650D (T4i) or 600D (T3i)

[lolage]

Hi, bit of an awkward decision to make..! I want this for 75% video, 25% photo. I can basically get the 600D body in the UK for £459 due to buying a KISS version in the UK.

Will the 650D really be much of an upgrade to justify spending £700 on the body in comparison? I like the fact it has autofocus but its not really a big play advantage really. I'm more interested in the better quality for video and potentially fixing moire and just generally having a newer camera.

What would you guys do? Also with the 600D I know for sure I'll get the 3x digital zoom.

Cheers, Ben.

 

[JasonATL]

Ben,

I'll assume that auto focus during video isn't that big of a deal to you. If it is, then read no further and just buy the 650D, since the 600D doesn't have it.

I have a 600D/T3i. As you mention, the 3x zoom is a great feature of the 600D and I still have not found out whether the 650D has it. If the 650D suffers from the same moire/aliasing issues as the 550D and 600D and doesn't have the 3x-10x zoom, then the 600D is a clear winner to me, since the 3x function also serves to eliminate moire on the 600D, without a loss in resolution.

If the 650D has less moire issues than the 600D and better ISO performance, then I'd opt for the 650D. However, I suspect that the 650D does not significantly improve on moire/aliasing or ISO performance, or else this probably would have been trumpeted by Canon. If you can wait, then wait for some people to do hands-on tests of the video with it.

Finally, a very large advantage of the 600D over the 650D right now is the ability to install Magic Lantern's firmware upgrade that gives a lot of very nice video features.

 

[tomfu]

Rebel t4i has improved movie recording including Continuous AF with subject tracking, other new features see rebel t3i vs t4i, I think it is more suit for you than the old t3i.

 

[JasonATL]

Now that it is confirmed that the 650D/T4i cannot do 3x-10x zoom and that it suffers from as much moire/aliasing as the T2i and T3i, I see no reason for anyone interested in video to buy the T4i UNLESS the autofocus is a key feature for them. Plus, Magic Lantern already works on the T3i.

If my I needed to replace my T3i or T2i, I would get another T3i.

I hope that the 7D or 60D replacements improve on the moire/aliasing. Until then, the T3i is the camera to beat, in my opinion.

 

[lolage]

Yeah I think I'm going to go for the 600D.

Pros for 600D for me:
- cheaper to buy other accessories/put towards other lenses
- magic lantern
- 3x zoom
- no need to buy new STM lenses

Pros for 650D:
- autofocus

 

[paul13walnut5]

An impossible question to answer, as the 650D's haven't had any comprehensive reviews as yet, and particularly as even the big reviewers don't tend to dwell on video so much.

What I can say is that I use the 600D and am very happy with it. I use it for about the same ratio, 75% video, 25% stills.

I also use a 7D for video, and the 600D replaced my 550D.

From a video point of view I would be interested in if the new 650D is any cleaner in the shadows and at higher ISO's. The Q-scale function also interests me (user set video bitrate)

I can say that if you buy a 600D today you are getting a well sorted camera. If you are an early adopter you may have bugs and pay over the odds for the 650D, but if you can wait a month or so... you might be able to get yourself an even better camera with revised firmware.

I don't run ML. Camera does all I need without it, so for me that wouldn't be a deal breaker.

 

[JasonATL]

From a video point of view I would be interested in if the new 650D is any cleaner in the shadows and at higher ISO's. The Q-scale function also interests me (user set video bitrate)
...
I don't run ML. Camera does all I need without it, so for me that wouldn't be a deal breaker.

Paul - You make very good points. The Q-scale is interesting. Since you mentioned that you don't use ML, you might or might not already know this: ML allows you to set a higher (or lower) bitrate on the 600D/T3i (which sounds like the Q-scale).

By chance, I was experimenting with this recently and it works - though not without some qualifications. The ML bitrate multiplier has been reliable for me at 1.4x (with audio on). Of course, this comes with a resulting larger file per minute of video. With audio disabled, I was able to go up to 2.3x reliably. I can achieve 3.0x in a low dynamic range environment (even with audio). Of course, the benefits of a higher bit rate are also less apparent in the latter case.

The highest (video-only) resulting average bit rate that I was able to achieve without the camera stopping the recording was a little north of 100 Mbps. Again, I shot at 3.0x indoors, but the resulting bitrate in that situation was only around 70 Mbps. Quite nice resulting picture, though not night and day compared to 1.0x. And, a test at 0.2x at 7 kbps was completely watchable, though I wouldn't ever use it for a serious video. Of course, the bit rate can't solve the 600D's moire/aliasing problems nor can it increase the actual resolution. But, it does what it does.

I mention this in case you tried ML a long time ago and might consider it again, given your interest in Q-scale. The latest version (from December) has been very stable on my 600D.

 

[RLPhoto]

Get a 600D, its a time tested and proven entry level camera.