Its official Canon 600D

[An Exception]

Secondary settings screen, better burst, better buffer, better build quality, second settings dial, lots of small things add up to a big difference.

1) Secondary settings screen (no biggy imo)
2) better burst (no biggy unless shooting sports)
3) better buffer (Use fast SD card)
4) better build quality (More robust & good if in rainy weather, adds weight/less practical for carrying for long periods)
5) second settings dial (no biggy imo)

Well done, you listed a bunch of stuff that doesn't impact image quality, or really the ability to capture an image, with exception of higher burst/buffer, which is mainly useful when shooting sports etc.
Settings are subjective, IMO, it all depends on what your used to, I hardly have any issues navigating a 550d and really like the controls, I'm sure if I moved to a 7d I wouldn't like the all of those controls buttons at first, until I was used to them.

Bottom line though, I obviously wasn't arguing that the 7D wasn't better (hence why I didn't like the failed attempt at being funny), but that only aside from a few select circumstances, a 550d can deliver the exact same (or extremely close) results and image quality as a 7d.

I have a friend who thinks her 550D is just like my 7D, and it's laughable.
550D is a fine camera, a close competitor to the 7D it is not.

Confusingly however, apart from build quality, the 550D has more in common with the prosumer EOS 7D.

The new camera also inherits the EOS 7D's sophisticated metering system (which brings it a lot closer to similarly positioned Nikon SLRs).

So why has Canon apparently risked cannibalizing 7D sales by releasing such a similarly-specced, lower-end model?

Ummm... yes it is, unless your a camera snob.

Edit: Comparison

550D Vs 7D

 

[Raikiri]

1) Secondary settings screen (no biggy imo) - Actually very useful
2) better burst (no biggy unless shooting sports) - Not just better, over twice the FPS
3) better buffer (Use fast SD card)
4) better build quality (More robust & good if in rainy weather, adds weight/less practical for carrying for long periods)
5) second settings dial (no biggy imo) - Also really useful
6) Faster max shutter speed
7) Greater high ISO performance
8) Greater Dynamic range
9) Much better viewfinder
10) Much quicker and more accurate AF
11) Micro Adjust
12) Wireless ETTL

 

[An Exception]

body flex is more noticeable. Mostly positive though, especially the dpreview article...

Maybe a grip would help with the 600d's body-flex?

 

[An Exception]

1) Secondary settings screen (no biggy imo) - Actually very useful
2) better burst (no biggy unless shooting sports) - Not just better, over twice the FPS Can actually be too fast in anything other than sports, as you just fill up your card in no time.
3) better buffer (Use fast SD card)
4) better build quality (More robust & good if in rainy weather, adds weight/less practical for carrying for long periods)
5) second settings dial (no biggy imo) - Also really useful
6) Faster max shutter speed - Never had to use over 4000 personally

7) Greater high ISO performance

Here, as with the 7D, Canon scores by making the high-density sensor very clean at high ISO settings.

The 18 megapixel sensor yields lower noise than the similar sensor in the 7D, and Canon confirms it is not identical.

8) Greater Dynamic range

The 550D also has better dynamic range, maybe at the expense of some colour discrimination. All this is achieved with the help of gapless micro-lenses and low-density colour filters on the sensor.

9) Much better viewfinder

The optical viewfinder, though small, is very clear with the benefit of new screen technology and an unobtrusive AF display.

10) Much quicker and more accurate AF

Despite the far simpler AF array of the 550D, with its single f/2.8 central sensor, I found it more accurate with everyday subjects than the 7D.
Does this mean the AF system of the 550D is superior to the 7D? Maybe Canon has adjusted whatever parameters it can to yield more consistent and acceptable results from the inexperienced user. That must include me, as my hit-rate with the 550D was definitely better than with the 7D.

11) Micro Adjust - Potentially a very good feature if you have a soft lens.
12) Wireless - ETTL - Not the most flexible solution & Unreliable in some circumstances

Source

You do realise that bar from a few minor features like 'micro-adjust' and high fps burst, it's practically a 7d?

It was a fairly preposterous statement to be honest

Lol.

 

[3dcandy]

Maybe a grip would help with the 600d's body-flex?

I don't think they were really making an issue of it, just that the cost reductions appear to have been made in the body, not the sensor etc.

 

[bigredshark]

Source

Lol.

If you want to believe that go ahead, my experience (not to mention common sense about the merits of a £600 camera vs a £1100 one) suggests otherwise. My parents have between them a 7D and 550D as it happens, I've spent enough time shooting with both to know the differences. The 550D is a capable entry level body but it's very obvious not as good to me.

I don't own either, I don't shoot Canon personally, I've no involvement so I'm calling it as I see it with decent experience of both bodies. One I could use for a day's shooting without complaint by and large, the other would simply annoy me. I'm sure you can get the same shots with the 550D/600D most of the time, but the 7D will get you them more often, which is often the point of spending extra.

Each to their own, if you're saying a 550D does you as well as a 7D would, fair enough, that's you and each to their own (personally I couldn't live with the controls, build or lack of weatherproofing for starters and the burst rate would be problematic too), but claiming it's 'as good as a 7D' is disingenuous and makes you look silly.

 

[An Exception]

If you want to believe that go ahead, my experience (not to mention common sense about the merits of a £600 camera vs a £1100 one) suggests otherwise. My parents have between them a 7D and 550D as it happens, I've spent enough time shooting with both to know the differences. The 550D is a capable entry level body but it's very obvious not as good to me.

TBH, I'm inclined to put more weight on the findings and evidence of professional reviewers, than ramblings from someone who doesn't even own said camera's, for all I know you could be a novice.
Your 'common sense' argument, you made in relation to cost is ill thought out. Granted more often than not it is the case, but it's certainly not a definite arguement.

Example:

It's like me saying, the Intel x25-m G1 is better than the Intel x25-m G2 because it cost's more, when in fact the G2 is better than the G1, and was only cheaper due to being manufactured on a newer process.

I don't own either, I don't shoot Canon personally, I've no involvement so I'm calling it as I see it with decent experience of both bodies. One I could use for a day's shooting without complaint by and large, the other would simply annoy me. I'm sure you can get the same shots with the 550D/600D most of the time, but the 7D will get you them more often, which is often the point of spending extra.

I disagree, the reviewer says more shot's were in focus on 550d than 7d, so I think your clutching at straws.

Each to their own, if you're saying a 550D does you as well as a 7D would, fair enough, that's you and each to their own (personally I couldn't live with the controls, build or lack of weatherproofing for starters and the burst rate would be problematic too), but claiming it's 'as good as a 7D' is disingenuous and makes you look silly.

I think you'l find that I never actually said the 550D was as good as a 7D as a whole, but from reading some of the reviewers comments, 'technically' you could argue it's actually better in allot of respects.

To sum things up, IMO it's you who looks silly, and using long words for the sake of it doesn't make your argument any more logical/intelligent.

 

[Rojin]

To be honest you're not doing yourself any favours. In given circumstances a 350D can produce just as good an image as a 550D or 7D. The fact of the matter is that the 550D is not practically a 7D as you stated, the only carry over is the metering. Video features as I have already said are actually better on the 550D, and the screen has more pixels. Unfortunately it's all in a rebel body which I can't go back to using due to the size and controls. I've used both thanks very much and don't feel any need to defend my purchase as you seem to want to. It's clear to me which is the better handling camera for my needs and the far more responsive and a pleasure to use camera. That works for me, what works for you if fine as well.

You can quote "reviews" all you want, they are never more than someone else's opinion, I only use them as a starting point and then I go and use the products themselves.

 

[Pants]

Chaps, could you link me to the review that states the build quality / flex is worse in the 600D? I can't find it using google...

 

[An Exception]

To be honest you're not doing yourself any favours.

I don't get that tbh?
I'v simply made a logical argument that was actually backed up by evidence from with supposed knowledgeable and impartial 3rd party sources.

In given circumstances a 350D can produce just as good an image as a 550D or 7D.

Can you back up such sweeping statements?

The fact of the matter is that the 550D is not practically a 7D as you stated, the only carry over is the metering. Video features as I have already said are actually better on the 550D, and the screen has more pixels. Unfortunately it's all in a rebel body which I can't go back to using due to the size and controls. I've used both thanks very much and don't feel any need to defend my purchase as you seem to want to. It's clear to me which is the better handling camera for my needs and the far more responsive and a pleasure to use camera. That works for me, what works for you if fine as well.

Camera feel and handling is subjective, some prefer the 7d, others the 550D, I personally wouldn't use a 550d without a grip.
What I'm interested in, and the case I'm arguing is the 'performance' and image quality of the camera, and in this respect it pretty much matches the 7d in a practical sense (bar a few specific areas), even if not 'exactly' the same due to slightly different sensor and AF.
Even so, the reviews I have read say the 550d actually edges slightly ahead in a few areas that people on here suggested the 7d was better, which I found surprising, such as Sharpness, ISO, Dynamic Range, AF accuracy.

You can quote "reviews" all you want, they are never more than someone else's opinion, I only use them as a starting point and then I go and use the products themselves.

I have mostly simply quoted comments from reviewers, reviewers that 'should' be impartial, people who are not trying to defend any purchase, and people who 'should' know what they are talking about, more than most in this forum.
I don't know how I could present a more plausible argument than that?
All I'v been met with is snide jab's with little weight behind them.

Tbh, I'm wondering if this was what it was like for the first guy who said, "Call me crazy guy's, but I reckon the earth might be round".

 

[Rojin]

To me it seems you are on a crusade trying to batter everyone with quote upon quote, that's just going to put peoples backs up I'm perfectly happy with you just preferring the 550D because it does exactly what you want, that makes it the ideal tool for you and you saved money to boot

I wouldn't disagree about the image quality, if you nail it in either camera the results are going to be damn near impossible to separate. Hence my comment on the 350D, for the bulk of websized or "normal" sized prints, an image that is well sorted shot in any crop body will look great.

For me the improved handling, and by this mean I also mean the controls, on the 7D together with the faster AF make my chances of getting the shot I want much better. I don't take many shots at all of static objects where you can control everything. I do a lot of sports and subjects that generally move. One of the main things that just cripple me using the 550D is the lack of the rear wheel, I've just got used to it so much! If I don't get the exposure right on the 7D I can end up with a noisy image, but then again I don't mind noise (to a limit!). I also don't like it at all with the grip, it just feels clumsy.

 

[FreeStream]

Can you back up such sweeping statements?

Given the perfect conditions even a point and shoot can match what a 7D can offer, hell, it could match what a 5DII or a 1Ds Mark IV could do.

Take it onto a sports field on a rainy day with the 7D in zone AF mode and a 300mm F2.8 and see who wins then.

Oh and have you actually properly used a camera with a second settings screen? I'd never go back to one without, even my 350D had one!

I read every review, every comment on a number of forums arguing the toss about the 550D and the 7D, I went and handled them both and tested them both before I landed four figures on my 7D. If the 550D was so close to the 7D then why did I spend a good chunk more on buying one? Why does anyone?

Besides, AF sharpness varies camera to camera (sometimes my 40D does a better job - simply down to user error) and the ISO noise between them on everything apart from lab tests is indiscernible.

 

[An Exception]

To me it seems you are on a crusade trying to batter everyone with quote upon quote, that's just going to put peoples backs up I'm perfectly happy with you just preferring the 550D because it does exactly what you want, that makes it the ideal tool for you and you saved money to boot

I wouldn't disagree about the image quality, if you nail it in either camera the results are going to be damn near impossible to separate. Hence my comment on the 350D, for the bulk of websized or "normal" sized prints, an image that is well sorted shot in any crop body will look great.

For me the improved handling, and by this mean I also mean the controls, on the 7D together with the faster AF make my chances of getting the shot I want much better. I don't take many shots at all of static objects where you can control everything. I do a lot of sports and subjects that generally move. One of the main things that just cripple me using the 550D is the lack of the rear wheel, I've just got used to it so much! If I don't get the exposure right on the 7D I can end up with a noisy image, but then again I don't mind noise (to a limit!). I also don't like it at all with the grip, it just feels clumsy.

No probs mate, glad your happy that you got the right camera for the job.

The reason I sounded like I was on a crusade which I apologize for, was simply I felt another couple of posters were simply being blindly dismissive, which I thought was out of arrogance/ignorance more than anything else, which then get's my back up

Happy snapping!

 

[3dcandy]

Chaps, could you link me to the review that states the build quality / flex is worse in the 600D? I can't find it using google...

Just looked at it was on the dpreview preview...however, it appears to have been updated (and the 1100D is too) and the comments about flex aren't there any more. The 1100D preview was similiar, it now says engineered down to a price or something similiar!