Canon Flaming

[Roger LePage]

Roger LePage et al,

Roger you hinted at the reproduction capabilities of the D30/D60,
but I didn't quite get it.

Will the D30/D60 make a file capable of reproducing a double truck
(two page spread) color magazine image or not?

Yes, I am a magazine shooter (boating, travel, adventure) myself
and this ability is key in my making the switch to digital (D60 + L
glass) from Velvia film.

Thanks for filling in the blanks,
JL
--
...f8 and be there!

 

[Roger LePage]

Double truck D30 well no, D60?? I have had D30 images printed in a magazine almost full page with great results. What the extra rez will do, I don't know. Yea,the camera does have problems, (mostly focus). It will be interesting seeing what the D60 can do when the production cameras are on the street. I find it hard using a film camera now, polaroid back yuk. Am I stuck on Canon, no, I have used Nikons, Minoltas, Contax, even Alpas, medium and large format, what ever works. I guess the game is to buy now and upgrade when the newest greatest comes out, other wise you will always be waiting for the next product. They got ya.

 

[MikeA]

Here's how the D30 Servo AF works.... you can take shots of birds
on a dock walking as long as they are walking parralell to you and
not towards or going away from you.

But only if they're asleep. For more information, see:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=2285505

 

[james]

Give it a break guys--CheersJames Young http://yjy.biz

 

[Karl Guttag]

I think the bottom line is something like this:

1. Some people are whining about the inadequacies of the D60 when
there aren't even any production models in the stores yet!!

So if somebody has a different opinion than you they are a whiner? You sound like you are whining.

2. Some people are whining about the D60 not being a revolutionary
upgrade from the D30, in effect second-guessing Canon's marketing
and engineering prowess. Those same people are generally
unsatisfied with their D30's for the same reasons (primarily the
mythical poor autofocus).

Obviously you need to learn how to read, I guess you are too busy whining to read what other people are saying.

Here is the crux of it, as I see it: Those who fall into the
above catgegories probably shouldn't have purchased a D30 to begin
with. They would be much happier with a 1d or another
manufacturer's camera which is better tuned for low light sports
photography. That simply isn't the D30's strong suit.

This is you "Let them eat cake speech." Spend $5,000 just to get a $400 camera's AF system or sell all your lenses and change systems. The D30 was the best camera for the money about 1.5 years ago.

So what? It should be a matter of fitting the proper tool to the
job. All this whining is like someone complaining about how their
new Cadillac has a lousy turning radius compared to someone else's
Honda Accord. If that was important to them, then why the heck
didn't they get the Accord to begin with??? Instead we see
complaining about how Cadillac deliberately crippled the turning
radius of their products for some sinister purpose. ;-)

Why don't you stop with all the whining? Canon could have put a decent AF system in for negligible cost. They either ignored customer feedback or were trying to make space for the 1D. It is not a grand conspiracy theory, but just how businesses work sometime. Maybe this is too hard a concept for you to understand.

The way the free market works, particularly in this age of the internet is that if you dissappoint people, you get a lot of negative feedback.

In the short run, most people are locked-in by the lenses they own. Most people don't want the hassle and/or financial loss of trading out their lenses. Canon does not "owe them" anything, but they deserve to hear from their customers that are going to make a ruckess if they think Canon is taking them for granted.

Karl

--Karl

 

[MikeA]

Give it a break guys

You feel much better now.

 

[MikeA]

There must be some simple solutions to this problem.

This is you "Let them eat cake speech." Spend $5,000 just to get
a $400 camera's AF system or sell all your lenses and change
systems. The D30 was the best camera for the money about 1.5 years
ago.

Aha, I just KNEW it. Simple fix: then don't buy it. If $400 cameras focus better, buy them. Or buy a 1D. Or a D1. Or a something-something that focuses better.

(The D30 might actually still be a pretty good buy, its grotesque, awful, grim, hideous auto-focus notwithstanding ... especially at today's prices. That's "might," not "is." I wouldn't want anyone to get upset about this.

Why don't you stop with all the whining? Canon could have put a
decent AF system in for negligible cost. They either ignored
customer feedback or were trying to make space for the 1D.

Simple fix: don't buy a D30. Or even a D60, if its auto-focus is so bad.

It is
not a grand conspiracy theory, but just how businesses work
sometime. Maybe this is too hard a concept for you to understand.

Ah...I understand. It's the "if you toss enough personal insults at him, often enough, THAT'll prove the point" approach. It has always worked so well.

out their lenses. Canon does not "owe them" anything, but they
deserve to hear from their customers that are going to make a
ruckess if they think Canon is taking them for granted.

Now, that's certainly true -- they will, and they have. If the AF is objectionable enough to enough people, then Canon should hear from them. And I suppose some Canon employees must read forums like this. But I wonder if making complaints here is a truly effective way of dealing with these problems. I suspect it isn't. It might help, but it's probably not "efficient."

In any case, there's always the vote-with-your-wallet solution. Don't like the auto-focus performance of the D30? Then don't buy one.

Stop me if you've heard that before.

 

[Andy Somnifac]

Oh, we've heard that before, but everyone knows best about a camera they have yet to hold in their hands, remember?

Andy

In any case, there's always the vote-with-your-wallet solution.
Don't like the auto-focus performance of the D30? Then don't buy
one.

Stop me if you've heard that before.

 

[MikeA]

In any case, there's always the vote-with-your-wallet solution.
Don't like the auto-focus performance of the D30? Then don't buy
one.

Stop me if you've heard that before.

Oh, we've heard that before, but everyone knows best about a camera
they have yet to hold in their hands, remember?

Well, I know I do. Hey, for all I know, I'll end up eating my words big-time; I'll be in a situation in which I desperately need good auto-focus, and I'll run across the AF shortcomings, and then I'll be ticked off, too. But the thing is, in the dim past: there wasn't any auto-focus. If the light was poor, tough luck. You had to make do with the equipment you had. There was one advantage back then: the focusing mechanisms of the old FD lenses were extremely solid and silky-smooth in operation. These newer lenses feel "tinny" by comparison (though I reckon the optics themselves are every bit as good, if not much better). It just doesn't make a person feel warm 'n' comfy all over to focus manually, the way it once did. Turning the focusing ring of the 50/1.4 feels like scraping two pieces of semi-smooth plastic together without benefit of WD-40.

Well, so it goes...just another set of limitations to become accustomed to. I don't know what else to do. Customers can expect that given enough complaints, Canon will Do Something About The Problem. But in the short term, if we want to use their stuff we have only the equipment they manufacture...and it's a "get OVER it" sort of world...

 

[Matt Kim]

I am growing very tired of reading negative comments about Canon
and the D30/D60. The D60 isn’t on the shelves yet and everyone is
declaring it a piece of junk. I purchased a D30 this spring, it
has taken over most of the photography I had used a Hasselblad for.
I still use the Hasselblad for magazine covers. I’ve used the D30
for catalog, fashion, portraits and even food photography that I
had previously shot with 4x5. Every time I down load images, the
camera impresses me, I guess that’s what matters. The company I
work for purchased a Canon D2000 ($12,000) few years ago, the D30
images kicks it’s but. If the D60 has all the qualities of D30 and
more rez, GREAT. Cameras are just a piece of equipment, not
perfect, doesn’t matter what brand, get comfortable with it and
make the most of what it has.

--Regards, Matt http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=386029 http://www.pbase.com/mattjkphoto/root http://www.wherearethetoonsnow.com/

 

[Marie H.]

and I still don't buy it...

Composition is all that is left, and many times this is pure luck.
Give BoBo the chimp a D30 and a microdrive and let him go to town.
Eventually he'll get an award winning photo.

Doubtful. It's not all about composition and it's not all about the camera. It's a little of both. If the camera didn't matter, my Canon S10 would take just as good pictures as my 1D -- after all, I'm still the same photographer. But it doesn't.

Now, I can get stuff out of my S10 that a lesser skilled photographer can't (and likewise I don't get as much out of my 1D as the really great sports shooters do because I'm not as good as them). But at some point there are shots that even the world's best photographer won't get with lesser equipment.

Besides, if it was just the equipment, then how come when I hand down my old equipment to my husband, he doesn't take as good as shots with it as I did before I gave it to him? He's definitely smarter than BoBo the chimp. But he's not as good a photographer as I am and it shows. when we both use the same equipment.

Likewise, I get so sick of reading how a great photographer can get a great shot out of a pinhole camera. It's such a cliche and it's so misleading. The word's greatest photographer can't get a shot of Kurt Browning frozen in mid-air in a triple jump with a pinhole camera ... That's because it's not just the skill of the photographer just like it's not just the quality of the equipment. It's a combination of both.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging what kind of equipment you need to get the results you want. Having fancy equipment doesn't mean you are an idiot whose camera does all the work. It's not like skilled photographers never use P or never use AF. But part of being skilled is to know when to use P and when to use M and when to use AF and when to use MF and to be able to use whatever combination is the right one for that situation.

To get back to the issue at hand. The AF on the D30 is fine for some people's needs. For some the D30 doesn't quite cut it but the D60 will be enough better. But for some of us, neither cut it. We're taking lots of fast action shots in low light and getting a 10% keeper rate or missing that once in a lifetime shot isn't acceptable. That doesn't make us crappy photographers at the mercy of our equipment. It just means that the D30/D60s are not the best cameras for someone doing low light action shots 90% of the time.

Marie

 

[SteveB Ohio]

I am growing very tired of reading negative comments about Canon

--Steve http://home.att.net/~bishopweb/

 

[Mike Johnston]

Uh, ever seen the shots one of the Canon forum semi-regulars has
taken at clubs in L.A.? With flash? Ever seen how well they turned
out? (If you like that sort of thing.)

Well, perhaps not. (With his D30, by the way. A minor detail, to be
sure; don't be troubled by it. Damned if I know how he did it,
considering that the shots appeared to be taken in fairly low
light, and there's not a sleeping sandpiper or an impossibly cute
kitten in sight.)

Could it be that the skill of the photographer "makes" the shot?
Quick! Let's take a vote! How did ANY photographer who had only a
Speed Graphic -- with flash bulbs -- available to him EVER get a
decent photograph out of the thing? You want to talk about lousy
autofocus.

Hilarious post, Mike A., and wise. I like this thread because it's a bit of an antidote to the sometimes raging equipment fetishism more often to be found around here.

Your comment reminds me of a smartass editorial response to a letter in the old Car & Driver magazine, back when David E. Davis was in charge. The letter-writer wrote in to complain about a sentence in the previous issue: "You said that the XXX 'blew the doors off' the BMW. I went back to your own reports and found that the BMW is a full second and a half faster than the XXX in your 0-60 tests. Please tell me at what point the BMW found itself 'getting its doors blown off' by the inferior XXX."

And the response: "At the point it realized it was being driven by an inferior driver."

Cameras are what we make of them, not what they make of us.

--Mike J.-- http://www.37thframe.com

 

[SteveB Ohio]

Sorry you took this the wrong way, Karl, but I hope you feel better after blowing off some steam.

So if somebody has a different opinion than you they are a whiner?
You sound like you are whining.

For the record, no I don't feel that way. I didn't say those who have a different opinion were whining. Please read before retorting.

Obviously you need to learn how to read, I guess you are too busy
whining to read what other people are saying.

Obviously. LOL! Some parts of me want to say, "You and whose army??" But I'll refrain and just try to understand what you're really trying to say.

This is you "Let them eat cake speech." Spend $5,000 just to get
a $400 camera's AF system or sell all your lenses and change
systems. The D30 was the best camera for the money about 1.5 years
ago.

Let them eat cake? I say, let them use Sigmas! ;-)

I think I see where you are misunderstaning what I wrote. You're upset for spending so much money on something that doesn't do what you expected it to do? The answer is not to insult people who ARE satisfied with their purchase. If you truly believe that the focus of the D-XX is only worthy of a $400 camera, then you should seriously consider getting something else.

Did anyone buy a D30 with the assurance from Canon that they would give us an inexpensive upgrade in just a year and a half that would have an autofocus system worthy of their best film cameras?

So what? It should be a matter of fitting the proper tool to the
job. All this whining is like someone complaining about how their
new Cadillac has a lousy turning radius compared to someone else's
Honda Accord. If that was important to them, then why the heck
didn't they get the Accord to begin with??? Instead we see
complaining about how Cadillac deliberately crippled the turning
radius of their products for some sinister purpose. ;-)

Why don't you stop with all the whining?

Forgive me, but I don't see any whining there at all. I'm quite satisfied with the focus performance of my D30. Sure, it could be faster. If I what I mostly use it for required 1D performance then I would have tightened my belt a bit more and just bought a 1D.

Canon could have put a decent AF system in for negligible cost.

Are you SURE of this? Is this based on your knowledge as a design engineer with a full grasp of all the technical and marketing variables, or is it based on wishful thinking? Heck, Canon could have included a coupon for 50% off on an 'L' lens. I wish they did, but they didn't. That's life.

customer feedback or were trying to make space for the 1D. It is
not a grand conspiracy theory, but just how businesses work
sometime. Maybe this is too hard a concept for you to understand.

LOL.. Yes I understand perfectly. If you truly understand it, then why the complaints about Canon exercising their right to work in the marketplace in the way that they see fit to? They know that if sales are strong, they made the right decision regardless of how loudly a minority of customers complain.

The way the free market works, particularly in this age of the
internet is that if you dissappoint people, you get a lot of
negative feedback.

Anytime something changes, there will be a certain percentage of people who are dissatisfied. I'm sure that Canon has taken this into account in their design and marketing decisions.

In the short run, most people are locked-in by the lenses they own.
Most people don't want the hassle and/or financial loss of trading
out their lenses. Canon does not "owe them" anything, but they
deserve to hear from their customers that are going to make a
ruckess if they think Canon is taking them for granted.

This is very true, but the only clout that any company will listen to are the sales numbers. If the D60 is a successful as the D30 was, then all the whining about why they didn't do more to improve it will fall on deaf ears. However, if they lose significant market share to Nikon or anyone else, you can count on them making an adjustment to recapture the loyalty of those customers.

--Steve http://home.att.net/~bishopweb/

 

[Thomas Gardner]

I am growing very tired of reading negative comments about Canon

Well, I must say this about that; it's sure a good thing that we have these long winded threads to read. If it wasn't for these long winded threads, I'd have more time to capture images I could whine about. At least this way, I'll be kept so busy reading, I'll be able to save myself from myself

 

[Karl Guttag]

So if somebody has a different opinion than you they are a whiner?
You sound like you are whining.

For the record, no I don't feel that way. I didn't say those who
have a different opinion were whining. Please read before
retorting.

“Whining” is a derisive term that you kept repeating throughout your post. It is like saying “you are a little cry baby, you are a little cry baby . . . “ throughout your whole post. I would agree that some people had unrealistic expectations for the D60, but most of the people that have express disappointment in what they have read have not “whined like a baby.”

This is you "Let them eat cake speech." Spend $5,000 just to get
a $400 camera's AF system or sell all your lenses and change
systems. The D30 was the best camera for the money about 1.5 years
ago.

Let them eat cake? I say, let them use Sigmas! ;-)

And then we have the people that believe all the marketing hype of Foveon. The real issue for Canon for the next year will be the Nikon D100 and maybe some other cameras based on the new Sony 1.5X sensor.

I think I see where you are misunderstaning what I wrote. You're
upset for spending so much money on something that doesn't do what
you expected it to do? The answer is not to insult people who
ARE satisfied with their purchase. If you truly believe that the
focus of the D-XX is only worthy of a $400 camera, then you should
seriously consider getting something else.

I don’t see where I insulted people that are satisfied with their purchase. Certainly not to the extent that you insulted people that are less than happy with the proposed D60 announcement. I paid $3,000 for my D30 soon after it was introduced and I am not complaining as I got a lot of good pictures while others were waiting for prices to drop. But any regular of this forum will tell you that the weakest point of the D30 is the AF.

Did anyone buy a D30 with the assurance from Canon that they would
give us an inexpensive upgrade in just a year and a half that would
have an autofocus system worthy of their best film cameras?

There you go putting words in the mouths and totally misrepresenting what I said. I SPECIFICALLY said I did NOT expect the AF of their BEST film cameras. I like to think it was a reasonable expectation that they would seriously address the weakest point of the D30.

Canon could have put a decent AF system in for negligible cost.

Are you SURE of this? Is this based on your knowledge as a design
engineer with a full grasp of all the technical and marketing
variables, or is it based on wishful thinking? Heck, Canon could
have included a coupon for 50% off on an 'L' lens. I wish they
did, but they didn't. That's life.

I happen to be an IC design engineer, but the fact that they can afford to put much better AF sensor into much cheaper film cameras should be proof enough.

customer feedback or were trying to make space for the 1D. It is
not a grand conspiracy theory, but just how businesses work
sometime. Maybe this is too hard a concept for you to understand.

LOL.. Yes I understand perfectly. If you truly understand it,
then why the complaints about Canon exercising their right to work
in the marketplace in the way that they see fit to? They know that
if sales are strong, they made the right decision regardless of how
loudly a minority of customers complain.

In the short run, most people are locked-in by the lenses they own.
Most people don't want the hassle and/or financial loss of trading
out their lenses. Canon does not "owe them" anything, but they
deserve to hear from their customers that are going to make a
ruckess if they think Canon is taking them for granted.

This is very true, but the only clout that any company will listen
to are the sales numbers. If the D60 is a successful as the D30
was, then all the whining about why they didn't do more to improve
it will fall on deaf ears. However, if they lose significant
market share to Nikon or anyone else, you can count on them making
an adjustment to recapture the loyalty of those customers.

Yep they will only seriously do things if sales numbers are bad. This is the danger any manufacturer makes if they play cute positioning products. But the criticisms of the product DO have an impact on sales. They have a right to try and manipulate the market. Their customers that have bought into their lens system have a right to call foul. From what I see, the complaints in these forums find their way back to Canon and perhaps as importantly to Reviewers of cameras and some store personnel. The more heat Canon gets about the Autofocus, the less likely they are to trivialize the issue in the future.

Karl--Karl

 

[Mike Johnston]

Well, I must say this about that; it's sure a good thing that we
have these long winded threads to read. If it wasn't for these
long winded threads, I'd have more time to capture images I could
whine about. At least this way, I'll be kept so busy reading, I'll
be able to save myself from myself

A photography teacher of mine told me something I never forgot. He said that when he first started teaching, he wasted a lot of time and energy trying to help students who seemed unhappy and whined and complained a lot. Then he learned an essential fact: when students got involved in working and making photographs, their complaining vanished; when they weren't shooting enough and didn't have enough actual photography to do, that's when they bitched and moaned. So he said he stopped worrying about disaffection and malaise and frustration: he'd just say "Work harder and shoot more."

But I do know that some of the people complaining about the D30's AF are working. In regards to that, one thing that always interests me is how people complain about one product in a manufacturer's line while seeming to ignore the presence of other products that are offered to solve the very problems the complainers are complaining about. The Canon D30 was obviously made to be inexpensive and small and light: when it came out (maybe still?), it was the smallest and lightest D-SLR, and one of the least expensive. So okay, that's the design brief. For the price and size of the camera, Canon can't easily incorporate great autofocus. Makes sense that they'd have to cut some corners somewhere, doesn't it? Then Canon introduces the EOS-1D, which does (by all accounts) have great autofocus. So, obviously, Canon is giving us a choice. We can buy the D30/60 and get a relatively reasonably priced and portable D-SLR, and, if we have a need for pro-quality predictive AF for sports shooting and other difficult conditions, well then, they provide a camera to meet those needs.

Complaining that the D30/60 doesn't have everything is like me complaining that my Ford Escort ZX-2 doesn't have the acceleration of a Corvette. If I want a Corvette, I should buy a Corvette, shouldn't I? And if I want to gripe that a ZX-2 is all I can afford, then shouldn't I accept the fact that Corvette-like performance costs something to implement and can't be incorporated into a $15,000 econocar? It doesn't make sense to me that people complain that a lower-level camera isn't the right tool for specialized jobs just because they can't afford, or don't want to pay for, the tool that IS provided for those specialized jobs.

Let's admit it: the Canon D30 and D60 do a hell of a lot and provide an incredible amount of performance and image quality for the price. They execute their design brief with aplomb. And if faster predictive AF for sports shooting is a high priority for you, shouldn't you merely accept the fact that you need an EOS-1D? If you can't afford it, that's life. But don't blame Canon--the choice is yours.

--Mike J.

"The 37th Frame," an Independent Newsletter for Photographers
No Advertising Accepted

-- http://www.37thframe.com

 

[SteveB Ohio]

Let's admit it: the Canon D30 and D60 do a hell of a lot and
provide an incredible amount of performance and image quality for
the price. They execute their design brief with aplomb. And if
faster predictive AF for sports shooting is a high priority for
you, shouldn't you merely accept the fact that you need an EOS-1D?
If you can't afford it, that's life. But don't blame Canon--the
choice is yours.

--Mike J.

Bravo!!!! --Steve http://home.att.net/~bishopweb/

 

[Stephen Cook]

I suppose this is what I find most frustrating on the threads. There is a tendency to push to one extreme or the other. The D30 isn't the perfect camera, nor is it the piece of junk others have claimed, and as you've pointed out, it's not the ideal camera for every situation.

If I may add to your statement, my frustration with each side (on the extreme ends) is as follows:

Neither the D30 or the D60 is listed as a pro camera, although many pros use them. It's unrealistic to expect a camera that street prices at under $2000 (D30), or under $3000 (D60 projected) to have the features and build quality of a camera costing 1.7 to 3 times what it does, and that's not just competing against other Canon cameras, it's any make. I'd like to have a new Mercedes for around $20,000, but if I want the build, features, etc, there's a floor to how much it costs.

On the other end, the posts which say a "pro" shouldn't need better autofocus because she should be able to do it herself make little sense. This carries with it an implication that a pro should be willing to deliberately cripple herself with her equipment because her skill should make up for it and she can still get the shot. It also means that a lot of people here think that there's a "perfect" photographer out there. I love having automatic features on a camera, but also want a manual override. The more I can trust the camera to make the proper mechanical adjustments, the more I can concentrate on composition, framing, storytelling and mood. Certainly there are "features" I neither need or want, like mpeg movie mode, digital zoom, etc.(mostly on consumer cameras), But other than the "idiot" modes on the D30, there are darned few features I don't use.

I also have to keep reminding myself that when you get to the upper levels of quality, you may pay twice as much for a 10% improvement, and that the better the photographer, the more difference that 10% makes.

Would I like a 1D? Yeah, buddy. Even more, I'll probably be drooling over the new Contax, if it lives up to their usual high standards.

Hey, all it takes is money!

Composition is all that is left, and many times this is pure luck.
Give BoBo the chimp a D30 and a microdrive and let him go to town.
Eventually he'll get an award winning photo.

Doubtful. It's not all about composition and it's not all about the
camera. It's a little of both. If the camera didn't matter, my
Canon S10 would take just as good pictures as my 1D -- after all,
I'm still the same photographer. But it doesn't.

Now, I can get stuff out of my S10 that a lesser skilled
photographer can't (and likewise I don't get as much out of my 1D
as the really great sports shooters do because I'm not as good as
them). But at some point there are shots that even the world's best
photographer won't get with lesser equipment.

Besides, if it was just the equipment, then how come when I hand
down my old equipment to my husband, he doesn't take as good as
shots with it as I did before I gave it to him? He's definitely
smarter than BoBo the chimp. But he's not as good a photographer as
I am and it shows. when we both use the same equipment.

Likewise, I get so sick of reading how a great photographer can get
a great shot out of a pinhole camera. It's such a cliche and it's
so misleading. The word's greatest photographer can't get a shot of
Kurt Browning frozen in mid-air in a triple jump with a pinhole
camera ... That's because it's not just the skill of the
photographer just like it's not just the quality of the
equipment. It's a combination of both.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging what kind of equipment
you need to get the results you want. Having fancy equipment
doesn't mean you are an idiot whose camera does all the work. It's
not like skilled photographers never use P or never use AF. But
part of being skilled is to know when to use P and when to use M
and when to use AF and when to use MF and to be able to use
whatever combination is the right one for that situation.

To get back to the issue at hand. The AF on the D30 is fine for
some people's needs. For some the D30 doesn't quite cut it but the
D60 will be enough better. But for some of us, neither cut it.
We're taking lots of fast action shots in low light and getting a
10% keeper rate or missing that once in a lifetime shot isn't
acceptable. That doesn't make us crappy photographers at the mercy
of our equipment. It just means that the D30/D60s are not the best
cameras for someone doing low light action shots 90% of the time.

Marie

 

[Stephen Cook]

Great post: Might I also mention that photographing fast moving objects in the dark is not the easiest photo situation in the world anyway?

1. Some people are whining about the inadequacies of the D60 when
there aren't even any production models in the stores yet!!

2. Some people are whining about the D60 not being a revolutionary
upgrade from the D30, in effect second-guessing Canon's marketing
and engineering prowess. Those same people are generally
unsatisfied with their D30's for the same reasons (primarily the
mythical poor autofocus).

Here is the crux of it, as I see it: Those who fall into the
above catgegories probably shouldn't have purchased a D30 to begin
with. They would be much happier with a 1d or another
manufacturer's camera which is better tuned for low light sports
photography. That simply isn't the D30's strong suit.

So what? It should be a matter of fitting the proper tool to the
job. All this whining is like someone complaining about how their
new Cadillac has a lousy turning radius compared to someone else's
Honda Accord. If that was important to them, then why the heck
didn't they get the Accord to begin with??? Instead we see
complaining about how Cadillac deliberately crippled the turning
radius of their products for some sinister purpose. ;-)

Me, I'll just continue to enjoy cruising along in the sunshine in
my nice noise free Caddy!

I am growing very tired of negative comments about post that
identify potential short comings of the D60 and the inadequacies of
the D60 for certain people. These people who are flaming the canon
flaming don't seem to realize:

A) that there are other people who have different photographic
needs from them
B) Wanted to upgrade to the D60
C) Don't feel that the D60 is enough of an "improvement" to justify
handing over their money to Canon.
D) Wanting the D60 to be better than it is / will be does not
equate to wanting the D60 to be a 1D. That there can be / is a
middle ground between the 1D and D60 that allows the D60 to be
improved without approaching the quality of the 1D.

Joo

--
Steve
http://home.att.net/~bishopweb/