Upgrade my 350D Body or lens

I presently have a 350D and a sigma 50-150MM f2.8.[/SIZE]I occasionally use it for sports and programs in school where light is wanting. So sometimes i have to stretch the camera to ISO1600 was comparing my recent pics to the new cameras and i feel that my pics are a bit noisy in the ISO 800 and 1600. Also* my camera only goes to IS01600 max.* If i upgrade which should i go for? a new body or a better glass. for body i'm thinking of a Canon 60D or 650D. Question would there be a significant improvement in the image quality most especially on the high ISO? like 1600 and above? Would the improvement be incremental or just by leaps and bounds?

In the alternative, if the improvement is negligible should i just get a better lens like a Canon 70-200mm f2.8?I am not after the video capabilities, live-view and high ISO's of the new cameras. I am just after an improvement in the image quality. For most of my pics i use a GF2, ii only use the dSLR once or thrice a year for school programs and school sports affairs. Other than that i use the Micro 4/3rdsInputs guys?

Sample pic

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

I had a 350d as well as a 400d as a pairing doing duty in my bag quite recently still, and i was always itching to upgrade as i thought the bodies were my limiting factors... Until i picked up a 24-105L and it changed everything... Just having a decent lens made a massive difference. I followed that shortly after with a 35L and that was even more amazing, even on the small 8megapixels of the 350d.

Ive moved on now to a 5d2 and a 5dc but as the glass has been quality, its allowed me to upgrade the bodies without again having to upgrade glass.

A 70-200 f2.8 is one on my list too! It would make a substantial difference in my opinion.

I upgraded from a Rebel XT to a 60D. Feature-wise, the 60D is a lot better, but I didn't feel like I was getting a significant boost in image quality over the 350D. ISO performance is about 0.5 stop to a full-stop better at ISO1600. On the other hand, getting a 70-200 f/2.8 II gives me better results, higher keeper rate and sharper shots. IMO, go for a good lens before the latest body.

XT + 70-200 f/4 non-IS, ISO 1600, 1/10 sec, 120mm @ f/4

Looks like you are sharpening the noise, before taking care of the noise first.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15122449
Looks like you are sharpening the noise, before taking care of the noise first.

Do you suggest that I get a better lens first? Even If I have a 50-150 f2.8 already?

alfa wrote in post #15122499
Do you suggest that I get a better lens first? Even If I have a 50-150 f2.8 already?

My response was to AXI.

Having had a 350D, I would definitely suggest upgrading bodies. However, don't go all out so that you do have enough left for glass. If you like the feel of the 350D, then I would suggest a T2i as a refurb from Canon, and then you can worry about glass, like a 17-55 2.8 IS. Since you already have an f2.8 zoom lens, sure you can upgrade that lens, but it will still be an f2.8 lens, so your ISO needs will still remain.

I didn't apply any noise reduction in lightroom, here is with some NR applied. but my point is that the image quality difference between the two crop bodies will be noticeable but not as big.

Sure but there would be a very noticeable difference the farther up the ISO scale you go. 6400 on the XT is very, very ugly. Also ISO 1600 can be quite clean on the newest crop bodies, more so than the 350D, if you ETTR and post process judiciously.

If you can swing it I'd go with a newer body and a better lens. In the long run you'll have a more capable body and a nice lens to boot. While most people say better lenses make low end cameras work better, I have to say that the XT is pretty much outdated and Canon hasn't supported that camera for the last couple years now.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15122714
Sure but there would be a very noticeable difference the farther up the ISO scale you go. 6400 on the XT is very, very ugly. Also ISO 1600 can be quite clean on the newest crop bodies, more so than the 350D, if you ETTR and post process judiciously.

I am sure you mean 6400 on the 7D or 60D, yes? I had an XT (350D) for a while when it first came out, until I got my XTi (400D). Both of them have an upper limit of ISO 1600, and it's pretty bad noise-wise. Actually I have CHKD firmware so I get ISO 3000 (not 3200) and its even worse. Just nice to have for the times when a noisy shot is better than no shot at all.

I keep being simply amazed when I see images from the 5D's and 1D's of the world at ISO 3200 or (much) higher. I think it looks like ISO 400 on my XTi, if not better!

ddk632 wrote in post #15122837
I am sure you mean 6400 on the 7D or 60D, yes? I had an XT (350D) for a while when it first came out, until I got my XTi (400D). Both of them have an upper limit of ISO 1600, and it's pretty bad noise-wise. Actually I have CHKD firmware so I get ISO 3000 (not 3200) and its even worse. Just nice to have for the times when a noisy shot is better than no shot at all.

I keep being simply amazed when I see images from the 5D's and 1D's of the world at ISO 3200 or (much) higher. I think it looks like ISO 400 on my XTi, if not better!

No I mean 6400 on the XT/XTi. You can shoot at higher ISOs, you just have to shoot raw and shoot to the left 2 stops.

6400 on the 7D is very workable. This is directly out of camera JPG, not a raw that has been processed.

I have nothing to add but that I *love* those glasses. We started buying cheap eyeglasses online and so have a bunch of "fun" ones, and totally approve of people wearing glasses as a fashion statement (as opposed to just boring things that have to be worn just to see).

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15122865
No I mean 6400 on the XT/XTi. You can shoot at higher ISOs, you just have to shoot raw and shoot to the left 2 stops.

I see, I was thinking actual sensor sensitivity vs. PP.

Mediocre operation is what made me upgrade from my 350D. The focusing wasn't great and, in my opinion, ISO 1600 was unusable. I was hoping to alleviate this by getting a the Canon 50 1.4 but no dice. Focus was still bad and I had to drop the dof way too far too get any shots.

I upgraded to the 5D2 so it's not exactly applicable to your situation, but I would recommend getting a different body instead of a lens. The 350D is a great camera, but it can only go so far.

I would think that a body upgrade will help. I am not sure what kind of center AF point your camera has, but the newer cameras are f/2.8 sensitive in the center- which might help with focusing accuracy. Both the t4i and the 60D are similar in this respect- all cross type af points- and f/2.8 sensitivity in the center. You also state that you use your camera to the highest selectable ISO on that model- that usually does not work that well. Having more iso options at your fingertips will help keep shutter speed up.. IQ- I would think and like to hope that you will see an improvement in IQ- just because your AF system will likely be more accurate plus years of improvements rolled into the later models. In good light- your 350D is probably a good camera.. Push it towards the upper edge of its limits- and a newer body would have the advantage.

The other option- if you don't have one, is perhaps an external flash- but keep in mind the distance to the ceiling if you bounce (and if it is white ). A 580 EX II costs more- but has more power for bouncing. Or you could bounce off a reflector..