Canon 60D v Rebel t3i v t4i help choose

[pablomatsumoto]

<p>I have a Canon 30D which I am looking to replace. I also do video and having a DSLR with good video capabilities is very convenient for me (currently use a Canon Vixia G10). Increasingly video work is being done with DSRL rather than camcorders. Also, low light video seems to be much (very much) bettern with DSRL than camcorders, unless you have a $5,000 pro camcorder.<br>

These 3 models are within my budget.<br>

<strong>60D</strong><br>

Despite not being the same semi-pro level of the previous X0D series, is of course the natural choice in terms of built quality and usability. It also has good video capabilities, as far as I researched equal to the t3i except for digital zoom, which seems to be a great feature.<br>

Recording time is limited. 12 minutes per clip may end to be short for live recordings. <br>

<strong>t3i</strong><br>

Very cheap right now and have digital zoom feature, which as mentioned seems great and very handy for the type of work I do (stage video) to have close-ups. Only 1 cross sensor for stills + all the issues of the Rebel line (small viewfinder, no second wheel, etc).<strong><br /></strong><br>

<strong>t4i</strong><br>

The best video capabilities of all, but a Rebel. It has the new constant focusing feature, which is suppose to keep subjets in focus like a common camcorder, but in practice the reviews are not good. They say it useless for real work.<br>

Also, increadibly the t4i does not have the digital zoom feature (but is has much longer recording time).<br>

Any thoughts?</p>

<p> </p>

[cabbiinc]

<p>Do you plan on shooting longer than 12 minutes? That's a long clip to edit.<br>

I went with the T3i. Not because it was better than the other two (the T4i was rumored to come out shortly when I bought), but because the T4i was pretty similar and I didn't see the need for an xxD camera. I was already replacing a 40D, which replaced an XTi. The fact was that I was already planning on replacing whatever camera I was buying in the long run anyways and spending less meant I could afford a better lens, flash, computer, software, etc... </p>

<p>That's just my reasoning, others will have different reasonings and come to different conclusions.</p>

<p>I didn't even know the T3i had a digital zoom. I've never needed it. With a crop sensor I'm constantly trying to get wider, not more telephoto. I wouldn't base a decision on that alone, you're shooting with a dSLR, just change the lens.<br>

Also, the T4i's continuous focus system only works on the STM lenses, currently there's only 2 lenses available.</p>

[pablomatsumoto]

<p>Thanks for your help.<br /> In video I don't shot scenes like in cinema. I always shot live events, usually stage, so 12 minutes is not that long. As a matter of fact is short. Sometimes you have a performance which cannot be cut until it ends.<br /> The digital zoom for video is a very handy feature of the t3i, that surprisingly was drop in the t4i. It does not degrade quality because it uses the pixels that are not used during video recording, and let you zoom 3x. This is very handy for close-ups at long distances.<br /> The t4i seems appealing but going back to a Rebel body for still shooting really does not convince me.</p>

[cabbiinc]

<p>None of the dSLRs can shoot longer than 29 minutes if I understand things correctly. Something to do with VAT taxes in the EU are higher for a video camera compared to a still camera. If it shoots 30 minutes or more of video it's classified as a video camera. I could be wrong on that, I read it on another forum somewhere. So if 12 minutes is really short then just over twice that may not be enough.</p>

<p>I would have hoped someone else would have spoke up with a differing opinion.</p>