am experiencing with the last 2 Nikon point and shoots that I have had( Coolpix P80 and Coolpix L120) is that I am have trouble getting a focused shot, mainly on the interior of the vehicle. Also having a problem with the photo being too dark on a few of my shots. Have adjusted the camera as much as I can and still cannot get a good lit photo even with the flash on. Keep in mind as well the shots I am talking about are me sitting in the back seat of the vehicle and getting a cockpit shot of the car as well as any extras that may be there such as Nav, Shifter if it not on the column, etc. As far as lenses gos, I will probably stick the the 18-55mm that comes with the camera for now until I learn more about the DSLR setup and features.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 16, 2012)

If your p+s is doing the trick but lasting a year I suggest you keep buying them. At 600 shots a day, taking weekends out you are above 100000 shots a year. Mid level canon dslrs are rated at 150000 shots (7d) I think. Entry level dslrs are not rated but may expect them to be 100000+, but still your into a year or two before there expected life goes with quite an extra premium for image quality that may not be needed. I suggest (if you really need the image q and the p+s are not suitable)you look into some mirrorless design cameras that have less moving parts (this was already hinted at above)and maybe will last longer, such as sony alpha35 or similar, maybe even some 4/3 systems


----------



## KmH (Apr 16, 2012)

Shutters can be replaced, at about $300 a pop, plus the time the camera has to be in the shop for the repair (at least a week plus shipping time 2 ways).

Whatever you get, get 2.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 16, 2012)

Another thing to consider, is that with a DSLR, your Depth of Field will naturally be shallower that with a P&S.  So it might actually be harder to get all of your car interiors into focus.  It's still possible, of course, but it would require smaller aperture settings, which would require more light and/or longer shutter speeds.

I'd guess that the best way to get better photos, would be to invest in some lighting and gain the knowledge on how to use it effectively.  Although, again...there is the issue of quantity over quality.  It sounds like you're shooting more than a photo per minute, constantly over an 8 hour work day.  You may not have time to set up lighting to get the quality that a photographer might want.  But if quantity is what you require, then that's what you have to do.

I'm not sure what to suggest, maybe you could rent/borrow a DSLR, just to see if it will help you get what you want.


----------



## hukim0531 (Apr 17, 2012)

There's lots of professionals here so I'll be brief with my 2 cents.  I have never put my pos through rigors of several hundred shots a day, but I remember they did not last very long, especially with the zoom mechanism.  I am most certain, you will get a lot more mileage with a DSLR compared to pos in both image quality and life expectancy.  If shutter mechanism ever fails out of warranty, as someone said above, it's only a $300 fix.  That is what you'd pay for a typical pos anyway.  So get something like a T2i and a large aperture wide (or ultra wide) angle zoom that fits your needs.  

As Mike said, DSLR photography is a system and you use different pieces that best fit the needs of specific situation.  With that said you might have to consider adding on other components that can 'improve' your shots.  You can probably live without them, as you did with pos, but quality does not come w/out cost.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Apr 30, 2012)

I currently have a couple of 1D bodies and 1Dmkll, which I use. I just bought a T2i as a backup for shooting some simple stuff, it has the 18-55mm. I have all the lenses I need, 70-200 2.8, 300 2.8 and a 4002.8,  I shoot sports. As I said the T2i, for the price, $650 and the 18MP is all I need for shooting any awards that may require a little flash fill. I think it's a pretty good little camera, as long as I don't bang it around too much.


----------



## Underdeveloped (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm with Hukim, there are a lot of pros here, but I'll chime in anyway: 
1. you may consider better glass, however, I know that these photos are always website pics.  So I suggest you stick with the kit 18-55; the increase in quality would be unapreciated for the $$ IMHO. if you're going to add a glass, I can see you needing wider lenses, as the crop sensor turns 55mm into 88mm.  Interior shots are a pain when you can't back up enough.  
2. T2i is a great camera. I suggest purchasing it from some place with ext warranty as your shutter counts are staggering. I don't think you'll get 5 years at 100000 a year, you will have to service it.  I have no experience with which place will get your camera back to you quickest, but it seems like money well spent.  
3. Renting is the best thing for you to see if a t2i can do the level of light that you need. 
Good luck!


----------



## TheKenTurner (Apr 30, 2012)

Am I the only one that thinks he should go with a 60D instead of a T2i?


----------



## belial (Apr 30, 2012)

TheKenTurner said:
			
		

> Am I the only one that thinks he should go with a 60D instead of a T2i?



Quite probably more money than he wants to spend. Also I don't see the advantage a 60d would give to shooting car interriors


----------



## hukim0531 (May 2, 2012)

belial said:


> TheKenTurner said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Viewfinder is brighter and those flippy screen probably come in very handy.


----------

