# Advice, Plz help [t2i]



## nsteezyy (Feb 4, 2012)

Im thinking of getting the t2i, but the thing is 
should i get the 18-55 EF-s lens with the t2i body? 
Or should i just get the T2i body, and then get a sigma 18-50mm 2.8?

And can you guys also recommend a few better lenses?


----------



## katerolla (Feb 4, 2012)

It's up to you but will you save much money doing that, I would go with the canon lens if it was for my camera another great cheap canon lens is the 50mm 1.8 its only $100 new


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 4, 2012)

I suggest the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8.


----------



## tyqre (Feb 4, 2012)

I would get the sigma because it will get annoying if you only have a 50mm lens. I have the 50mm but i also have a 80-270 and a 10-20 wide angle.. I would go with the sigma because it has the most options, and you also get the 50mm in the package. Ofcourse its not going to be as sharp as a prime but it will be fine.


----------



## nsteezyy (Feb 4, 2012)

katerolla said:


> It's up to you but will you save much money doing that, I would go with the canon lens if it was for my camera another great cheap canon lens is the 50mm 1.8 its only $100 new


 Yeah I was planning on getting the 50mm like after I get the camera



EchoingWhisper said:


> I suggest the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8.


Its a lovely lens but its outta my price range/:



tyqre said:


> I would get the sigma because it will get annoying if you only have a 50mm lens. I have the 50mm but i also have a 80-270 and a 10-20 wide angle.. I would go with the sigma because it has the most options, and you also get the 50mm in the package. Ofcourse its not going to be as sharp as a prime but it will be fine.


What do you mean?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 4, 2012)

Save more money for the 17-50mm 2.8! And why are you switching to Canon? XP


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 4, 2012)

Hey - Canon T2i vs Nikon D90


----------



## nsteezyy (Feb 4, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> Save more money for the 17-50mm 2.8! And why are you switching to Canon? XP


 Lol i would but ehh. Canon is just for recording.



EchoingWhisper said:


> Hey - Canon T2i vs Nikon D90


Lol i know, Ill use the D90 sometimes i still have it though.


----------



## Austin Greene (Feb 4, 2012)

I know its not what you were thinking, but I would save a bit and pick up the T3i instead, I did and I'd never go back. For the extra $80 you get a port for an external mic if your ever interested in some great video, along with the articulating screen which is a lifesaver for when you just can't get down to the level you want your camera at. There are also a few small changes to the camera's capabilities that often go unmentioned, such as improved audio metering in video mode. If there's one thing I really love about the T3i though, its the screen and being able to rotate it in (facing the body) to protect it when I wont need it for a period of time.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 5, 2012)

Why do even want to buy it? It's like downgrading your body. Is your body broken or what?  Or else I'd recommend you to buy a new lens for your D90.


----------



## nsteezyy (Feb 5, 2012)

togalive said:


> I know its not what you were thinking, but I would save a bit and pick up the T3i instead, I did and I'd never go back. For the extra $80 you get a port for an external mic if your ever interested in some great video, along with the articulating screen which is a lifesaver for when you just can't get down to the level you want your camera at. There are also a few small changes to the camera's capabilities that often go unmentioned, such as improved audio metering in video mode. If there's one thing I really love about the T3i though, its the screen and being able to rotate it in (facing the body) to protect it when I wont need it for a period of time.


 Ok i will think about that/



EchoingWhisper said:


> Why do even want to buy it? It's like downgrading your body. Is your body broken or what?  Or else I'd recommend you to buy a new lens for your D90.


What lenses,? 
I'm keeping my D90. but itll be used as my 2nd camera, I just need another camera for filming.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 6, 2012)

nsteezyy said:


> togalive said:
> 
> 
> > I know its not what you were thinking, but I would save a bit and pick up the T3i instead, I did and I'd never go back. For the extra $80 you get a port for an external mic if your ever interested in some great video, along with the articulating screen which is a lifesaver for when you just can't get down to the level you want your camera at. There are also a few small changes to the camera's capabilities that often go unmentioned, such as improved audio metering in video mode. If there's one thing I really love about the T3i though, its the screen and being able to rotate it in (facing the body) to protect it when I wont need it for a period of time.
> ...



A D5100 is also good, with the benefit of the ability to use your current lenses.


----------



## Crollo (Feb 9, 2012)

nsteezyy said:


> I just need another camera for filming.





			
				nsteezyy said:
			
		

> getting the t2i




Sigh.

Why did you buy your D90? Following your logic I'm surprised you didn't buy a video camera and only used the picture capture button on it.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 10, 2012)

And about the lens, but the lens as long the range as possible without being expensive, because of the low resolution, there's no difference between any sharper lens.


----------



## Dao (Feb 10, 2012)

nsteezyy said:


> Im thinking of getting the t2i, but the thing is
> should i get the 18-55 EF-s lens with the t2i body?
> Or should i just get the T2i body, and then get a sigma 18-50mm 2.8?
> 
> And can you guys also recommend a few better lenses?




If you are using it for video, maybe check out this site instead.

Canon T2i / T3i "Fast Lens" difference?

I believe you will get a better answer there since that site gears towards video instead of photography.


----------



## nsteezyy (Feb 11, 2012)

Crollo said:


> nsteezyy said:
> 
> 
> > I just need another camera for filming.
> ...


What do you mean? I use my D90 Really often, Its just I take film now so I wont be using it as much, and D90 isnt quite good with recording due to no AF in LV.



EchoingWhisper said:


> And about the lens, but the lens as long the range as possible without being expensive, because of the low resolution, there's no difference between any sharper lens.


 Yeah I kinda figured. I saw the reviews and some said the sigma wasn't any different to the stock 18-55



Dao said:


> nsteezyy said:
> 
> 
> > Im thinking of getting the t2i, but the thing is
> ...


Lol thanks, much appreciated.


----------



## daarksun (Feb 11, 2012)

Go with the T3i & the kit lens.  The 17-50mm 2.8 is awesome for shooting in low light and a nice DOF but the near $600 price tag is a bit stiff.  

you could also go for the t2i only and nab the Sigma 18-250 or the Tamron 18-270. Both are excellent lens and offer great quality shots with a nice range. Great for walking around or filming.  Neither will blow the doors off the wall at night, but the high iso ability of the camera you can still shoot at night.  If your planning to get the 50mm 1.8 you can definitely use that one at night with ease.


----------



## Crollo (Feb 11, 2012)

Photo cameras are designed to take photos, not videos. It might not matter all that much to you but most people buy video cameras for videography and photo cameras for photography.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 11, 2012)

Crollo said:


> Photo cameras are designed to take photos, not videos. It might not matter all that much to you but most people buy video cameras for videography and photo cameras for photography.



Photo cameras are a much cheaper option if you even want similar results with video cameras. That's why a lot of company have went the dSLR way instead of video camera way.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Feb 11, 2012)

nsteezyy said:


> Crollo said:
> 
> 
> > nsteezyy said:
> ...



Of course, the Sigma is sharper than the Nikon kit, but at 1080p (around 2 megapixels), you won't be able to see any difference in sharpness. Video don't really demand much from lens. Your best bet is to get the fastest lens and lens with the most zoom.


----------



## nsteezyy (Feb 11, 2012)

daarksun said:


> Go with the T3i & the kit lens.  The 17-50mm 2.8 is awesome for shooting in low light and a nice DOF but the near $600 price tag is a bit stiff.
> 
> you could also go for the t2i only and nab the Sigma 18-250 or the Tamron 18-270. Both are excellent lens and offer great quality shots with a nice range. Great for walking around or filming.  Neither will blow the doors off the wall at night, but the high iso ability of the camera you can still shoot at night.  If your planning to get the 50mm 1.8 you can definitely use that one at night with ease.


 Those lens look great but the price LOL.
My budget was around 800-850 so yeah



EchoingWhisper said:


> nsteezyy said:
> 
> 
> > Crollo said:
> ...


So is the kit lens the best way to go? Or should i go for the sigma. But i mean the kit lens makes it around 100 bucks more,


----------



## o hey tyler (Feb 11, 2012)

You're not going to want to use AF while filming anyway... Unless you're going to replace the audio. 

But I agree, Canon has better video support.


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2012)

Also check out this site for custom firmware.

Magic Lantern Firmware Wiki


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> Crollo said:
> 
> 
> > Photo cameras are designed to take photos, not videos. It might not matter all that much to you but most people buy video cameras for videography and photo cameras for photography.
> ...



This is what the folks from Magic Lantern said.

==================================================  ===========================
 These cameras are "game changing" for independent film makers:  

 It allows the use of a wide range of lenses (anything that can be adapted to the EF mount).
 The 5D's 35mm full-frame sensor is larger than the RED ONE's  sensor, Super 35 film. It is approximately the size of VistaVision. This  means shallower native depth-of-field than anything on the market,  except for the Phantom 65.
 The dynamic range and latitude are close to the capabilities of high-end HD cameras.
 The [video=vimeo;6602274]http://vimeo.com/6602274[/video] is currently unrivaled, even by the RED ONE.
==================================================  ===========================


----------

