T2i review should have comparison with XSi also !

[AP7]

Specially, image quality, sharpness, other IQ. What do you think?

 

[Lemming51]

There isn't a full T2i/550D review yet, just a preview.

When there is a full review, comparison to T1i/500D should be sufficient. If you want a comparison to the XSi/450D, that can be derived by how it compared in the T1i/500D review.

 

[NumberOne]

You can have an idea using Imaging's Resource Comparometer.

... Although I'm a great fan of the 450D, it looks - from these photos - like the 550D shows, at least, one EV advantage regarding noise, especially at high ISO.
Nevertheless - I guess - you should expect a full review, soon.

Best regards,
Pedro

 

[Jim Holtz]

You can have an idea using Imaging's Resource Comparometer.

... Although I'm a great fan of the 450D, it looks - from these photos - like the 550D shows, at least, one EV advantage regarding noise, especially at high ISO.
Nevertheless - I guess - you should expect a full review, soon.

Best regards,
Pedro

Hi Pedro,

FWIW, I've downloaded the RAW files from Image resources for every crop camera from Canon. In comparison, I see slightly more noise at 200 ISO and 400 ISO with the T2i than the Xsi. I do mean slight. At 800 ISO and 1600 ISO, I think the T2i and XSi are comparable. The same comparisions were made with the 7D and I reached the same conclusion.

However, 3200 is only slightly more noisy than 1600, which the XSi can't do. 6400 isn't stellar but it's usable on smaller prints. Everything from 400 ISO on up from the T2i requires some noise reduction for noise free pixel peeping. None would have noticeable noise up to 1600 ISO prints at normal size.

I will add a T2i in a few months when the price comes down for the additional ISO capability and some of the convenience features. Image quality is comparable, IMHO.

That's my take anyway.

Jim

 

[Tom44999]

I tend to see that the T2i at ISO 1600 looks a little better than the XSi at 800 looking at the still-life charts. I am an XSi owner, definitely buying the T2i after a few months when the cost comes down some. Mainly want the all the features that appear just a little better (resolution, LCD, metering), and the ability for HD movies on occasion. Well worth the upgrade, IMO.

--
Tom
http://www.pbase.com/photoman

 

[NumberOne]

You can have an idea using Imaging's Resource Comparometer.

... Although I'm a great fan of the 450D, it looks - from these photos - like the 550D shows, at least, one EV advantage regarding noise, especially at high ISO.
Nevertheless - I guess - you should expect a full review, soon.

Best regards,
Pedro

Hi Pedro,

FWIW, I've downloaded the RAW files from Image resources for every crop camera from Canon. In comparison, I see slightly more noise at 200 ISO and 400 ISO with the T2i than the Xsi. I do mean slight. At 800 ISO and 1600 ISO, I think the T2i and XSi are comparable. The same comparisions were made with the 7D and I reached the same conclusion.

However, 3200 is only slightly more noisy than 1600, which the XSi can't do. 6400 isn't stellar but it's usable on smaller prints. Everything from 400 ISO on up from the T2i requires some noise reduction for noise free pixel peeping. None would have noticeable noise up to 1600 ISO prints at normal size.

I will add a T2i in a few months when the price comes down for the additional ISO capability and some of the convenience features. Image quality is comparable, IMHO.

That's my take anyway.

Jim

Hi, Jim.

Just wondering - What software did you use to compare the RAWs?

TIA,
Best regards,
Pedro

 

[Jim Holtz]

Hi, Jim.

Just wondering - What software did you use to compare the RAWs?

TIA,
Best regards,
Pedro

Hi Pedro,

I used DPP with a calibrated 24 bit color Samsung LCD Monitor. The comparisons were at 100% of course.

I am an XSi owner and these are just my opinions so your mileage may vary.

Jim
Jim

 

[Tom44999]

IMO, even if IQ was identical, the 2Ti is well worth the upgrade.

1. 12mp to 18mp (like adding a 1.5x tele on each lens if you like to crop)

2. 3200, 6400 added ISO for low-light (and slightly less noise at 800 & 1600 IMO)
3. 35 area bumped to 63 area metering (more accurate)
4. 230k bumped to 1040k LED (MUCH better for manual focus and evaluation)
5. Movie Clips!

Just not sure if I can wait a few months for a price drop.

--
Tom
http://www.pbase.com/photoman

 

[AP7]

It appears that Canon XSi (450D) was a better camera than Canon T1i (500D):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos500d/page23.asp

"Finally let's have a look at the 500D side-by-side with its predecessor, the EOS 450D. The 450D was amongst the best within its peers in terms of JPEG quality, and can still easily keep up with most of the latest generation APS-C sensor DSLRs. The older model offers superb pixel level sharpness and despite its increased resolution the 500D struggles to squeeze much more detail out of the JPEG files. The color response is unsurprisingly almost identical."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos500d/page25.asp

"Compared to the JPEG output both cameras eke a tad more detail out of the RAW files. In terms of pixel detail the 450D is nothing short of outstanding. The 500D is not far behind but can't quite match its predecessor in this comparison. Having said that, the new model of course offers a higher resolution which makes up for the slight pixel detail disadvantage when producing larger prints."

Also, it is better than Nikon D90:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD90/page27.asp

"As we saw with the comparison to the D80 (itself not the sharpest camera in the cupboard), the D90's default output is very soft, having had very low levels of sharpening applied. Canon, meanwhile, takes the opposite approach, delivering very crisp (and contrasty) images at its default setting. Other than that, there's little to choose between the two. Comparing the two in RAW will show how much underlying difference there is, once you scrape away the manufacturers' image processing decisions."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD90/page31.asp

"Having seen how much sharper the RAW results are than the default JPEG output, it comes as no surprise to find that the difference between the 450D and the D90 evaporates when processed in the same manner. We have always suspected that the 450D has quite a light anti-aliasing filter and this is supported by looking at the medals on the third crop - there is a smidgen more detail than the D90. But think back to the JPEG and there was also a hint of color moiré (the frequency of the pattern on the bottle interfering with the spacial frequency of the photosites on the sensor - precisely what an AA filter aims to reduce). And that appears to be the only difference."

 

[nyer82]

godámnit. This post fooled me into thinking DP actually did a review. What a scam! lol.

 

[AP7]

godámnit. This post fooled me into thinking DP actually did a review. What a scam! lol.

Lol, not sure how this post fooled you. Is there any mention of T2i review in my post? Did I say, T2i review is up or anything like that? I just expect a comparison with Canon XSi and want to know whether somebody think in the same or other way.