T3i udgrade lens

I was in Sam's Club the other day and saw a Canon 70D, I almost picked it up and put it in the shopping cart http://www.samsclub.co​m …rod14520076.ip?​navAction= but then got to thinking do I really need it or should I get a better lens for my T3i. I don't care about being a professional photographer BUT I would like to get past the amateur stage, all I really want is to be able to take SHARP IMAGES like goose bump on skin to stand out sharp as a tack, eyes that are sharp not cloudy, soft or what I call out of focus.
I am convinced that I have applied myself to learning something about photography, I have used a light meter for lighting, used gray card for white balance, all shot in RAW, Lightroom 4 and hundred's of edited pictures all with the same results, It is finally sinking in that it is not me, so it has to be the T3i or the kit lens that came with it.

If I decide to get a better camera 70D will I be stuck with KIT Lens just to find out later that I going to upgrade the lens to get past the soft, cloudy, out of focus looking 70d kit lens. Any opinions as to what I should do? Buy a new 70D or upgrade the T3i lens?

I appreciate any help I can get with helping me decide.

Thanks
Don

I would keep the T3i. It is more than capable of 'sharp' photos. Keep in mind that there is more to photos than 'sharp'. Anyway, neither of your lenses is really known for its sharpness, or focus speed/accuracy. I'd put some money in good used lenses before upgrading the camera. The 15-85 is a lot better than the 18-55 II. The 70-200 f/4 IS is a lot better than the 55-250 II. There are a lot of options, depending on what you want to accomplish.

Upgrade glass for IQ, generally.
Upgrade cameras for features, generally.
The cheapest upgrade most of can get is skills/practice/techni​que.

Just about any camera and lens made in the last 10 years (and before) will take sharp pictures. If your pics are not sharp, maybe your gear is defective, or maybe your technique is lacking. I suggest you do some careful tests on a tripod to find out what is wrong.

Buy some more lenses before upgrading the camera...look at a prime at a focal length you like

Here's one you might want to consider. I don't have this lens but it gets pretty good reviews.

Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM

Compared to the kit lens, it starts out at f2.8 and gives 15mm more at the long end. Compact size.
Maybe this is useful to you, maybe not. Some thing to think about.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …r-header-back-to-top-link

You're getting some great recommendations for upgrade zooms, but the next lens you should get is the 50mm f/1.8 STM. For a modest investment of $125, you will get sharpness, but more importantly the experience of shooting with a large aperture prime, which you should absolutely have before putting any money into better lenses, zooms or otherwise.

The T3i body is not what's holding you back, it's the lens. It's much harder to produce a cheap zoom that is really good, as compared to a cheap prime. The 50 STM is Canon's cheapest lens, but stopped down to just f/2.8, it's sharper than any of the non-L kit zooms, razor sharp in the center especially. The 40/2.8 STM is also impressively sharp wide open; not quite as sharp in the center as the 50 gets, but it holds its sharpness much better into the corners, even on full-frame.

I recommend the 50 though, because it will let you do selective focus shots. On an APS-C sensor body, the effective f-stop of a lens, as it relates to depth of field, is affected by the crop factor: The 50mm f/1.8 has the field of view that an 80mm lens would have on a FF body, which most people know, but the depth of field is equivalent of about f/2.8 on a FF body, something that is mentioned less often. For this reason, it's nice to have the fastest lens you can get (The f/2.8 pancakes will deliver DoF equivalent to f/4 lenses when put on crop bodies).

To get the sharpness of the 50mm STM from a zoom, you have to spend some serious cash. The 20-70mm f/2.8 mk II and 70-200/2.8 mk II are only zoom lenses I've used that beat it on sharpness. My walkaround 24-70mm f/4 is very good, but the 50mm STM is sharper.

absplastic wrote in post #17671002
You're getting some great recommendations for upgrade zooms, but the next lens you should get is the 50mm f/1.8 STM. For a modest investment of $125, you will get sharpness, but more importantly the experience of shooting with a large aperture prime, which you should absolutely have before putting any money into better lenses, zooms or otherwise.

The T3i body is not what's holding you back, it's the lens. It's much harder to produce a cheap zoom that is really good, as compared to a cheap prime. The 50 STM is Canon's cheapest lens, but stopped down to just f/2.8, it's sharper than any of the non-L kit zooms, razor sharp in the center especially. The 40/2.8 STM is also impressively sharp wide open; not quite as sharp in the center as the 50 gets, but it holds its sharpness much better into the corners, even on full-frame.

I recommend the 50 though, because it will let you do selective focus shots. On an APS-C sensor body, the effective f-stop of a lens, as it relates to depth of field, is affected by the crop factor: The 50mm f/1.8 has the field of view that an 80mm lens would have on a FF body, which most people know, but the depth of field is equivalent of about f/2.8 on a FF body, something that is mentioned less often. For this reason, it's nice to have the fastest lens you can get (The f/2.8 pancakes will deliver DoF equivalent to f/4 lenses when put on crop bodies).

To get the sharpness of the 50mm STM from a zoom, you have to spend some serious cash. The 20-70mm f/2.8 mk II and 70-200/2.8 mk II are only zoom lenses I've used that beat it on sharpness. My walkaround 24-70mm f/4 is very good, but the 50mm STM is sharper.

Some questionable advice here. The 50/1.8 is a full frame lens and is too long for general photography on a crop like the T3i. Furthermore, it is not particularly sharp, nor is it known for its good autofocus.

OP, it would be useful if you would show us examples of your pics where you think the sharpness is not adequate. Make sure the EXIF is intact.

Archibald wrote in post #17671027
Some questionable advice here. The 50/1.8 is a full frame lens and is too long for general photography on a crop like the T3i. Furthermore, it is not particularly sharp, nor is it known for its good autofocus.

OP, it would be useful if you would show us examples of your pics where you think the sharpness is not adequate. Make sure the EXIF is intact.

Certainly agree about the questionable advice. The 50 STM suffers from the same poor AF as the 50 1.8 II. Yes, it is too long for general use on a crop camera.

EDIT:
DOF is not affected by sensor size. A 50mm lens, set to f/1.8, and focused at X distance will show the same DOF on apsc, apsh, or full frame.

plenty of people use a 50mm on a crop and get good results...OP has the 18-55mm for general use...just because the 50 is a little long for some doesn't mean it's questionable advice...having a fast prime will open up a new way of looking at things for the OP...

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17671035
EDIT:
DOF is not affected by sensor size. A 50mm lens, set to f/1.8, and focused at X distance will show the same DOF on apsc, apsh, or full frame.

online DOF calculators don't agree with this statement...

DreDaze wrote in post #17671043
plenty of people use a 50mm on a crop and get good results...OP has the 18-55mm for general use...just because the 50 is a little long for some doesn't mean it's questionable advice...having a fast prime will open up a new way of looking at things for the OP...

You are solving the wrong problem.

Archibald wrote in post #17671049
You are solving the wrong problem.

what's the problem? all i see is the OP talking about sharpness...the 50mm is going to be sharper than anything he's got now

DreDaze wrote in post #17671047
online DOF calculators don't agree with this statement...

Try it.

Same aperture, same distances (camera to subject, subject to background) will yield the same DOF regardless of sensor size. Of course, the crop body shot will appear to have the subject a lot closer to the camera. Subject will fill more of the frame, leaving less background showing. DOF will be the same.

Same aperture, same framing (camera further from subject, and further from background) will yield deeper DOF for the crop camera camera. This is real. The crop camera has to be ~1.6x further from the subject than the full frame to get the same framing. The change in distances is what affects the DOF. Sensor size does not. This, I suppose, must be the basis of the DOF calculator variations due to sensor size. It is comparing apples to giraffes.

It is quite simple generate a totally obliterated background at f/16. It is equally simple to get super-deep DOF at f/2.8. DOF is dependent on focal length, aperture, and distance. Sensor size is irrelevant.

a lot of people say Circle of Confusion is related to DOF(i'm reading a thread on it now)

all i know is when i went to my online DOF calculators, and plugged in the same aperture, same distance, and just changed the camera, the DOF changed as well...

DreDaze wrote in post #17671082
a lot of people say Circle of Confusion is related to DOF(i'm reading a thread on it now)

all i know is when i went to my online DOF calculators, and plugged in the same aperture, same distance, and just changed the camera, the DOF changed as well...

I use this one: http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html. Yes, it most certainly does do that. I can not explain that. My guess is that it is somehow related to print size and viewing distance. It has no basis in physics.

Here is a simple thought experiment. Imagine taking a photo using fixed parameters, let us say 50mm, f/2, focused at 10', on a full frame camera. The sensor will capture a 24mm x 36mm portion of the image projected onto the sensor by the lens.

Now consider changing NOTHING except replacing the full frame body with a crop body. The crop body does absolutely nothing to the parameters. It merely captures a smaller portion (14.9mm x 22.3mm) of the exact same image projected onto the smaller sensor by the lens. The images projected by the lens are exactly the same. One camera captures a larger portion of it than the other. DOF will be identical. Sensor size does not affect what comes out of the back of the lens.