Is the 550D a beast compared to the 400D?

I'm getting sick of my xti, I've had this camera since 2007... view finder is bad, iso performance is bad, it's just not a good camera, anyone that is... use to be.

I was thinking about the 7D, but the T2i seems to be more attractive since it's almost identical.

So my question is how much better is the T2i quality and the camera overall compared to the Xti?

I don't think you'll see a big difference over the 400D. The 550D is an "evolution" of the same basic design. The only big change is the addition of video. IF that's not a big selling point for you, and going by the problems with the 400D you describe, I think you'd be happier with a 50D or 7D.
Better handling, bigger viewfinder, more FPS, focus micro-adjustment, faster autofocusing, more customisation options, better build quality.
I went from a 300D to a 400D. Then didn't see the point of upgrading to a 450 or 500. Partially because there wasn't a whole lot of new features or big improvements and partially because I didn't like the changes Canon had made to the ergonomics.

I find the 400D to be quite good, but entry level cameras are mainly supposed to be for students who start out on their photographic experience
If you look at my set on the 400D, it is good, just ignore the ones with the bad colours, it has something to do with colour management nothing to do with the 400D http://www.flickr.com …d/sets/72157623​901168310/

Yeah, compared to the 50D, albeit, you are looking at the 550D, it is comparatively slow by 3 miles

MLphoto wrote in post #10110720
...the T2i seems to be more attractive since it's almost identical...

Maybe I've missed something, but if you feel that's the case, why would you "upgrade" to something "identical" to what you already have?

why didn't anyone mention the improvement in sensor?

philwillmedia wrote in post #10110933
Maybe I've missed something, but if you feel that's the case, why would you "upgrade" to something "identical" to what you already have?

he wasn't referring to his camera in that sentence, but rather comparing the t2i and 7d (which are similar in terms of sensor performance).

the T2i is a big upgrade in many aspects to the XTi. it also has a digic 4 processor, a nicer screen in the back, liveview and movie recording, and of course the improved sensor means that he will get much improved ISO performance. I've never used an XTi so I don't know what the viewfinder is like compared to the t2i.

MLphoto wrote in post #10110720
I'm getting sick of my xti, I've had this camera since 2007... view finder is bad, iso performance is bad, it's just not a good camera, anyone that is... use to be.

I was thinking about the 7D, but the T2i seems to be more attractive since it's almost identical.

So my question is how much better is the T2i quality and the camera overall compared to the Xti?

about these 2 points...

Yes VF size matters, just ask those who jumped from xxD Canons to FF models...(kind of like going from a smaller tv to a larger one...oooh, nice)...When I had my xt and compared the VF to the xsi, it made me sick...best not to do that too often...

As for poor (high, I presume) iso performance....you don't say at what ISO setting you're not happy, but if it's under 1000 then the problem is not in your stars, but in yourself....how high an ISO do you need? And how often do you need to go there...? That is the question?

Hellbelly wrote in post #10110914
I don't think you'll see a big difference over the 400D. The 550D is an "evolution" of the same basic design. The only big change is the addition of video. IF that's not a big selling point for you, and going by the problems with the 400D you describe, I think you'd be happier with a 50D or 7D.
Better handling, bigger viewfinder, more FPS, focus micro-adjustment, faster autofocusing, more customisation options, better build quality.
I went from a 300D to a 400D. Then didn't see the point of upgrading to a 450 or 500. Partially because there wasn't a whole lot of new features or big improvements and partially because I didn't like the changes Canon had made to the ergonomics.

I think there is actually more in the 550D over the 400D than just movie mode.

Spiral pointed out a few of these differences.

I'm surprised you think the 400D has poor high ISO performance. I used to own one a couple of years ago and always found it pretty good.

I have a feeling you will be disappointed in the move to a newer entry level, unless of course you want video. Why not look at something like a 40D?

MLphoto wrote in post #10110720
I'm getting sick of my xti, I've had this camera since 2007... view finder is bad, iso performance is bad, it's just not a good camera...

Pictures from an XTi, taken in the last few weeks.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

DC Fan wrote in post #10111772
"Upgrading" won't solve all dissatisfaction, as has been learned by users of this forum who have spent small fortunes on equipment, only to learn they're still unhappy.

isn't that the truth !
if only expensive cameras could buy happiness ... I could be happy with a 5DmkII

philwillmedia wrote in post #10110933
Maybe I've missed something, but if you feel that's the case, why would you "upgrade" to something "identical" to what you already have?

I was refeering to the 7D if you missed that...


And I'm not saying it's a bad camera.... I just need newer features... I'll probably go with the T2i since I can buy the body alone for around 800.

My first thoughts are on what glass you have to use with your camera body - even a 350D or 300D can give some very good performance if you use pro end glass on it. Further for things like studio work controlling and using the right lighting setups can make a massive difference over in body features.

If you are dead set on a new camera body though my advice would be to wait - save and go for a 7D or a 50D or even a 2ndhand/reconditioned 40D. Each of those would offer you an upgrade in the quality of camera body rather than another rebel series that is really not adding a vast amount (besides video and more pixies) to what you currently have to use.

philwillmedia wrote in post #10110933
Maybe I've missed something, but if you feel that's the case, why would you "upgrade" to something "identical" to what you already have?

spiralspirit wrote in post #10111303
he wasn't referring to his camera in that sentence, but rather comparing the t2i and 7d (which are similar in terms of sensor performance).

MLphoto wrote in post #10114868
I was refeering to the 7D if you missed that...

ummm....hahaha
Yep, you're right.
Like I said "maybe I've missed something..."
I did - big time.
haha...how did I manage to mis-read that.

I like it how threads sometimes just take a direction and stay there. I thought I would read replys saying you really should upgrade but this thread doesnt have that. Yet you have people upgrading from the 50D to 7D and saying that there is a world of difference and others recommending this upgrade. I would really hope the iso performance on the 550d would be better than the 400d and that would be a fairly good reason to get a new camera.