This is an interesting test on the T2i, very scientific and I don't know the real value of test like this.
But it make me feel I did a good choice on buying this camera when I compare it against a Panasonic LX3. The test also scare me when I compare the T2i against Nikon D90, and even more scary T2i vs 5D mark II. Could someone analyse this and maybe help me sleep better tonight?

First test (english)
EOS 550D (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Canon/EOS-550D)

detail review of T2i against 7D (but in french)
http://www.zone-numerique.com/news_6744_Le_Canon_EOS_550D_passe_au_banc_d_essai_DxO.htm

Brief translation:
They say that T2i and 7D are almost equal performance since they share the same captor
but they (T2i and 7D) are poor against Nikon D90 and D5000! that the Cano's body are not very glorious comparing the other aps-c camera's.
They even say that the Canon's body are under the Pentax K10 or samsung GX20. for the sensitivity Canon's earn the silver medal, the gold belonging to Nikon's D90 and D5000.
Nowhere in the test they talk of video performance, which Canon probably is the gold medal and even the world record holders for many more months or years to come (in my opinion)

You have also to remember DXO lab are softwares for helping the photographers not the videographers.
And the test was realeased on the 16 february probably they did not have a production model, and they admit in the text that they did the test very fast.
If you need help on french let me know cause its my real language.

For those who T2i Rock
I salute you

Martin

With these kind of scientific tests, the big question to me is always: will you see the difference as well when you use the camera in real life? I remember when I bought my first camcorder, had to choose between a 1CCD Sony vs 3CCD Panasonic which was supposedly real bad in low light. I went to the local dealer, tested them out in lowlight, and found there was no difference to my eyes! There are many more examples of a camera scoring big marks in these scientific circumstances, but the one scoring slightly less delivers much more pleasing footage in real life.

So: although these scientific tests are useful in selecting the best from the rest, in the end it comes down to which cam delivers the best footage to your eyes. In my humble opinion anyway...

In photography alone, there are whole forums devoted to the Nikon vs Canon-dillema, and in the end, they are so close, it's down to your personal preference. Personally, I prefer the Nikon over the Canon in photography. But for video, there's only a handful people using Nikon vs whole forums using Canons, for me thats reason enough to go for Canon. But for photography, I'll stick to my Nikon (and although I hope Nikon will make a successor capable of the same or even better video quality as the Canons, I seriously doubt they will, considering Canon's got a massive headstart and more experience in video camcorders.)