Canon D30 Snobbery in rec.photo.digital

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people
think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.

"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole
system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each. I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was 1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

There will always be people who try to make themselves feel good by putting down another product or try to convince others that what they have is superior.

I'm sure the D30 is a very fine camera, and those that own it are getting alot of pleasure from it.

I for one am very happy with my decision to get the E20, there is a post over at the Canon SLR forum asking how much owners of the D30 have spent in total on it.

I was astounded by the amounts.

I think the fights in other forums should stay in other forums. Or we get the nasty thread "E-10/D7" we had a few days ago. (after seeing what it became, I regret having put in my 2 cents.) I don't intend to be negative, but that's my personal opinion.

Joe Hawblitzel

Hi Gary -

Well, for fear of getting SHOT considering where we are . . . I believe the D30 is superior, when using the best lenses. It is capable of producing some of the smoothest and most noiseless images I've seen. But the expense is huge - even with the D30 coming down in price, excellent lenses cost significantly more than the camera. And I don't completely buy Pekka's argument that the lenses are used forever - I see a lot of Canon users rushing out to buy the IS lenses, now that they're available. New technology sells - at a hefty price.

I considered going the D30 route recently, when the E-20 review was first out. Actually, primarily it wasn't the expense that dissuaded me - it was the thought of dealing with changing lenses and sensor dust! And let's face it, having another million pixels (while I agree shouldn't be a deciding factor) sure comes in handy.

While I admire Pekka's photography greatly, and agree with many of his points, I did find his tone in this particular posting offensive.

Laurie

Gary Eickmeier said:

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup
about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people
think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.

"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole
system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's
reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each.
I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which
is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not
night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had
the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the
same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction
resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was
1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account
everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

Gary Eickmeier said:

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup
about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people
think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.

"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole
system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's
reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each.
I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which
is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not
night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had
the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the
same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction
resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was
1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account
everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Click to expand...

Well he is not talking about performance superiority in terms of image quality as you are, but about performance in terms of flexibility. And there a true SLR (pardon my ignorance, but are they even technically SLR(single lens reflex)?) certainly beats all the SLR-like cameras.

But, of course, in the quoted text he is showing the bias of a false belief that his shooting is like everyone elses. Of course, there is a reason to compare SLR and SLR-like cameras. Especially for amateurs and even for some pros. I would think that portraiture and wedding photography professionals would enjoy not investing many times more money for something that does not actually add much to their ability to make their customers happy.

Mike Roberts

P.S. You guys to scared to continue E10 vs. D7 thread, huh?

Laurie, his tone is not wrong, but he is. the camera is a SLR, everyone knows that the "D30-system" may be superior, if you can afford it. But the camera itself is not. Since if you buy the E-20 you have a working camera, vs the D30 one does not. More $$$$$$ is required

2.000 vs about 10,000

If that kind of invetsment was required to enjoy photography and earn a living also, not many would be in the bus. Too many people are making money and wondereful photographs with the E-10/20 series "SLR" to denounce its solid presence in the industry.

Pekka should compare apples to apples...

my 1:2.7 cents and Mine alone

regards

Laurie Sokoloff said:

Well, for fear of getting SHOT considering where we are . . . I
believe the D30 is superior, when using the best lenses. It is
capable of producing some of the smoothest and most noiseless
images I've seen. But the expense is huge - even with the D30
coming down in price, excellent lenses cost significantly more than
the camera. And I don't completely buy Pekka's argument that the
lenses are used forever - I see a lot of Canon users rushing out to
buy the IS lenses, now that they're available. New technology
sells - at a hefty price.

I considered going the D30 route recently, when the E-20 review was
first out. Actually, primarily it wasn't the expense that
dissuaded me - it was the thought of dealing with changing lenses
and sensor dust! And let's face it, having another million pixels
(while I agree shouldn't be a deciding factor) sure comes in handy.

While I admire Pekka's photography greatly, and agree with many of
his points, I did find his tone in this particular posting
offensive.

Laurie

Gary Eickmeier said:

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup
about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people
think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.

"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole
system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's
reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each.
I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which
is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not
night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had
the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the
same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction
resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was
1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account
everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think the argument that the E-10 design is not a true SLR is a bit tired now. SLR - Single Lens Reflex. I don't think theres anything about interchangeable lenses in there. Besides, how many SLR owners use their camera with the same lens 90% of the time?

People like to boast, and put down others, and put down other people or their possesions. Frankly I am sick of these long Camera X vs Camera Y threads that attract so much argument.

I was going to get a D30, but I got an E-10. I will buy a car for my wife with the difference.

Regards

Paul

Gary Eickmeier said:

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup
about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

Click to expand...

A veery long time ago there was a humongous thread here claiming the superiority of Canon G1 over E10 with - you guessed right - the name of P. Saarinen on it.
Later P.S. said it was published by a troll who used his name.

It is natural for anyone to praise what he has, moreover, it's psychologically necessary to justify your (not a small) expenditure with feelings and therefore posturing in a web forum. E-10 owners are prone to that too.

What happened to me was this: it stopped being an issue after a few months. I've owned E-10 for 1 year now, and instead of boasting whose lens is bigger, my competitiveness finds an outlet at photo sites where they publish and compare photos (on Russian sites they even give you grades and promote you in the ranks if you produced interesting ones consistently, something 90% of dpreview participants actually dread).

I stopped even to compare film to digital - it's the photos that matter.

I wonder why someone like P.S., whose photos are so obviously far from being the best or the most inventive in the world should still cause so much attention? Were not most "classical" photographs taken with early Leica cameras with (mostly) 50mm lenses (and the whole possible range at that time seems to be between 35 mm and 120mm or so )?

Photograph, look at what other people have done before you to learn, and do photograph - that is the best part of it. Otherwise one runs a risk to become like a Japanese Leica collectioner - if the wrappings were taken off the camera, it's value as a collectioner's item falls drastically. They simply never use them.

Where performance counts - yes.

Especially, and especially when one adds in the D1x.

As for one over the other - one strats to get used to the SLR and its capabilities again adn I find I'm not using my E10 - not that I don't still like it - I just don't.

Gary Eickmeier said:

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

The man is entitled to his opinion. Why not address his post in rec.photo.digital instead of here? But since you have addressed it here I will throw in my 2 cents. I also own a D30. I bought it just to use Canon's superior wireless flash technology. Yes, I said superior. No one comes close to their wireless flash technology which is E-TTL as well. As for the CMOS, even at 3MP with less resolution then the E10, it WILL produce much better prints even up to 16x20. Since you left out the noise ratio, let me remind you that the D30 has less noise at ISO 400 then the E10 has at ISO 80. Now lets talk flexibilty. You have access to over 40 top of the line Canon lenses. Even though it is a interchangable lens SLR it does NOT suffer from the same dust problems that other SLR's do because of the design of the CMOS. The filter resides in front of the CMOS far enough away from the sensor so any dust that does get trapped on the filter is virtually undectable on images at any f-stop. Continuing our comparision, we have a max of 1/4000 sec shutter speed on the D30 verses 1/640 on the E10. Of course work arounds are possible if you carry ND filters with you. Technically speaking, this preson presents some valid points and even leaves out many more, unless you left them out.

Now all this said, it has not stopped me from using my E10 more for casual shooting then any of my other of my cameras. Why? Because I don't always like to carry extra lenses. I love using my E10, and am very happy with the results. But if asked to be honest about my observations, I tell it like it is. Certainly these are only my opinions. But I assure you they are completely non-biased as I have each of these cameras. My absolute favorite is the D1X. Still my E10 gets used the most.

Kindest Regards,
Jim K
http://www.jimsphotopage.com/digital/e20/index.html

Gary Eickmeier said:

Pekka Saarinen has some comments in the rec.photo.digital newsgroup
about the superiority of the D30 over the E10 or E20. He says

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people
think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.

"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole
system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's
reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each.
I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which
is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not
night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had
the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the
same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction
resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was
1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account
everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

Gary Eickmeier said:

"There is absolutely no point to compare D30 to E20. If some people

Click to expand...

I do agree that you cannot compare a D30 to an E20, option for option. They are completely different cameras designed for different markets. I don't understand why people continue to justify the Ex to other cameras. The Ex is what it is, a great camera.

Gary Eickmeier said:

think there is, because Olympus marketing calls it an SLR, they are
wrong. E20 is not a real SLR - it's a fixed lens SLR emulation camera.
"Why put your money into a system where lens a body are welded
together? If there is a flaw in either, you have to dump the whole

Click to expand...

Some people enjoy the sealed lens of the Ex, some people find it limiting. This man obviously sees the fixed lens as an unwanted limitation.

Gary Eickmeier said:

system. If you don't have enough range of aperture or ISO, you're
stuck. It's often a question of getting a photo or not getting a
photo."

I downloaded and printed out some pix from each from Phil's
reviews. I made sure there was lots of blue sky and detail in each.
I then printed them both at 7x10 size. To me, it's a tossup which
is superior. They aren't identical images, but it is still not
night and day or even close. I did note that the picture size had
the E20 file at 256ppi, whereas the Canon was only 216ppi at the
same size.

I also noticed in the reviews of each that the absolute/extinction
resolution of the Canon was 1150/1350, whereas for the E20 it was
1350/1650 or so. Big difference, and this is taking into account
everything from the CCD to the "welded on lens."

Let's get real here. Do you guys think the D30 snobbery is caused
by true performance superiority, or are they just trying to justify
a more expensive purchase? If price were no object, would you
rather have an E20 or a D30, D1X, whateva?

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

If price were no object, I would have a Canon 1D with 5 lenses and a D30 as my backup. On the consumer end, price is almost always relevant. Take a look at a thread currently running on the Canon SLR forum.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&page=1&message=1746663

People are posting their age and how much money they have invested in their D30 setups over the past year. I believe this will shed a tremendous amount of light on the subject. This goes back to my original point, you cannot compare the 2 cameras. The Ex is designed for a particular target audience that is willing to spend an amount of money that is at the high end of the consumer market. The D30 is an entry point (low end) of the professional markets. The difference in price between these 2 are substantial. Read the thread I just posted to see for yourselves.

What I'm trying to convey is this, if people are willing and can afford a D30 with nice L series lenses, then more power to them. I chose the E-10 because I could pay cash for it. I believe that the E-10 is a wonderful camera and provides a mid-sized range of Quality accessories. I pay cash for all the accessories I have bought or will buy. I love the fact I don't have to make monthly payments for a hobby of mine. If I had chosen to go the D30 route, I would be paying on the body and lenses for the next 2-3 years. The E-10 is the right camera for my budget.

God bless,

Rich L.

I tire of all these contests. E10 E20 707 D30 etc

You chose what suited you best as I did and others. Who gives a toss what PS thinks or anyone else!

I like the D30 it is a nice digital SLR. In the right hands it's very good.

I think the E10 reflects light upwards too and has a single lens. Indeed, it even uses a mirror in the vf path to reflect light to the eye. Seems very SLR to me...

Blokey

Rich L. said:

People are posting their age and how much money they have invested
in their D30 setups over the past year. I believe this will shed a
tremendous amount of light on the subject.

Click to expand...

I have to say I'm amazed. I just read this thread. We, together, make a nice income, but I can't imagine spending $15,000 on a hobby. Maybe I'm conservative (never thought of myself that way)--I just don't know. Maybe they make WAY more money than we do---or don't mind debt. Anyhow----I am still astounded LOL. The one thing I have to assume from most of their posts[--that most seem to be 'hobbyists'---and seem to have a huge amount of disposable income. It was eyeopening to say the least. Are they doing better work?? I wonder.

Diane

It's what you do with what you've got that matters, and along the line learning the craft a little better, mainly thanks to shared advice on this forum.

I for one like the sealed lens idea on the E series for everyday shooting, keeping the dirt, dust and moisture out of delicate innards.

The Pro's will always need extra flexibility to practice their trade, hence the choice at the upper end of the market with a price tag to suit. But owning this high end gear does not necessarily make one a better photographer.

Some of the photos posted here over the last few months have been stunningly excellent in composition, and the E series provides a very usable platform to take them with the minimum of fuss.

Which is why we're all here in the first place, sharing ideas among people who use the same type of camera; no one has a technical advantage over the other, and seeing the quality of the work here pushes us on to try that little harder.

I think we're a unique bunch, and long may it continue.

great question, are they doing better work, most of the time theres never a post of proof, just the gift of gab

and of course, the constant theme of buyer remorse once they found out they bit of more than they could chew.

Diane B said:

Rich L. said:

People are posting their age and how much money they have invested
in their D30 setups over the past year. I believe this will shed a
tremendous amount of light on the subject.

Click to expand...

I have to say I'm amazed. I just read this thread. We, together,
make a nice income, but I can't imagine spending $15,000 on a
hobby. Maybe I'm conservative (never thought of myself that
way)--I just don't know. Maybe they make WAY more money than we
do---or don't mind debt. Anyhow----I am still astounded LOL. The
one thing I have to assume from most of their posts[--that most
seem to be 'hobbyists'---and seem to have a huge amount of
disposable income. It was eyeopening to say the least. Are they
doing better work?? I wonder.

Diane

Click to expand...

Hello Blockey,

Indeed, those "contests" doesn't make that much sense ...

Just like yourself, I've choosen the camera that would forfill my photographical "needs" as good as possible at an affordable price, without feeling "guilty" to spend a hughe amount of mony to practice my hobby - or name it "passion" in my case.

I keep saying that I saw the most awfull D-30 images and the most wonderfull Canon S10, Oly E-10, Nikon CP990, ... shots ...

And I also saw the most wonderfull D30 images and a lot of awfull E-10, CP990, D-7, ... shots ...
Things had to be kept in perspective.

The camera is just an instrument that captures what the photographer wants to capture - but he has to capture it!

Kind regards,
Jaja
http://www.belgiumdigital.com

Blokey Bloggs said:

I tire of all these contests. E10 E20 707 D30 etc

You chose what suited you best as I did and others. Who gives a
toss what PS thinks or anyone else!

I like the D30 it is a nice digital SLR. In the right hands it's
very good.

I think the E10 reflects light upwards too and has a single lens.
Indeed, it even uses a mirror in the vf path to reflect light to
the eye. Seems very SLR to me...

Blokey

Click to expand...

Bryan,

Sorry, but please don't generalise. Surprisingly I have posted 4 of my images (sorry 5) in the Canon SLR forum where people have been discussing how bad the 75-300mm IS lens is (I don't agree) and another saying how good their new 24-70mm Sigma lens was (I agree) and I added one taken with a recently purchased 105mm EX macro lens.

Yes, I am a D30 owner, and as I already owned the lenses (had an EOS3 before that) and the fact that I am poor I just purchased the D30 body and extra storage and have just added the macro lens.

To put the cat among the pigeons I also have a Nikon CP990 which I also think is very good, but not in the same league as the E10/E20/D30 but then again it was a lot cheaper.

So, yes I spent a lot more money that I would have wished. But::: I don't drink, don't smoke, too old to chase after women and that expense, and don't play golf with club fees etc and I run a 10 year old Volvo 940SE with 99,875 miles on the clock. I look foward to its 20th birthday.

I spent many happy hours looking at images (excellent images I should say) posted by Jaja of Belgium and many others when deciding to move from the CP990.

I had an Olympus OM4 for many years but have had Canon longer so brand loyalty was there a bit. But I also had for a while a Nikon F4 outfit so why not the D1?

Basically apart from that already mentioned - in comparison with the Nikon D1, Fuji S1 and Olympus E10 (the E20 was only at rumour stage then) I found final image quality of the to be D30 surperior. As for dust (I shouldn't say this) but I do not find this a problem. I have 3 lenses which I change reasonably often but I will be honest the 28-135mm IS lens is on for 90% of the time. I have taken just under 4000 images - not a lot, and I am a happy man.

So hopefully that is constructive comment because what I am saying is: I have the camera that I wanted and I am sure that you all have the camera's that you wanted - Why the arguments?

Enjoy your photography and take care.

Bryan (not a D30 snob)

Brian Mackey said:

and of course, the constant theme of buyer remorse once they found
out they bit of more than they could chew.

Diane B said:

Rich L. said:

People are posting their age and how much money they have invested
in their D30 setups over the past year. I believe this will shed a
tremendous amount of light on the subject.

Click to expand...

I have to say I'm amazed. I just read this thread. We, together,
make a nice income, but I can't imagine spending $15,000 on a
hobby. Maybe I'm conservative (never thought of myself that
way)--I just don't know. Maybe they make WAY more money than we
do---or don't mind debt. Anyhow----I am still astounded LOL. The
one thing I have to assume from most of their posts[--that most
seem to be 'hobbyists'---and seem to have a huge amount of
disposable income. It was eyeopening to say the least. Are they
doing better work?? I wonder.

Diane

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I own an E-10 (and love it). The E is noisier than the D's, but can

come very close after Photoshop actions (see http://netnet.net/~llueck/NR.htm ).

The B&H catalog got me wondering what I'd need to spend to match
the E's F2 35-140, F2 200, F2.8 420 and F2.8 610:

Canon's EF 28-70 F2.8L USM - ~$1200 USD (closest to E's main lens).
EF 135 F2L USM - 1000 USD (closest to E's 200mm conversion lens).
EF 300 F2.8L IS USM - ~$4600 USD (Note-image stabilized, closest to
E's 420mm conversion lens).
EF 400 F2.8L IS USM -$8000 USD (note-image stabilization, closest
to E's bazooka-like 420 AND 200 conversion lenses giving 610mm F2.8).

Is this a fair comparison? No, but it's just as meaningful as saying
the the E-10/20 are noisier than the D's.

Hi Jaja,

Just talking about you earlier in the forum but I went on a bit and typed too much.

Glad to see that you are still talking sense and taking excellent photographs. Even though I did not purchase the E10, my reson for looking at your site many months ago) I still visit.

Take care

Bryan

Jaja - Belgium Digital said:

Indeed, those "contests" doesn't make that much sense ...
Just like yourself, I've choosen the camera that would forfill my
photographical "needs" as good as possible at an affordable price,
without feeling "guilty" to spend a hughe amount of mony to
practice my hobby - or name it "passion" in my case.
I keep saying that I saw the most awfull D-30 images and the most
wonderfull Canon S10, Oly E-10, Nikon CP990, ... shots ...
And I also saw the most wonderfull D30 images and a lot of awfull
E-10, CP990, D-7, ... shots ...
Things had to be kept in perspective.
The camera is just an instrument that captures what the
photographer wants to capture - but he has to capture it!

Kind regards,
Jaja
http://www.belgiumdigital.com

Blokey Bloggs said:

I tire of all these contests. E10 E20 707 D30 etc

You chose what suited you best as I did and others. Who gives a
toss what PS thinks or anyone else!

I like the D30 it is a nice digital SLR. In the right hands it's
very good.

I think the E10 reflects light upwards too and has a single lens.
Indeed, it even uses a mirror in the vf path to reflect light to
the eye. Seems very SLR to me...

Blokey

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Diane B said:

Rich L. said:

People are posting their age and how much money they have invested
in their D30 setups over the past year. I believe this will shed a
tremendous amount of light on the subject.

Click to expand...

I have to say I'm amazed. I just read this thread. We, together,
make a nice income, but I can't imagine spending $15,000 on a
hobby. Maybe I'm conservative (never thought of myself that
way)--I just don't know. Maybe they make WAY more money than we
do---or don't mind debt. Anyhow----I am still astounded LOL. The
one thing I have to assume from most of their posts[--that most
seem to be 'hobbyists'---and seem to have a huge amount of
disposable income. It was eyeopening to say the least. Are they
doing better work?? I wonder.

Diane

Click to expand...

Diana, a D30 costs about $500 more then the E10 did, and what the E20 does now. A good lens (28-135 IS) costs $350. So all you need to spend is an extra $850 to get a d30. People who invest big bucks for lenses make their living at it. The average person can still get started with a D30 with a modest amount of money. Indeed some E10 users have spent more on accessaries then some D30 owners have invested so far.

Kindest Regards,
Jim K