Canon Rebel t3i critique needed

deej · Mar 9, 2012

Hello, I'm DJ. I just bought a 600d a couple months ago but I hadn't used it since I was saving up for equipment to use for filming purposes. With that being said, I've received a good amount of equipment up to now [although there's still a few more things I'd like to get asap]. This includes:

- Davis & Sanford 7518
- Shoulder Rig (link here)
- Sony MDR 7506
- Sound Devices MM-1
- Rode NTG-2
- Dead Cat windscreen

I was able to dabble with these items last saturday for filming a friend's event (which I wasn't excited about at all) and I learned a lot about my equipment, pros and cons... for example, I sold the extra 55-250mm lens that came with the kit in order to save up for a lens that can take good, sharp, close-up action footage from a safe distance [oxymoron?]

If anybody can steer me in the right direction on what kind of film equipment to get, I'd appreciate it greatly. Also, if you want to view my first project, please do not hesitate to pm me and I'll send you the video link and password to view it. I'm looking forward to any responses!

Overread · Mar 9, 2012

I'm not going to say that no one can help (because I won't dare claim that I know what everyone here knows) but on the video front I'm not directly aware of anyone on site that does this to any large degree. I think we've a few who have dabbled, but you might end up short on an answer (its not that we don't welcome such talks its just not a big part of the general active population here). You might find you get more direct advice, or at least a wider range of info sources at some amateur film/video forums - that market segment having really snapped up the DSLRs with video.

As for the lens suggestion have you any rough idea what kind of focal length you want? Was the 55-250mm long enough or too short for what you were after? What kind of distances and subjects and shots are you after and - importantly - what kind of budget are you after. Seriously good and very long lenses will cost a lot (its sadly one area where going cheap is harder, though for video where you've no AF you might be able to get some discount by using some older lenses which whilst optically sound lack modern AF units).

deej · Mar 9, 2012

Overread said:
I'm not going to say that no one can help (because I won't dare claim that I know what everyone here knows) but on the video front I'm not directly aware of anyone on site that does this to any large degree. I think we've a few who have dabbled, but you might end up short on an answer (its not that we don't welcome such talks its just not a big part of the general active population here). You might find you get more direct advice, or at least a wider range of info sources at some amateur film/video forums - that market segment having really snapped up the DSLRs with video.

As for the lens suggestion have you any rough idea what kind of focal length you want? Was the 55-250mm long enough or too short for what you were after? What kind of distances and subjects and shots are you after and - importantly - what kind of budget are you after. Seriously good and very long lenses will cost a lot (its sadly one area where going cheap is harder, though for video where you've no AF you might be able to get some discount by using some older lenses which whilst optically sound lack modern AF units).

Thanks for the response, Overread, I appreciate it a bunch. Even from a photography perspective, specifically manual focus, any tips you could help me out with on that would be great. I know that photographers at sporting events must use manual focus because on AF, I assume there's too much going on so it's almost like shooting a film, which manual focus would be best.

I was at a basketball game today and the photographer was panning side to side following the action to try and get a clean shot. He was sitting against the wall on the baseline which had to have been about 15-20 feet from the action. So I was looking for a lens that could cover that. The lens he had looked to be one of those in the $1,300-$2,300 range [wayyyy out of my budget]. I've researched lenses and came across a thorough review comparing the 55-250mm, 70-200mm, and 70-300mm lenses [for DSLR's of course] and out of the three, the 70-200 f/4.0-5.6 sounded like the one (financially as well), although an f/2.8 lens would be even better, right?

I'm throwing a lot out there, my apologies, but I'm trying to learn from the vets such as yourself. All I'm doing right now is trying to better understand my camera, the basics, ISO, aperture, shutter speed.... I get lost a bit filming trying to use manual focus because AF isn't going to do it I would think.

Overread · Mar 10, 2012

Manual VS AF for stills work is very dependant on the situation, the type of shot, the photographers skills and experiences as well as the gear being used (higher end gear has superior AF features, but can also have superior mirrors for viewing, thus making manual focusing easier).

Generally the DSLR is made for auto-focus as its primary method of acquiring focus on a scene. Those with an experience of older film cameras oft speak that manual focus with a modern DSLR is often harder since they lack the manual focusing aids in the viewfinder as well as often having smaller viewfinder images to work with.

So its hard to give an overall answer as to what is the best or how to use it best without a specific situation presented. As with your example the photographer panning a shot could use AF or manual focusing - either would be a valid and accurate approach depending what they are using and how they work.

On the lens front two things to consider:
1) Focusing with zooms. With most still camera zoom lenses the point of focus will shift at the focal range is changed (ie as you zoom with the lens). This is a problem for video if you are recording whilst zooming at the shot will shift out of focus (without adjustment). There are some parafocal lenses which do retain the same focus point, though I'm not aware of which specific lenses are and are not parafocal in the canon range (though I am aware that the 24-105mm f4 IS L is parafocal)

2) IS - stabilization of the image is a feature only present in the lenses for the canon range and thus if you want this to help with providing a smoother image for handheld video work you might want to focus toward purchasing IS capable lenses.

Canon makes a strong 70-200mm f4 IS L lens which is small and very good. The 70-200mm f2.8 IS L is somewhat better in that it offers the wider max aperture, but its heavier glass and also actually a touch softer at the aperture extremes. Don't let that fool you though as it has many years of being a top pro choice behind it - though its now only availible second hand.
(the new and far more expensive 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII is a vast improvement and the strongest of the set thus far).