Will Canon keep the D30 in production?

Hi all,

I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital, would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

McGregor,

I think it will stay in the line-up for another year or so. The new Canon, which many think will not be out until late this year or even possibly not until January 2002 is reportably going to cost some big bucks.

They need the D30, it's a good seller. I think the USA version will level off in the $2300-$2500 price range.
That is total speculation on my part.

Jim C.

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

The odds of Canon keeping the d30 in production after the release of
the EOS 1D are 100%. The d30 will be replaced but the EOS 1D is NOT
considered by Canon to be a d30 replacement.The d30 replacement will
simply be a larger mp version using the same EOS 33 body as the d30.

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

There is no reason to think that Canon won't have a digital SLR line-up like their 35mm SLRs. It makes marketing sense to have different specs/prices for a wide range of consumer types. Canon's priority must be the pro digital right now. A D30 replacement is more likely to be an upgrade (bigger sensor and better focussing) and, I guess, at least 18-24 months away before it reaches the market. The SLR market is different to the compact camera market and models stay on the shelves much longer. If the D30 wasn't such a good performer it would be logical to think that it would be pulled quicker but it's still up with the best, even now.

David

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

Hi-

Thanks for the responses- I agree that it makes sense for Canon to stick with D30, at least until an improved version makes it to market. That could take a while, too.

What about the price, though?

Looking at http://www.mysimon.com , I'm seeing prices like $2500, $2700 and $2248, although I hate to think what the cheap deal would like be as consumer experience

So prices are dropping.

In my veiw, Canon should price the D30 up against the other camera house's fixed lens, so called SLR's. That is, $2000 max. I think the D30 would do serious damage to that kind of competition.

But do people think it will happen?

I ask this because I would like nothing better than a D30 in the toolkit right now and I can afford one right now, but it does seem very over-priced.

I look at web sites that are selling a Canon EOS1v-HS (arguably the world's finest SLR) with a battery grip for only $1900 and think- "Well digital is a handy photographic technology, but isn't that film camera way,way,way better in terms of technology and value for money?"

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film processed. Yes?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

It depends on what you are looking for. If you only ever want your pics to be commercially-processed (digital too - either by in-store kiosk or online services) then it makes sense to go for the conventional approach because digital has little to offer you (apart from a camera that can expose between 100-1600 ISO and handle all lighting conditions without recourse to specially-balanced film).

If, however, you have a PC and a photo-quality printer and want to produce a few high-quality enlargements with minimum fuss, then digital is fanstastic. OK, you can buy a film scanner but having used a digital camera, it's a whole new world not having to wait for film to be processed, trying to scan it to get the most from it and then retouching the image to remove dust and scratches from the neg/slide.

The other big plus point for digital is that you can see what has been recorded almost immediately after taking the shot - you can see whether it was exposed correctly, composed correctly, focussed correctly etc. If it isn't then you delete it and re-take it. I now have a much higher percentage of usable shots per outing.

I would never have considered buying an EOS 1v. I have two mid-range Canon EOS bodies already. However, I had no hesitation in spending more on a D30 than on an EOS 1v. I have had much greater value in terms of photography from the D30 than I would have from an EOS 1v.

You have to ask yourself what you really need - the convenience and flexibility of digital vs the build quality and prestige of one of the world's finest SLRs. Personally, I would have no hesitation in buying the D30 again.

David

Andi McGregor said:

What about the price, though?

Looking at http://www.mysimon.com , I'm seeing prices like $2500, $2700 and
$2248, although I hate to think what the cheap deal would like be
as consumer experience

So prices are dropping.

In my veiw, Canon should price the D30 up against the other camera
house's fixed lens, so called SLR's. That is, $2000 max. I think
the D30 would do serious damage to that kind of competition.

But do people think it will happen?

I ask this because I would like nothing better than a D30 in the
toolkit right now and I can afford one right now, but it does seem
very over-priced.

I look at web sites that are selling a Canon EOS1v-HS (arguably the
world's finest SLR) with a battery grip for only $1900 and
think- "Well digital is a handy photographic technology, but isn't
that film camera way,way,way better in terms of technology and
value for money?"

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And
for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film
processed. Yes?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Andi McGregor said:

Hi-
Thanks for the responses- I agree that it makes sense for Canon to
stick with D30, at least until an improved version makes it to
market. That could take a while, too.

Click to expand...

My bet is that while a D30 will remain (in the announcement we are expecting sometime real soon now), it will not be the same D30 we have today. Canon will want to continue to reap dollar returns on their major capitol investment in the development of the D30. Canon will do what Nihon did, Canon will release a D30H, addressing some of the major complaints about the existing D30, setting the price of the D30H back up around the price of a D30 when it was first released and stopping production of the current D30 (and maybe even recalling old D30 stock like Nikon did with the D1). 3Mp, 1.6 multiplier, non-pro body will all be the same,, what remains to be seen is just what (how) existing D30 problems Canon will “fix”.

Phred

My guess is that the D30 and the 1.6x is an interim product. It may, with some improvements like better focus, stay around for a few years, but it is not really a perfect match. You really are “wasting” a lot of lens glass that is not being used. I expect in the longer term to see full 35mm framed SLR and a line of “APS sized” line of bodies using a line of scaled down interchangeable lenses with a 1.6X sized sensor. The APS size cameras will target both prosumers and pros that want a smaller and lighter set-up.

Karl

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

The annoucement specificaly deals with the EOS1d pro camera body.
The D30 replacement/upgrade will be some time away.

Phred said:

Andi McGregor said:

Hi-
Thanks for the responses- I agree that it makes sense for Canon to
stick with D30, at least until an improved version makes it to
market. That could take a while, too.

Click to expand...

My bet is that while a D30 will remain (in the announcement we
are expecting sometime real soon now), it will not be the same D30
we have today. Canon will want to continue to reap dollar returns
on their major capitol investment in the development of the D30.
Canon will do what Nihon did, Canon will release a D30H, addressing
some of the major complaints about the existing D30, setting the
price of the D30H back up around the price of a D30 when it was
first released and stopping production of the current D30 (and
maybe even recalling old D30 stock like Nikon did with the D1).
3Mp, 1.6 multiplier, non-pro body will all be the same,, what
remains to be seen is just what (how) existing D30 problems Canon
will “fix”.

Phred

Click to expand...

Andi McGregor said:

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And
for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film
processed. Yes?

Click to expand...

Have to admit this is a valid point and needs to be thought about for your own needs....

I'm not a great photographer (or even a good one) but I love trying! Digital for me makes the experience much more rewarding because now with my D30 I can try all the things I wanted to with film and see within seconds that actually I've messed up

However, in terms of the D30 vs my EOS3 the 3 does as you say about the 1v, whip the D30. Simple things like I was shooting in bright sunlight, couldnt see the lcd too well and the focus on the D30 (already not that great) kept selecting the left most box... now on the EOS3 I can see which focus boxes it chooses because they light up in the viewfinder... Not on my d30 though.

AF on the EOS3 is amazing... I've learnt over time that its so good that if I want to, I can hold the EOS3 above my head and click.. the results will be spot on. OK, thats not very creative but if I do the same with the D30 my experience is that it will either not focus or will focus on something I didn't want it to.

I could go on..... but everyone will disagree with me anyway so I'll stop but in my personal, limited, and below amateur status experience... yep, think about what digital will give you and if you can live without for the mo, go with the 1v.. That's not to say the D30 isn't great.. it is! but as you say, compared to a more capable body its lacking.

For me... well.... I'll keep on using the D30 to learn the art... keep clicking and learning what I've done wrong so my EOS3 sits in the box most of the time.

Cheers,
Keith

Something to keep in mind is that the D30 is a remarkably QUIET camera. It would make a great backup camera for pro's using an "EOS 1D" where being inconspicuous would be an issue, such as at a church. The A2E is just such a camera. It is very quiet an unobtrusive. Of course at this juncture we don't know just how loud an "EOS 1D" will be.

John W.

Let's all not loose site of the fact that photography is still an "art form" and should continue to be. I am at least as much if not more of a "gear head" as some of you and others. I admire and enjoy a good technology toy so very much as electronics has been a hobby of mine since I was a child. But I have seen too many examples of a photograph, taken by a very talented photographer with a not so sophisticated camera or setup, looking superior to a photographer using the "latest technology" to aid them. This is clearly why some who own the D30 have been able to glean photos that not only rival film but surpass it. It is still important to remember that in the right hands, any tool can exceed it's expectations. Exactly why I plan on taking courses when I am done with my selling season and learn as much as I can so that I can maximize my capabilities on this wonderful machine! Technolgy, not unlike knowledge can and MUST move on. Let us all become better photographers for it!
P.S. I am in love with my camera (and my wife isn't even jealous) LOL

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

Andi McGregor said:

I look at web sites that are selling a Canon EOS1v-HS (arguably the
world's finest SLR) with a battery grip for only $1900 and
think- "Well digital is a handy photographic technology, but isn't
that film camera way,way,way better in terms of technology and
value for money?"

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And
for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film
processed. Yes?

Click to expand...

Digital has never been about image quality or saving money. It's about speed and convenience.

It will be about saving money (and perhaps even image quality) at some time in the near future. We're getting close now. It wasn't very long ago that a less capable camera than the D30 cost 4-5 times as much.

But for now, you're still going to have to pay a premium for that speed and convenience.

When I was first learning photography, I found an old 120 box camera in my Mom's closet. I got a roll of B&W 120 film and spent the day shooting around my yard. One photo was VERY good. I spent years trying to get a shot that good with at 35mm SLR camera. I guess it was just luck, but sometimes you can exceed your equipment and technology. Then again, I've taken OK photographs with an oatmeal box and a piece of tin foil using black tape as a shutter. They might not have been art, but they were still ok.

Lee Rothman said:

Let's all not loose site of the fact that photography is still an
"art form" and should continue to be. I am at least as much if not
more of a "gear head" as some of you and others. I admire and enjoy
a good technology toy so very much as electronics has been a hobby
of mine since I was a child. But I have seen too many examples of a
photograph, taken by a very talented photographer with a not so
sophisticated camera or setup, looking superior to a photographer
using the "latest technology" to aid them.

Click to expand...

Keith Pritchard said:

AF on the EOS3 is amazing... I've learnt over time that its so good
that if I want to, I can hold the EOS3 above my head and click..
the results will be spot on. OK, thats not very creative but if I
do the same with the D30 my experience is that it will either not
focus or will focus on something I didn't want it to.

Click to expand...

I hear lots of examples of the amazing AF on other Canon models but I don't understand some of them. In this example how does the EOS3 know what you want to focus on? I mean I can get the D30 to focus on anything as long as I can give it enough contrast in a focus point. It sounds like people can point other cameras at any scene they want and the AF system will choose the most interesting subject and focus on it automatically!

Karlg said:

My guess is that the D30 and the 1.6x is an interim product. It
may, with some improvements like better focus, stay around for a
few years, but it is not really a perfect match. You really are
“wasting” a lot of lens glass that is not being used.
I expect in the longer term to see full 35mm framed SLR and a line
of “APS sized” line of bodies using a line of scaled
down interchangeable lenses with a 1.6X sized sensor. The APS
size cameras will target both prosumers and pros that want a
smaller and lighter set-up.

Karl

Click to expand...

Minolta tried the APS sized lens idea. It didn't realy work out. Nikon and Canon went with standard lens mounts on their APS SLRs. That didn't work out much better but at least nobody had to dump a collection of lenses.

Hopefull the D30 will one day be replaced with a product with a fulll size sensor. I think that may be more than two years away though. I think you will see a pro-body Canon with the D30 sensor (and one with a full size sensor).

Andi McGregor said:

Hi-
Thanks for the responses- I agree that it makes sense for Canon to
stick with D30, at least until an improved version makes it to
market. That could take a while, too.

What about the price, though?

Looking at http://www.mysimon.com , I'm seeing prices like $2500, $2700 and
$2248, although I hate to think what the cheap deal would like be
as consumer experience

So prices are dropping.

In my veiw, Canon should price the D30 up against the other camera
house's fixed lens, so called SLR's. That is, $2000 max. I think
the D30 would do serious damage to that kind of competition.

But do people think it will happen?

I ask this because I would like nothing better than a D30 in the
toolkit right now and I can afford one right now, but it does seem
very over-priced.

I look at web sites that are selling a Canon EOS1v-HS (arguably the
world's finest SLR) with a battery grip for only $1900 and
think- "Well digital is a handy photographic technology, but isn't
that film camera way,way,way better in terms of technology and
value for money?"

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And
for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film
processed. Yes?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

There are photographers like Micheal Reichman, http://www.luminous-landscape.com , who own both the D30 and The Iv. His 1v is mostly gathering dust, relegated to backup duty. I have a friend with a D30 and two EOS film bodies which he doesn't use any more.

I though about buying a film body and a good scanner before I bought the D30. However, the cost of an Eos 3 and a good film scanner was over $2000. My D30 was about $2500 (not including microdrive/battery rebate).

The savings in film should make up the difference. The Eos 3 may focus better but it can't change ISO unless you change films. It also can't tell you if you over exposed the image. The D30 can which more than compensates for any metering disadvantage.

It is a cliche that the photographer takes the photograph , not the camera. The 1V will not make you a better photographer. However, the D30 tgurns this cliche on its head. It will make you a better photographer because you will take more photos and will immediately know iif you screwed up. This will help ypu determine why, which will help you improve. Feedback and practise will help you improve at almost anything. Having taken all these photographs you will also have photos to choose from and therfore more good ones.

I'm aware of the Minolta APS system. I'm exepecting that in the long run that a 1.6x smaller imager with full size lenses will not last for some of the reasons that the Nikon and Canon APS's did not work out. Making an APS body that can handle full size lenses made no sense (nullifies the size/weight advantage, yet gives you poorer, APS size, film).

APS film was not for the kind of person that will buy interchangable lenses. APS is a format for people that don't know better (a marketing gimmic to sell less for more). At least part of the problem with APS SLRs is related to the problem of APS itself.

On the other hand, a 1.6x smaller sensor will, for a long time, be a lot cheaper than a full size 35mm sensor. As the D30 demostrates, a 1.6x sensor can deliver great images. The question is whether it is worth developing a lens set for it. In theory a 1.6x smaller sensor would yeild a system with about 1/4th the volume/weight ( 1/(1.6* 3) ). Imagine a set of cameras and lenses that give the quality of a D30 (or better with newer sensors) with 1/4th the volume and weight.

Certainly for many pro uses, a full 35mm sized sensor will make a lot of sense.

Certainly the Digimage7 and E-10 type of camera (all in one "SLR" with a 7x or so zoom) will fill at least part of this segement of the market. I still think there will be a market for people that want to have the image quality of a D30 without the bulk.

Karl

Andrew Grant said:

Karlg said:

My guess is that the D30 and the 1.6x is an interim product. It
may, with some improvements like better focus, stay around for a
few years, but it is not really a perfect match. You really are
“wasting” a lot of lens glass that is not being used.
I expect in the longer term to see full 35mm framed SLR and a line
of “APS sized” line of bodies using a line of scaled
down interchangeable lenses with a 1.6X sized sensor. The APS
size cameras will target both prosumers and pros that want a
smaller and lighter set-up.

Karl

Click to expand...

Minolta tried the APS sized lens idea. It didn't realy work out.
Nikon and Canon went with standard lens mounts on their APS SLRs.
That didn't work out much better but at least nobody had to dump a
collection of lenses.

Hopefull the D30 will one day be replaced with a product with a
fulll size sensor. I think that may be more than two years away
though. I think you will see a pro-body Canon with the D30 sensor
(and one with a full size sensor).

Click to expand...

David I'm with you!

I was reved and ready to laydown for a Nikon D1, but couldn't get past some of it's MAJOR photographic issues, the single biggest is the fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a "negative" out of the D1. Rumor had it that Canon's new rig would blow the D1 out of the water AND IT HAS (IMHO) and then some. What the lens sees is wht I get, sharpness (or lack thereof) and color and all that things that let me paint with light! Back to my point, the players and my money was there and I waited for the D30 and scored each on thier merits and actual production samples. FOR ME, the D30 had the capability of replacing film, though at the time I was going to be happy if it was close. I needed a "higher end (SLR)" for some web work I was doing at the trime and the money digital would save me over time would pay for itself readily just on the web work I do. In any case the D30 was for me the best choice and so I happily paid just under 3K for mine the WEEK it came out (my serial number ...860 indicates it was one of the first 900 made) and would do it again in a heart beat!

If someone came to me right now and GAVE me TWO new 1v's and UNLIMITED free film, processing and drum scanning for life, I STILL shot with my D30 because I get MUCH better pictures than drum scanned film, and I save SO much tiime I can (and do!) take more pictures... One day I'll get another camera, may not be the first week the "PRO" model comes out, but you CAN COUNT on it being a Canon DIGITAL camera with a larger sensor... The D30 will become a backup as my A2E is now, and I'll keep shooting DIGITAL since I've been SPOILED!

I swore for two decades I'd never switch to digital because it would never be as good as film, well I was part right... The D30 is NOT as good as film, ITS BETTER, MUCH BETTER... Which is why I won't go back...

Scott...

David R Stout said:

If, however, you have a PC and a photo-quality printer and want to
produce a few high-quality enlargements with minimum fuss, then
digital is fanstastic. OK, you can buy a film scanner but having
used a digital camera, it's a whole new world not having to wait
for film to be processed, trying to scan it to get the most from it
and then retouching the image to remove dust and scratches from the
neg/slide.

The other big plus point for digital is that you can see what has
been recorded almost immediately after taking the shot - you can
see whether it was exposed correctly, composed correctly, focussed
correctly etc. If it isn't then you delete it and re-take it. I now
have a much higher percentage of usable shots per outing.

I would never have considered buying an EOS 1v. I have two
mid-range Canon EOS bodies already. However, I had no hesitation in
spending more on a D30 than on an EOS 1v. I have had much greater
value in terms of photography from the D30 than I would have from
an EOS 1v.

You have to ask yourself what you really need - the convenience and
flexibility of digital vs the build quality and prestige of one of
the world's finest SLRs. Personally, I would have no hesitation in
buying the D30 again.

David

Andi McGregor said:

What about the price, though?

Looking at http://www.mysimon.com , I'm seeing prices like $2500, $2700 and
$2248, although I hate to think what the cheap deal would like be
as consumer experience

So prices are dropping.

In my veiw, Canon should price the D30 up against the other camera
house's fixed lens, so called SLR's. That is, $2000 max. I think
the D30 would do serious damage to that kind of competition.

But do people think it will happen?

I ask this because I would like nothing better than a D30 in the
toolkit right now and I can afford one right now, but it does seem
very over-priced.

I look at web sites that are selling a Canon EOS1v-HS (arguably the
world's finest SLR) with a battery grip for only $1900 and
think- "Well digital is a handy photographic technology, but isn't
that film camera way,way,way better in terms of technology and
value for money?"

I mean, I love digital, but the EOS 1v whips the D30, right? And
for the money saved, I can afford to get the odd roll of film
processed. Yes?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Andi McGregor said:

Hi all,
I'm looking to get some intelligent and/or educated opinions on
whether it's likely that Canon will keep the D30 in their range of
cameras in the long term.

For my money, it makes a lot of sense. Tell me there isn't a market
for a "true SLR" format semi pro digital at the $2000 or, even
better, $1500 mark. After all, plenty of serious amateurs went out
and bought this camera at the $3000 mark. So it's a fair assumption
that there'd be plenty more waiting in the wings hoping for a lower
price.

I know I am.

Canon have some history of doing this- take the A2E for example.

The D30 is, by all accounts, a fine camera and worthy of a long
production life. But, what are the odds of Canon keeping it on as
their "semi-pro" digital SLR when the announce their Pro Digital,
would you say?

Regards

Andrew McGregor

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scott Larson said:

I hear lots of examples of the amazing AF on other Canon models but
I don't understand some of them. In this example how does the EOS3
know what you want to focus on? I mean I can get the D30 to focus
on anything as long as I can give it enough contrast in a focus
point. It sounds like people can point other cameras at any scene
they want and the AF system will choose the most interesting
subject and focus on it automatically!

Click to expand...

Well ok, fair comment clearly it can't make determinations on what's interesting and what's not.... I guess there is a fair amount of interaction on my part in terms of where I point it at etc.... I don't want to sound silly in my description....

...but I was taking photo's at a Marina yesterday. Simple shot, bird sitting on a railing. The D30 sat there and focused repeatedly on a part of the railing that happened to be over to the left of the bird bit of the scene. Loads of things I could do... I could change the focus square it was looking at, I could compose the shot differently... (I could learn how to use the d30 better!)... not suggesting otherwise... but I got the EOS3 same scene, from the same spot, same lens and it immediately (very much quicker than the d30) showed me about 9 red focus areas in the viewfinder and they were all over the bird and the railing it was sitting on. Fast, accurate and just what I wanted... Add in the Eye focus control that focuses where you look and it works even more amazingly. I don't need to wonder why it seems to be focussing on the wrong area, I can see in the viewfinder exactly where it thinks it should be looking and if it DID get it wrong I can refocus very quickly....

Perhaps its me... happy to bow to the wisdom of other more experienced photographers.... but for me the d30 af system seems light years behind the eos3.

Cheers,
K.