- Significantly improved Monitor (higher resolution, swiveling)
- Significantly improved autofocus (9 cross-type AF points instead of a cross-type AF points and 8 regular)
- Video (yes, that's a no-brainer because my 450D no video can ^^)
- 18 instead of 12 MP.
Otherwise, I have found that the rest is more or less the same. The operation is the same with a few exceptions to 99%, as the range of functions. The only two functions (in addition to video of course) that I have noticed, is a HDR and a hand-held night scene mode, where each multiple shots are combined to provide a better result. Both, however, provide course only .jpg files and are personally interesting for me.
But now the most important thing, the image quality: With sheer horror I sat in front of my monitor when I compared the RAW files of 450D and 650D together in Lightroom. Coming full surprising to me, had changed in terms of image quality, including high-ISO performance, in the four years that lie between these cameras _nichts_. In the lab, you may perhaps find one or the other difference, however, in my tests, I was able for the RAW files not tell the difference (tripod, remote shutter, identical settings in both cameras (manual); 2 motifs with lots of details, one outdoors in good weather, an interior with moderate lighting). When it comes to details I hoped from the 50% greater resolution of 650D some improvements. Again, unfortunately, but I could not detect any improvement since apparently neutralize the effects of the enlargement of the resolution and the reduction of the individual pixel size of the sensor completely. I upload some comparison photos to show the effect.
The JPG files of the 650D were compared to those of the 450D but significantly forward. New algorithms and the significantly faster processor were probably helpful here. However, JPG files of the 650D are still propagated miles behind the RAW results also the old 450D.
Conclusion: The camera is when you can do without the swivel monitor, improved autofocus and video function, even the upgrade not worth the 450D. When it comes to software, Canon has some refills, the mere sensor technology, however, has not developed, so that the one who shoots in RAW and reworked his photos later, at the end here may not notice any improvement. That alone makes the camera but of course not bad per se, so there are still 4 stars, for a solid entry-level camera, with which you can shoot good photos. For the lack of technical development by Canon but it must give the star deduction.
Alternatives: The 7D and 60D have pretty much the same picture quality as apparently all APS-C cameras from Canon in the past 4 years. The difference lies only in its features and usability. This is significantly improved at 60D and 7D. So if you want more or less the performance of the 650D, but still want to make a step towards more professional cameras, which I empfele the 60D, for which I have also decided at the end. The performance is comparable, it also has a pivoting monitor is not much harder (important when traveling) has, but a second monitor and a second dial - two of the many features that make working with the camera more efficiently. The premium over the 650D is not big, so it's worth druchaus.
Who really wants to take a step forward in terms of image quality, but can unfortunately access only to the 5D series, which will be due to their price, but for the few people a real alternative.
