better lens or better camera?

[SaraSue]

I have a Canon Rebel XTi and my "best" lens is a canon 70-300USM IS Lens. I got this lens recently because I thought it would help make my photos sharper. I do think it helped and I love the image stabilizer. I have started doing more and more portraits for people and I am really enjoying it! I got this camera (my first DSLR) as a gift so I never really shopped around and learned the difference. I'm getting ready to take some photography courses to help take my photography to the next level but I'm just curious what equipment I need to take sharper images. I know a lot of it is probably the photographer, and I do think I'm getting better, but I'm just wondering if a better camera or a better lens would help. I'm dying to get an L serious lens because I'm hoping it will magically make me better. . But would a good lens like that not make a difference unless it is on a better camera body? I guess I'm asking if I should get a better lens or a better camera body? Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated, including suggestions on lenses or bodies. Thank you!

[RichardTaylor]

Providing your technique (shooting & PPing) is spot on,a lens that has better IQ and focussing performance will give you a technically better image especially when used at wider apertures, probably more so than a camera upgrade. To get a significant difference by upgrading the body you would probably need to go full frame and that means good glass anyway..
As the saying goes "glass before bodies".

What other lenses do you own?

[jml79]

Just looked at your site and your shots are great. I doubt you need a new body any time soon. I am not sure what lens you have used for your portrait work but I can tell you are shooting some pretty small apertures to get the DOF if you are using your 70-300. What you may be experiencing is simply camera shake at the long focal lengths. You might want to try the cheap but great 50mm lens. It is a prime so it should be as sharp as a tack and it is a little shorter (and a ton lighter) than your 70-300 would be. It also is a little faster for when you need the speed.

If you are using a tri-pod, are you remembering to turn off the IS. There are a few lenses you are supposed to leave it on but usually with a tri-pod you turn the IS off or it can introduce phantom camera shake.

Just some thoughts. Best of luck.

[SaraSue]

I figured it was probably glass before body so that is good to hear. I have the kit lens that came with the camera 18-55 (I don't know why but I hate that lens) and then a 50mm 1.4. I loved the 50mm before I got my new lens but now with the IS and USM I can't seem to use any other lens. I love the 50mm for inside when things are darker but outside I love my other lens. My main problem is I'm young, I have a toddler so all my friends who I do photos for are young with young toddlers. I'm usually working my toosh off trying to get them to look at the camera so as soon as they look I'm trying to quickly capture it. I'd love to hold my camera with perfect form all the time but I find it so hard when I'm trying to get there attention. Maybe I should just use my tripod more. I was hoping the L serious would help with that quick reaction time but it probably wouldn't change the fact that I'm still shaking from trying to get their attention. I usually stay at 70mm just so I can open up my aperture and still have a decent shutter speed. I do family photos too so I wouldn't want to go much lower than f/4. I don't know. Now I know why some photographers choose to work with seniors/bridals, and other adults. Kids are hard! I love natural light but maybe I should start using my speedlight more so I can make my shutter speed faster?

[jml79]

Just give the nifty fifty a shot. Because it is a shorter focal length it will have more DOF at the same aperture. Also it is much lighter and easier to handle. You can stop it down just as much to control your DOF but you also have the option of opening up a bit to get your shutter speed up. You could also bump your ISO up a stop if you have the head room.

You only need 1 stop of extra light to double your shutter.

[MrJones]

I would move up the body scale to a 60D or 7D to really start and feel a pro quality body and performance.
you are using an old model of the entry grade DSLR which is quite old. you can get a lot more from your camera these days.
right now you have nice set of lenses to work with, although they are not as fast and sharp as the L series, they do serve you well.
I agree with jml79 regarding the 50mm f/1.4 you own.. use it more, it's a great lens and you can get a lot of creative results if you use it wisely.
in your situation I would go for the camera first and lens later, mainly because you already own a nice set of lenses.
btw, if you have the 2500$ to spend - go straight to the 5D

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by MrJones

I would move up the body scale to a 60D or 7D to really start and feel a pro quality body and performance.

No. Lenses first.

[Glenn72]

Another vote to use your 50mm 1.4 lens. Its really a great lens and practically "L" quality.
I would work more on technique as IS does make you soft, but that lens is capable of really tack sharp images. Something else that I find helps out is to use Auto ISO as it should reduce the exposure time.
I have the 50mm 1.8 II lens and I am extremely pleased with it, the 50mm 1.4 is only better.

[inkista]

An L probably won't help you, here. Reaction time is reaction time and that's all on you, not the lens. AF lock--that can partially be the lens (larger max. apertures and USM tend to make the AF go faster). But your 50/1.4 USM already gives you what you need for that.

Where Ls might help out is in a) having IS and USM (although there are a lot of non-Ls that have IS and USM, too, as you've found, and a lot of Ls don't have IS), b) having better contrast, color and C/A control--none of which you're complaining about right now. c) being heavier-built so they can take more abuse (again, not something that you're complaining about). So, I'd say, put the red-ring lust aside. Ls are great lenses but they're still just lenses--not magical cure-alls for what ails you photographically.

They're also honking big, heavy, and conspicuous (filter size on most Ls is 77mm). And just because an L lens costs three times as much as a gold-ringed USM counterpart, doesn't mean you're going to get three times the lens. Just remember a lot of lens reviews are written by professionals who can write lenses off as business equipment on their taxes, so they don't count the cost the same way.

In terms of sharpness, stabilization, shutter speed (1/focal_length or faster for non-IS lenses), aperture (do you know your lens' sweet spots?), handholding technique, control over the AF system, and post-processing all come into it, so I'd actually suggest that if you've not yet begun to shoot RAW and play around in Lightroom, that that might actually be your next step, and a better way to spend your money than a new camera body or lens.

[SaraSue]

haha, my "red ring lust" good way to put it. I don't doubt the power of the 50mm I do use it frequently. I promise! But since right now I'm only self taught I have researched ALOT! I have read two things that I have taken to heart about doing portraits. 1. a rule of thumb is an f/stop of at least the amount of people in the photo, so since I did a shoot of a family of 5 I used about a f/5 or f/4. My big zoom does that so I thought why would I want to use the 50mm with a wider apeture, then wouldn't some of the family be out of focus? Or are you saying I should try to use a f/4 or f/5 with my 50mm and it would be better? I do shoot in RAW and edit in PS. I sharpen in post production and have been pretty satisfied with how it turns out but I just don't understand how some peoples photos literally jump out at you with sharpness. I've read that some people are worried their photos are too sharp and they have to soften them, that sounds crazy to me! Why wouldn't you LOVE sharp photos?? The second thing I have read about portraits is using a long focal length is generally more flattering so I thought that was the better lens to use. But since I keep my zoom on 70 maybe that isn't that different than my 50?

love all the comments! Thanks everyone!!!