Canon D30 Snobbery in rec.photo.digital

Gary Eickmeier · Nov 12, 2001

Pekka Saarinen said:
Gary,

Why didn't you reply in news, but instead bring this issue without
noticing me for me a chance to reply (I got a tip from a friend
that you talk here about my views)? Sigh.

Sorry, but I wanted to talk this over with the Oly group before you stepped in. Your presence in the discussion changes the whole flavor of it, due to our respect for your work. Didn't want to challenge you directly in the newsgroup, but rather get some opinions out of an Oly favorable crowd. Not sure if I violated a netiquette rule about cross-posting - if so, I apologize. I just figured you said what you said in public, so if I at least give your name and where the post was found, it would be kosher.

Pekka Saarinen said:
I see from your print/resolution test explanation that you have
missed the whole point of what I wrote. I'm not saying: D30 is a
sharper camera. It can be very sharp or blurred - lens matters.
User skill matters. PS experience matters. I said D30 can be very
expensive camera - but you can choose how much - build a system
gradually. I also said that D30 is so versatile (dozens of hardware
variations) that there's no point to compare it with E-series
Olympus's - where is this "D30 reference setup" defined? There is
no such thing.

Well, you (and a lot of others) have been constantly saying that the D30 is so much better, or obviously superior, or some such, but it is my belief that once you get into this class of camera, you can hardly tell one from another from the print results. I think someone in your thread said that it was SO obvious, just from looking at the prints, that he didn't even want to talk about it. So I question that.

Pekka Saarinen said:
To put is as simply as possible:

A D30, or D1X or 1D etc. let's you shoot usable photos in
situations where EXX can't get a shot at all. You can count f stops
and shutter speeds: Let's imagine a situation where the only
possibility to get a well exposed and sharp photo is 300mm f/2.8
ISO 800 and 1/30 (e.g. a concert shoot) what will E20 shutter speed
be? Can it stop enough movement? Are the noise levels acceptable?
What if the only possible parameters are f/1.4 ISO 1600 and 1/400
(e.g. a circus act in dark)?

Bottom line: How do you do a print compare when you don't have a
photo to print?

An interesting new twist to the argument. The D30 is so low in noise that it can shoot indoor events without flash at high enough shutter speeds to capture some action and good color. Might be true. So, if that is one of your priorities, you should consider the D30 a better camera. I am more of a family event, wedding, and some portraiture kind of guy. In those situations, I don't believe I would see any superiority with the D30.

I also recall you took some pretty darned good pix of indoor events with your G1. Now you can't live without your D30.

Thanks for the response,

Gary Eickmeier

Se Kang · Nov 12, 2001

I am a D30 and E10 owner. Pekka Saarinen’s comments are absolutely irresponsible and totally unprofessional. I have been a silent reader of this forum for long time. I cannot keep my silence for this comment.

On behalf of all (if not majority) D30 owners, I am embarrassed and shamed of Pekka Saarinen’s comments. If I can, I would like to apology for such comment to all E10 (and E20) owners.

I want other photo enthusiasts to professionally critique my photo work regardless of what tool (camera) I use. In that regards, I have been enjoying Olympus forum very much. Olympus SLR forum posts more pictures than any other SLR forum. Thanks to JaJa and others who really enjoy taking pictures, I will continue to respect and enjoy Olympus SLR forum very much.

I am sick of other SLR forums (including Canon SLR forums), concentrating too much on the “equipment” issues. I am not saying these are not important issues. I want to see what we can do with these expensive equipments.

I will never be good as JaJa even with the latest Canon 1D and all the “L” series lenses. I could only aspire to be good as him. To me, that is what photography is all about…mutual admiration, support, and respect.

Besides…I like JaJa’s photo’s better than Pekka Saarinen’s photos…and that’s a professional critique.

Respectfully,
SKang

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

stripes · Nov 12, 2001

Jim K53618 said:
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.

I think Minolta's wireless flash is E-TTL, and the built-in flash doubles as a wireless flash controller, so you don't have to pay $150+ for the ST-E2. The don't (currently?) have a digital SLR that uses it though. The even have the lens distance feature that Nikon touts (not that that is as useful with bounced flash).

Pekka Saarinen · Nov 12, 2001

Gary Eickmeier said:
Well, you (and a lot of others) have been constantly saying that
the D30 is so much better, or obviously superior, or some such, but
it is my belief that once you get into this class of camera, you
can hardly tell one from another from the print results. I think
someone in your thread said that it was SO obvious, just from
looking at the prints, that he didn't even want to talk about it.
So I question that.

I'm not saying it's so obvious, but D30 up to ISO 200 is totally noiseless and even if enlarging a lot might loose some detail the low noise makes the prints look really good and 'solid'. But my main point in this debate is not resolution or print quality, it's what's possible and when and where.

Gary Eickmeier said:
An interesting new twist to the argument. The D30 is so low in
noise that it can shoot indoor events without flash at high enough
shutter speeds to capture some action and good color. Might be
true. So, if that is one of your priorities, you should consider
the D30 a better camera. I am more of a family event, wedding, and
some portraiture kind of guy. In those situations, I don't believe
I would see any superiority with the D30.

You're right, maybe these arguments should be based on some exact target use. I'm into natural light photography now. No flashes if I can avoid it. G1 just didn't cope it without a tripod and plenty of luck.

Gary Eickmeier said:
I also recall you took some pretty darned good pix of indoor events
with your G1. Now you can't live without your D30.

All those G1 indoor photos like kid photos were flash shots. With D30 I try to evolve

I'm sure you can see how uncomfortable a flash is for most people, and in many situations it's prohibited to use flash alltogether. And to have a good flash illumination you need several flashes and bouncers or a small white room - and still a natural 3D look can be hard to achieve. Natural light photography is WYSIWYG photography.

Gary Eickmeier said:
Thanks for the response,

No problem, take care,

Pekka

Ger Bee · Nov 12, 2001

I'm into natural light photography now. No flashes if I

Pekka Saarinen said:
can avoid it.

Hmmmm. ISO 1600, even 3200 delicious on the right subject - you bet.

Peter Kunasz · Nov 12, 2001

Gary gets to the heart of the issue:

After all is said and done, does the D30 produce a better--more pleasing, film like--image than the E-10/20? The real issue may be noise vs resolution. You may be like me, an average shooter, who doesn't really need interchangable lenses, would LIKE fast write speeds but it isn't critical. But what you do want is the best possible image made on an inkjet printer like an Epson 1270/1280, and you would be willing to spend a few hundred dollars more if the difference were really visable on prints 8x10 or larger.

So, is the difference there? I still don't know. Some say yes. some say no. I downladed some test images from both cameras, expanded then with Genuine fractals to 8x10 at 280 dpi, printed them out and could not tell any difference, nor could several other unsuspecting people.

This doesn't mean that another image that might have deep shadows or a lot of sky area subject to noise would fare as well. Seems like you almost have to have both cameras in hand to do your own tests and make your own judgments.

To those of you who have both E and D cameras, thanks for the opinions.
Pete K.

Gary Eickmeier said:
Sorry to be so late in punching back into my own thread, but duty
called (family).

The point of the question was not to provoke a turf war over
cameras or brands. I know we all have our personal tastes in
equipment. I just asked it in the Oly forum so I might get a
favorable answer to whether the final photographic result is
different or the same with the two cameras. I know some of you have
both cameras, and would have definite (unbiased) opinions.

I know that the more expensive cameras have higher writing speeds,
less noise, perhaps some greater convenience or features, and
interchangeable lenses. No contest on that. If you can afford a
D1X, go for it. My ONLY question is whether the photographic result
is superior or not. I just happen to love the design of the E10/20,
and prefer it and its fixed lens over all others. But if the more
expensive cameras had ANY superiority in results, it would get my
attention, if not my credit card. My current opinion is that there
may be more measurable or visible at 100% on the monitor noise in
the E, but not in the prints that you make on your inkjet. But I
have no Epson printer, either, so I could be wrong on that.

One more caution in these types of arguments: I have heard people
say that it isn't the camera, but the man (person) behind the
camera that counts more. Well, fine, but that is beside the point.
We all know that we need certain capabilities in a camera to be
able to get the images we want - such as manual control over focus,
exposure, DOF, etc, and a PC contact to use studio or other
auxiliary flashes, SLR viewing with fine focusing capability, and
good ergonomics with ease of setting all the variables. And rapid
shutters so we can capture the moment we want! Some of these
requirements put some cameras out of contention, but the E is not
one of them. It has all of the features a pro would need except
interchangeable lenses, which is NOT a problem if the E series lens
is adequate for your needs.

So if I love the design of the E20 and can live with the write
speed and don't need some weird lens or other that is available to
Canon users, then there is nothing superior about the D30 - unless
the photographic end product really is distinguishable from the E20
in a side-by-side test.

So, I guess if anyone of you has done such a test, I would be very
interested in your opinion, and if anyone who has both cameras
could post sample pix of the same subject and let us guess which is
superior (without knowing which camera took them), that might be
fun.

Or, if this is getting boring, let me know.

Thanks for all the responses.

Gary Eickmeier

Ger Bee · Nov 12, 2001

Se Kang said:
I want other photo enthusiasts to professionally critique my photo
work regardless of what tool (camera) I use.

Does not happen too much.

Remember a thread that got a bit very bitter, recently when a few posters were trying to INSIST that the camera be identified in the thread header - so they need not look at what they though would be rubbish - or superior depending on what camera was used.

BTW – why are we discussing a rec.photo.digital thread HERE? Why are we not replying (or are we) on that forum (news feed)????

Pekka Saarinen · Nov 12, 2001

SeKang said:
I am a D30 and E10 owner. Pekka Saarinen’s comments are
absolutely irresponsible and totally unprofessional. I have been a
silent reader of this forum for long time. I cannot keep my silence
for this comment.

I see, another way to diguise a troll. Please let me debate about my own comments - they are MY comments - not yours or D30 community's (whatever that means) or John Smith's.

Se Kang said:
On behalf of all (if not majority) D30 owners, I am embarrassed and
shamed of Pekka Saarinen’s comments.

Be my guest. One question: why? Do you take hardware personally - you say you're a professional - can't be... these are just tools and it's a tool debate.

Se Kang said:
If I can, I would like
to apology for such comment to all E10 (and E20) owners.

Let's see what D30 users have to say about this...

Se Kang said:
I want other photo enthusiasts to professionally critique my photo
work regardless of what tool (camera) I use. In that regards, I
have been enjoying Olympus forum very much.

"my photo"? But you have never posted anything else that this post? troll alert confirmed

Se Kang said:
Olympus SLR forum posts
more pictures than any other SLR forum. Thanks to JaJa and others
who really enjoy taking pictures, I will continue to respect and
enjoy Olympus SLR forum very much.

I am sick of other SLR forums (including Canon SLR forums),
concentrating too much on the “equipment” issues. I am
not saying these are not important issues. I want to see what we
can do with these expensive equipments.

Do you really think in the end of the day pro's like to (which I am not btw) sit down and share all days work with the forums?

Equipment talk is very important as equipment costs so much - and that you have no clue what it's used for is just fine.

Se Kang said:
Besides…I like JaJa’s photo’s better than Pekka
Saarinen’s photos…and that’s a professional
critique.

I like Jaja's work, too but this discussion is about cameras, not any particular photos or "who's the best photographer" -nonsense.

PS. your profession seems to be in medical industry ( http://www.digipixart.com leads to http://www.emedicalfiles.com/ ) , not photography. I think I'll get a second opinion....

Jason Stoller · Nov 12, 2001

I guess I am confused here! While I love digital and I own two digital cameras, I am wondering about something here! If you are going to spend $10,000 aren't you better off just staying with Film?

Just a thought!
Jason

Jim K said:
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

Andrew Grant27981 · Nov 12, 2001

Jason Stoller said:
I guess I am confused here! While I love digital and I own two
digital cameras, I am wondering about something here! If you are
going to spend $10,000 aren't you better off just staying with Film?

Why would you be better off staying with film?

Jason Stoller said:
Just a thought!
Jason

Jim K said:

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

Click to expand...

stripes · Nov 12, 2001

Jason Stoller said:
I guess I am confused here! While I love digital and I own two digital cameras, I am wondering about something here! If you are going to spend $10,000 aren't you better off just staying with Film?

There are people who make their living by selling prints of their work who think the D30 is every bit as good as prints from scanned slides, and better then cibia prints fo slides for color, and close, but not quite on detail.

If those people are correct then there isn't as much reason to stick to film. Better AF, and wide angle lenses being the big ones, special film (IR, or ISO3200+) being the smaller ones.

The pluses of digital should be obvious to anyone reading here

Plus if you are doing mostly telephoto work the 1.6 focal length modifier is nice (sucks if you want wide angle though). Having the LCD is much more useful in flash work then the 70Hz "modeling strobe"...

Besides I only bought one (1) new lens for the D30, the rest I had from my film camera.

Jason Stoller · Nov 12, 2001

I think you both miss several points of each other in this case. Its not the camera you use but the results you get. Everyone has their own preferences. What is art to another is worthless in anothers persons perspective. Jaja said it when he mentioned that he learned first to take good pictures with a camera that put limitations on him. Its clear everyday and every photo he takes is a challenge to him. If we stop looking at other things around us then we stop learning. I personally love my E-10 and the features it offers. I also love my still love and value my Nikon 35mm. Yes features are nice, quality optics will always have influence, and printed images or developed ones are still the best way to see how good your input really was to start with. You can always through money at a more expensive camera hoping that it will make you a better photographer, but the reality of it is that unless you work at perfecting your craft, the tools do not matter. I play the trumpet! I can buy the most expensive trumpet there is, but if I do not practice what difference does it make. The instrument alone will not make me a better player if the talent behind the instrument is not developed or isn't there to start with!

Just a thought!

Jason

Gary Eickmeier said:
Jim K said:

Sorry if I misunderstood, but you sounded like you own a E10 since
you "love" the design" so much, and I didn't think you have a
printer because you said you don't have a "Epson printer".

Click to expand...

I am still saving for my first digital. It has got to be the right
one, if I have to pay these outrageous prices for it.

Gary Eickmeier said:

If you do have a printer, then why not just print out samples for
yourself and the hell what anybody else thinks?

Click to expand...

I had to go back and read my original post that started this
thread. You may not have seen it. I said

"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."

My printer is the original Photosmart, which is superb but doesn't
have the resolution of the newest Epsons. All of my digital work is
with scanned-in photos from my film cameras.

Gary Eickmeier

Les #39998 · Nov 12, 2001

Didn't see where Pekka indicated his ISO use, but as you mentioned it, you may want to let everyone know where it is stated. However, I personally think if you check his pics and exif, you will see where he uses neither.

He often shoots in concert halls where flash is not allowed or would intrude or would not cover the distance. The point, I think he was making, was the D30 is capable of better lowlight shots than smaller ccd's, which is why he went the direction he did on his choice of camera.

You bought a D1x because you felt it was superior to the E-10, for your use and he bought a D30 which he felt was superior to the G1.
So why the condescending attitude?
Les

P.S. - One thing Pekka hasn't done is run into the Canon forum (non slr) bragging about how much better his D30 is than the G1's.

Ger Bee said:
Ger Bee said:

can avoid it.

Click to expand...

Hmmmm. ISO 1600, even 3200 delicious on the right subject - you bet.

Jason Stoller · Nov 12, 2001

See! I need to work at being a better proof reader here and pay more attention to my spelling! I appoligize for the errors in the previous message.

Jason

Jason Stoller said:
Just a thought!

Jason

Gary Eickmeier said:

Jim K said:

Sorry if I misunderstood, but you sounded like you own a E10 since
you "love" the design" so much, and I didn't think you have a
printer because you said you don't have a "Epson printer".

Click to expand...

I am still saving for my first digital. It has got to be the right
one, if I have to pay these outrageous prices for it.

Jason Stoller said:

If you do have a printer, then why not just print out samples for
yourself and the hell what anybody else thinks?

Click to expand...

I had to go back and read my original post that started this
thread. You may not have seen it. I said

"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."

My printer is the original Photosmart, which is superb but doesn't
have the resolution of the newest Epsons. All of my digital work is
with scanned-in photos from my film cameras.

Gary Eickmeier

Click to expand...

Paul Blamire · Nov 12, 2001

The D30 shutter lag is quoted (by canon) as 60ms, the same as for the E-10. The lenses I tried with a D30 gave similar AF performance as the E-10, other lenses may give better results, but remember the AF control loop is computed by the camera not the lens. I have seen quite a few accounts of 'slow' AF when compared to film EOS cameras using the same lenses.

For me, the E-10 was a no brainer, I had no lenses, no dedicated flash, no batteries, and the E-10 covered 95% of my needs. I'm simply not good enough a photographer to warrant such expense, but when I am, I don't want to be lumbered with a camera I spent loads on that I no longer want.

Regards

Paul

Andrew Grant said:
THe D30 is clearly not in the same class as either the D1x or 1D
though.

Ger Bee said:

Paul Blamire said:

Yes, but the D30 isn't that much better than the E-10 when it comes
to performance, the AF is about the same, the shutter lag the same,
what differentiates it is the flush speed and buffer size (not
forgetting it has to deal with smaller files), but even then I
don't think it is the quantum leap that was suggested.

Paul

Click to expand...

I'd actually have to agree here - I did try the D30 and I also felt
I was not upgrading enough with it over the E10. If I were to buy
one or the other - without owning either before - then the D30 has
a few edges.

Click to expand...

Jason Stoller · Nov 12, 2001

Yes but you miss my point! Its about the money being spent! Yes we have gotten close to what we can do with film in the digital world, but at what cost?

Just a thought!
Jason

stripes said:
Member said:

I guess I am confused here! While I love digital and I own two digital cameras, I am wondering about something here! If you are going to spend $10,000 aren't you better off just staying with Film?

Click to expand...

There are people who make their living by selling prints of their
work who think the D30 is every bit as good as prints from scanned
slides, and better then cibia prints fo slides for color, and
close, but not quite on detail.

If those people are correct then there isn't as much reason to
stick to film. Better AF, and wide angle lenses being the big
ones, special film (IR, or ISO3200+) being the smaller ones.

The pluses of digital should be obvious to anyone reading here
Plus if you are doing mostly telephoto work the 1.6 focal length
modifier is nice (sucks if you want wide angle though). Having the
LCD is much more useful in flash work then the 70Hz "modeling
strobe"...

Besides I only bought one (1) new lens for the D30, the rest I had
from my film camera.

Jason Stoller · Nov 12, 2001

Thank Bill for pointing that out! Good for you! Very valid points!

Jason

William C said:
I usually keep out of these trivial camera comparisons,
but the name Pekka Saarinen did attract my attention.
He does outstanding work with his camera and I wonder
who in the hell are you to call him a snob.

But anyway after reading your edited version, and thank you
for excluding the whole message and making me search for it.

Also in the future please take the whole message or link to it
so I can read the "original" posting. God did give me a brain
and I do not want you be the Editor of what I read.

So I copy the beginning paragraph

I have also always wondered how people don't remember that the lens
and ability to change them is the most important thing in a camera
system. Many people only see megapixels. Megapixels are a non-issue.
Less is more when less is of best quality. With a good lens D30 can be
really wonderful, with a bad lens it can be mediocre. It's like a high
end hifi set, the whole system is as good as its worst part.

So he has a point of view you disagree with. He basically want
his camera to have a camera with interchangeable lens.

My point of view there is no snob only some person who is acting
like a troll. Here is a comparison with photo you can try. Take
you photo and compare them with Pekka's.

No not his D-30 his G-1! He wins and you lose and you lose by a mile.

This argument is not worth my two cents!!

Bill

Andrew Grant27981 · Nov 12, 2001

SeKang said:
I am sick of other SLR forums (including Canon SLR forums),
concentrating too much on the “equipment” issues. I am
not saying these are not important issues. I want to see what we
can do with these expensive equipments.

The name of this web site is dpreview. Both the Olympus SLR and Canon SLR forums exist to discuss Olympus and Canon SLRs. Why are you surprised that the focus is on equipment issues. There is a samples and galleries forum intended for the discussion of photographs or there is photo.net. Many of the best photos I have seen on the web are on photo.net.

Jim K53618 · Nov 12, 2001

Jason Stoller said:
Yes but you miss my point! Its about the money being spent! Yes
we have gotten close to what we can do with film in the digital
world, but at what cost?

Just a thought!
Jason

Jason, IMHO high end digital has already surpassed 35mm film.

The savings alone from film processing could equal the DSLR in just one month for some photographers. For example, Jaja has shot 35,000 images so far with his E10. Consider the cost to do that with film.

Regards,
Jim K

Jason Stoller said:
stripes said:

Jason Stoller said:

I guess I am confused here! While I love digital and I own two digital cameras, I am wondering about something here! If you are going to spend $10,000 aren't you better off just staying with Film?

Click to expand...

There are people who make their living by selling prints of their
work who think the D30 is every bit as good as prints from scanned
slides, and better then cibia prints fo slides for color, and
close, but not quite on detail.

If those people are correct then there isn't as much reason to
stick to film. Better AF, and wide angle lenses being the big
ones, special film (IR, or ISO3200+) being the smaller ones.

The pluses of digital should be obvious to anyone reading here
Plus if you are doing mostly telephoto work the 1.6 focal length
modifier is nice (sucks if you want wide angle though). Having the
LCD is much more useful in flash work then the 70Hz "modeling
strobe"...

Besides I only bought one (1) new lens for the D30, the rest I had
from my film camera.

Click to expand...

Jim K53618 · Nov 12, 2001

stripes said:
Member said:

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.

Click to expand...

I think Minolta's wireless flash is E-TTL, and the built-in flash
doubles as a wireless flash controller, so you don't have to pay
$150+ for the ST-E2. The don't (currently?) have a digital SLR
that uses it though. The even have the lens distance feature that
Nikon touts (not that that is as useful with bounced flash).

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.

Canon D30 Snobbery in rec.photo.digital

Senior Member

Member

stripes

Guest

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Peter Kunasz

Guest

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

stripes

Guest

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts