Official: T2i/550D

guyzer09 wrote in post #10773692
1-yes
2-yes
3-?
4- all cameras are capable of good IQ as long as you put good glass in front of it. 15 vs 18 MP is not a huge number. Either will give you good results s long as you have good glss. The large number of MP are demanding for good glass. It comes down to the need for video- T2i, need for speed/durability- 50d.

I am a recent 50d owner and now own a t2i.

OK. So I can do a double or triple exposure? Just want to make sure. I'm leaving for the store in a few minutes and probably going to buy the T2i.
Shoot. One more thing. The exposure compensation. +/- 2ev? 3ev? 5ev? NEVERMIND...FOUND THAT INFO - 2ev in 1/3 stop increments. 50D is +/-5 but I shoot mostly in manual anyways.

Good choice with the T2i

kfreels wrote in post #10773725
OK. So I can do a double or triple exposure? Just want to make sure. I'm leaving for the store in a few minutes and probably going to buy the T2i.
Shoot. One more thing. The exposure compensation. +/- 2ev? 3ev? 5ev? NEVERMIND...FOUND THAT INFO - 2ev in 1/3 stop increments. 50D is +/-5 but I shoot mostly in manual anyways.

You can go +/- 5 ev with the 550D, but the default LCD display only shows up to +/- 2.

.

Rivest wrote in post #10773948
Good choice with the T2i

OK. Just learned that I don't need double-exposure capability. I can do that on a computer I understand. Silly I guess, but I had never thought about that. It's really about the best image sensor I can get for less than $1000. I have good glass and I'm competent so I'm not too worried about "features" I guess. Kind of reminds me of the old days when I was shooting with a Pentax K-1000 with Kodak Pro film while a friend was shooting with a new state-of-the-art Eos 650 with Kodak Gold. Needless to say, everything I did was superior and I never told him my secret - even when I bought my first Eos 650 and continued to out-shoot him. lol So yeah, I could rock an all manual digital camera as long as the sensor and processor are superior.

Then, the T2i will fit you. As will the 50D or 40D will. It's up to features you want/need.

just ordered a battery grip and battery charger for the t2i.

Rivest wrote in post #10775340
Then, the T2i will fit you. As will the 50D or 40D will. It's up to features you want/need.

Well now I'm committed. Went and bought the T2i. shot some test photos. Put my Tamron 28-200 on it and found it isn't as sharp as I remember it since the kit lens is sharper. So far very impressed. It's midnight now but tomorrow is going to be a lot of fun!

Dirby wrote in post #10775791
just ordered a battery grip and battery charger for the t2i.

congrats! it will give your camera a hole new look and feel!

I ordered some wireless flash trigger 2 weeks ago, should receive them this week. Can't wait to try them

Well, now the addiction begins. Haven't had the camera 24 hours and I've already broke-down and ordered a Canon EF-S 55-250 3.6, a new bag, some collapsible reflectors, a speedlight, and a tripod. I'm way over my allowance now!

So here's a question - with all the post-processing capabilities, is there any reason to invest in filters, bellows and such? I had it in my head that I was going to rebuild everything I had before, but I'm starting to think that I can save all that money and put it into lenses. Any thoughts on this?

kfreels wrote in post #10782867
Well, now the addiction begins. Haven't had the camera 24 hours and I've already broke-down and ordered a Canon EF-S 55-250 3.6, a new bag, some collapsible reflectors, a speedlight, and a tripod. I'm way over my allowance now!

So here's a question - with all the post-processing capabilities, is there any reason to invest in filters, bellows and such? I had it in my head that I was going to rebuild everything I had before, but I'm starting to think that I can save all that money and put it into lenses. Any thoughts on this?

LOL sure does I cant remember how many times I have told my wife " Thats all I need then thats it!" As far as filters go dont waste your money unless its a good circular polorizer filter for the effect. Everything can be done in PP.

kfreels wrote in post #10782867
Well, now the addiction begins. Haven't had the camera 24 hours and I've already broke-down and ordered a Canon EF-S 55-250 3.6, a new bag, some collapsible reflectors, a speedlight, and a tripod. I'm way over my allowance now!

So here's a question - with all the post-processing capabilities, is there any reason to invest in filters, bellows and such? I had it in my head that I was going to rebuild everything I had before, but I'm starting to think that I can save all that money and put it into lenses. Any thoughts on this?

There's only so much PP can do in lieu of filters. You can't cut down on haze and reflections like you can with the use of a CP filter, though the increasing the saturation part might be doable. You can do HDR but you can't simulate perfect exposures like you can with a graduated ND filter at the beach, nor is it practical during times you can afford just one shot. You can try stopping down to take long exposures of waterfalls during the day without using regular ND filters, but might run into diffraction softening. In other words, filters are necessary if you really want to achieve a certain shot.

kfreels wrote in post #10782867
Well, now the addiction begins. Haven't had the camera 24 hours and I've already broke-down and ordered a Canon EF-S 55-250 3.6, a new bag, some collapsible reflectors, a speedlight, and a tripod. I'm way over my allowance now!

So here's a question - with all the post-processing capabilities, is there any reason to invest in filters, bellows and such? I had it in my head that I was going to rebuild everything I had before, but I'm starting to think that I can save all that money and put it into lenses. Any thoughts on this?

I don't use filters, I don't see much use for them, that's just me and my opinion. As you can see, not everyone feels this way, my advise to you is spend money on good glass but before you do that, you need to know what you're going to shoot most. Makes no sense you buying a lens you're hardly going to use after you know what you need for your style of shooting. I think with PP you can achieve many good results, not all as already pointed out but close enough.

Well a cpl is usefull when shooting cars and landscape photos. No real use in portrait photos. All depends of your shooting needs.

Well, as for what I'm shooting.......everyth​ing I can possibly think of and every thought I've imagined over the last 12 years that I was completely out of things. I don't even have to worry about the cost of developing any more. That's just plain awesome and I'm loving this!
I think I'll go for some filters but keep it limited. Maybe some graduated ND and regular NDs, circular polarizer of course. I'll skip the bellowshade and vignettes of course.

Now I just need to figure out how to use pp software. My old Paint Shop Pro 9 doesn't recognize the CR2 files.I've been using PSP for years for web graphics. I downloaded Adobe Lighthouse and it doesn't seem to be what I want. The Canon utility that came with the camera actually seems better than Lighthouse so can't seem to justify the $300 for that. I'm going to try out Gimp and Photoshop. Anything else I should maybe look at?