D60 vs. D30 Side by side pics...

Jeff Singer94142

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
390
Reaction score
0
Location
Victoria, BC, CA
Ok, ok, I know.. .this has been done to death... but I just got my D60 today and need to decide which to put up on Ebay... my D30 or D60. I am very new to this (photography in general and SLRs). To be honest, I probably couldn't even tell you what a properly exposed pictures looks like. But i do know that the D60 was constantly "darker." By how much I couldn't tell you. THAT ALSO DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T PREFER THE D60 PICTURE. Out of the 17 pairs of pictures I took, I preferred the D60's 11 times.

So, this isn't really a "why is my d60 underexposing" thread... its more of a "which do you prefer" thread based on my sample pictures. Being a beginner I'd like peoples opinion on how off the exposure is (if at all) and which version people with more experience than I prefer.

To bypass the rest of my blabbering, here is the link to the images:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

The cameras were shot with the same lens and same settings. I used my "sharpest" lens, a 50mm f/1.4. I would take 3 pictures with one camera and then retake the same three pictures without moving with the other camera. The pictures are close, but obviously not an exact match since this was handheld. I also varied the aperture for each pair. The sky was overcast and there was no variation in lighting from one camera to the next. These are just point at the first thing I see pictures and not meant to be good... I just wanted anything.

Both cameras were set to partial metering. One thing I though people meant when they said the D60 was underexposing was that the actual exposure settings were being detected differently by the cameras. But with the exception of a couple pairs, each pair had the same exposure settings. The difference in the pairs that are different are likely due to my error rather than the camera or lighting.

I did nothing to the pictures except resize it (I know, full size is better). The pictures were shot in raw mode and converted with BreezeBrowser as non-linear files with in camera defaults. They were then resized with photoshop.

I was going to remove the camera information from the gallery to have a "blind" test, but that would be more difficult since you would have to say "I like number 1,3,5,14, etc, etc." Hopefully knowing which picture was taken by which camera won't influence your decisions (subconsciously of course ;-) )

To my untrained eye, this is what I saw:

D60 is darker... I don't know if this is considered an underexposure or not though.
D30 always seems to have more of a red cast to it
D60 seems to have a green cast at times
D60 seems sharper... is this due to a darker image?

I think overall I like the D60 better. I imagine its easier to fix the slight underexposure than it is to fix a slight blown highlight. Please give me your opinions on the D60 vs. D30 images... which would you want.

Anyway, hope I get some replies here :-)

Anyway, here is the link again:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

thanks,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
Ok, ok, I know.. .this has been done to death... but I just got my
D60 today and need to decide which to put up on Ebay... my D30 or
D60. I am very new to this (photography in general and SLRs). To
be honest, I probably couldn't even tell you what a properly
exposed pictures looks like. But i do know that the D60 was
constantly "darker." By how much I couldn't tell you. THAT ALSO
DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T PREFER THE D60 PICTURE. Out of the 17 pairs
of pictures I took, I preferred the D60's 11 times.

So, this isn't really a "why is my d60 underexposing" thread... its
more of a "which do you prefer" thread based on my sample pictures.
Being a beginner I'd like peoples opinion on how off the exposure
is (if at all) and which version people with more experience than I
prefer.

To bypass the rest of my blabbering, here is the link to the images:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

The cameras were shot with the same lens and same settings. I used
my "sharpest" lens, a 50mm f/1.4. I would take 3 pictures with one
camera and then retake the same three pictures without moving with
the other camera. The pictures are close, but obviously not an
exact match since this was handheld. I also varied the aperture
for each pair. The sky was overcast and there was no variation in
lighting from one camera to the next. These are just point at the
first thing I see pictures and not meant to be good... I just
wanted anything.

Both cameras were set to partial metering. One thing I though
people meant when they said the D60 was underexposing was that the
actual exposure settings were being detected differently by the
cameras. But with the exception of a couple pairs, each pair had
the same exposure settings. The difference in the pairs that are
different are likely due to my error rather than the camera or
lighting.

I did nothing to the pictures except resize it (I know, full size
is better). The pictures were shot in raw mode and converted with
BreezeBrowser as non-linear files with in camera defaults. They
were then resized with photoshop.

I was going to remove the camera information from the gallery to
have a "blind" test, but that would be more difficult since you
would have to say "I like number 1,3,5,14, etc, etc." Hopefully
knowing which picture was taken by which camera won't influence
your decisions (subconsciously of course ;-) )

To my untrained eye, this is what I saw:
D60 is darker... I don't know if this is considered an
underexposure or not though.
D30 always seems to have more of a red cast to it
D60 seems to have a green cast at times
D60 seems sharper... is this due to a darker image?

I think overall I like the D60 better. I imagine its easier to fix
the slight underexposure than it is to fix a slight blown
highlight. Please give me your opinions on the D60 vs. D30
images... which would you want.

Anyway, hope I get some replies here :-)

Anyway, here is the link again:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

thanks,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
Ok, the full size images are here:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/test_between_d30_and_d60_full_size

Jeff
Ok, ok, I know.. .this has been done to death... but I just got my
D60 today and need to decide which to put up on Ebay... my D30 or
D60. I am very new to this (photography in general and SLRs). To
be honest, I probably couldn't even tell you what a properly
exposed pictures looks like. But i do know that the D60 was
constantly "darker." By how much I couldn't tell you. THAT ALSO
DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T PREFER THE D60 PICTURE. Out of the 17 pairs
of pictures I took, I preferred the D60's 11 times.

So, this isn't really a "why is my d60 underexposing" thread... its
more of a "which do you prefer" thread based on my sample pictures.
Being a beginner I'd like peoples opinion on how off the exposure
is (if at all) and which version people with more experience than I
prefer.

To bypass the rest of my blabbering, here is the link to the images:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

The cameras were shot with the same lens and same settings. I used
my "sharpest" lens, a 50mm f/1.4. I would take 3 pictures with one
camera and then retake the same three pictures without moving with
the other camera. The pictures are close, but obviously not an
exact match since this was handheld. I also varied the aperture
for each pair. The sky was overcast and there was no variation in
lighting from one camera to the next. These are just point at the
first thing I see pictures and not meant to be good... I just
wanted anything.

Both cameras were set to partial metering. One thing I though
people meant when they said the D60 was underexposing was that the
actual exposure settings were being detected differently by the
cameras. But with the exception of a couple pairs, each pair had
the same exposure settings. The difference in the pairs that are
different are likely due to my error rather than the camera or
lighting.

I did nothing to the pictures except resize it (I know, full size
is better). The pictures were shot in raw mode and converted with
BreezeBrowser as non-linear files with in camera defaults. They
were then resized with photoshop.

I was going to remove the camera information from the gallery to
have a "blind" test, but that would be more difficult since you
would have to say "I like number 1,3,5,14, etc, etc." Hopefully
knowing which picture was taken by which camera won't influence
your decisions (subconsciously of course ;-) )

To my untrained eye, this is what I saw:
D60 is darker... I don't know if this is considered an
underexposure or not though.
D30 always seems to have more of a red cast to it
D60 seems to have a green cast at times
D60 seems sharper... is this due to a darker image?

I think overall I like the D60 better. I imagine its easier to fix
the slight underexposure than it is to fix a slight blown
highlight. Please give me your opinions on the D60 vs. D30
images... which would you want.

Anyway, hope I get some replies here :-)

Anyway, here is the link again:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

thanks,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
Jeff, I never had a D30 but still own many Canon FD cameras and even they differ somewhat if you shoot the same thing on the same film. I think it will always come to personal preference. I do think the D60's higher resolution makes most of your shots posted here sharper and slightly more contrasty (other than the Antique building shot where the D60 shot seems slightly less sharply focused). I also suspect that each individual D60 is slightly different, in that I dont think mine is underexposing like some people claim. I also suspect that the AF function is much faster and better than the D30, and definitely the time it takes to write the picture is faster.

I also suspect, as the owner of the Canon 100mm 2.8 macro lens, that you might get a better test if you did some shots using that lens in shade and sun light of flowers and other things that really show the differences more than your subjects. You will also find that each Canon lens has somewhat different contrast and other characteristics that influence what you get. Even though I have three L lenses, I still prefer the images that I get from the 100mm macro, even for non macro use. Like I said, it will be mostly preference. I would surely keep the D60 if it were me, if for no other reason than the incredible resolution which allows larger prints. My 12 x 16 images on a good Epson printer are just amazingly sharp with the D60 and the 100mm macro.

Hope this is of some help.
--
Gerry Davis
Love my D60 and three new L lenses.
 
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way (changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30 is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip. So they are both "full size at 72ppi."

I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30) and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.

Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its about 22mb worth of files.

Jeff
Perhaps there are full sized D-60 images but I can't find full size
D-30 ones.

Bill
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
the size difference between d30 and d60 is why I converted them to slightly smaller files in the first gallery. i thought it would be better to look at them at the same size rather than a smaller d30 and a larger d60.

Jeff
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.

Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.

Jeff
Perhaps there are full sized D-60 images but I can't find full size
D-30 ones.

Bill
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi
from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way
(changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30
is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip.
So they are both "full size at 72ppi."
It sounds like you may be a confused about DPI. This might help:

http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#dpi

The files you posted are reducitons. They're not full size in any way.
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.
That doesn't sound right. If you shot in jpeg, just post the originals, which will be much smaller than this. If you shot in RAW, then use a RAW converter to product jpegs. They'll be the same size as what you would have gotten from the camera.
Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.
Are you confusing the amount of memory the file takes in Photoshop (shown on the bottom left) with the file size? These are two very different things.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Ok, ok, I know.. .this has been done to death... but I just got my
D60 today and need to decide which to put up on Ebay... my D30 or
D60. I am very new to this (photography in general and SLRs). To
be honest, I probably couldn't even tell you what a properly
exposed pictures looks like. But i do know that the D60 was
constantly "darker." By how much I couldn't tell you. THAT ALSO
DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T PREFER THE D60 PICTURE. Out of the 17 pairs
of pictures I took, I preferred the D60's 11 times.

So, this isn't really a "why is my d60 underexposing" thread... its
more of a "which do you prefer" thread based on my sample pictures.
Being a beginner I'd like peoples opinion on how off the exposure
is (if at all) and which version people with more experience than I
prefer.

To bypass the rest of my blabbering, here is the link to the images:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

The cameras were shot with the same lens and same settings. I used
my "sharpest" lens, a 50mm f/1.4. I would take 3 pictures with one
camera and then retake the same three pictures without moving with
the other camera. The pictures are close, but obviously not an
exact match since this was handheld. I also varied the aperture
for each pair. The sky was overcast and there was no variation in
lighting from one camera to the next. These are just point at the
first thing I see pictures and not meant to be good... I just
wanted anything.

Both cameras were set to partial metering. One thing I though
people meant when they said the D60 was underexposing was that the
actual exposure settings were being detected differently by the
cameras. But with the exception of a couple pairs, each pair had
the same exposure settings. The difference in the pairs that are
different are likely due to my error rather than the camera or
lighting.

I did nothing to the pictures except resize it (I know, full size
is better). The pictures were shot in raw mode and converted with
BreezeBrowser as non-linear files with in camera defaults. They
were then resized with photoshop.

I was going to remove the camera information from the gallery to
have a "blind" test, but that would be more difficult since you
would have to say "I like number 1,3,5,14, etc, etc." Hopefully
knowing which picture was taken by which camera won't influence
your decisions (subconsciously of course ;-) )

To my untrained eye, this is what I saw:
D60 is darker... I don't know if this is considered an
underexposure or not though.
D30 always seems to have more of a red cast to it
D60 seems to have a green cast at times
D60 seems sharper... is this due to a darker image?

I think overall I like the D60 better. I imagine its easier to fix
the slight underexposure than it is to fix a slight blown
highlight. Please give me your opinions on the D60 vs. D30
images... which would you want.

Anyway, hope I get some replies here :-)

Anyway, here is the link again:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

thanks,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
I would say that the D60's image is "flatter" rather than darker and I would call this a good thing. You have more information to work with and can get a better end product through editing. You can't work with detail that you don't have. Are both camera's contrast and sharpness settings the same?
 
See inline:
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi
from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way
(changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30
is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip.
So they are both "full size at 72ppi."
It sounds like you may be a confused about DPI. This might help:

http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#dpi

The files you posted are reducitons. They're not full size in any
way.
Hmmm. I guess I am confused. I thought they were the normal "size" because all I did was change the ppi (as photoshop calls it in image-> image size... I've always called it dpi until I noticed that) from 180 to 72.

Damn... that was one thing I thought I understood.... guses not :-(
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.
That doesn't sound right. If you shot in jpeg, just post the
originals, which will be much smaller than this. If you shot in
RAW, then use a RAW converter to product jpegs. They'll be the
same size as what you would have gotten from the camera.
Doh! I don't know why I did that, but I converted to 16 bit Tiff and then did the conversion to 8bit jpeg. I'm doing the jpeg conversion right now and they are about 1.5 megs
Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.
Are you confusing the amount of memory the file takes in Photoshop
(shown on the bottom left) with the file size? These are two very
different things.
I was actually going by what it says in the folder (in OSX Finder, not Photoshop).

Ok, well thanks for the info! I'm doing the jpegs right now and will repost... again!

Jeff
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
I would say that the D60's image is "flatter" rather than darker
and I would call this a good thing. You have more information to
work with and can get a better end product through editing. You
can't work with detail that you don't have. Are both camera's
contrast and sharpness settings the same?
Thanks for the reply. Yes, the cameraas are set up identically. I did do some photoshopping on the images (not the ones posted) and like the D60 image better than the D30 image after photoshopping. But, I'm not a photoshop expert, so I'm sure someone with more experience can do more with both.

Thanks again.
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
I was taking some more test pictures, this time inside under low lighting. The D60 image was completely orange while the D30 was not as bad. I had both cameras set to auto WB. I then changed the white balance on the D60 to the tungsten (sp?) setting and the two were then pretty close and the orangeness went away on the D60 (I know that I can also apply the white balance setting when converting the raw as well).

Of course, I then took a picture of a grey card and used CWB and that image blew them both away.

But, I'd like to know why the D30 is able to produce the same image in AWB while I have to change the WB settings on the D60?

The D60 AWB image can be seen here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/2730389

The D60 Tungsten WB (shot in AWB and then converted during raw conversion) can be seen here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/2730390

The D30 AWB image can be seen here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/2730391

Not nit picking here.. .just trying to make the best decision as to which camera I should put up on ebay. So far I'm pretty certain the D30 will be up by the end of the day.

Thanks again,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
Ok, ok, I know.. .this has been done to death... but I just got my
D60 today and need to decide which to put up on Ebay... my D30 or
D60. I am very new to this (photography in general and SLRs). To
be honest, I probably couldn't even tell you what a properly
exposed pictures looks like. But i do know that the D60 was
constantly "darker." By how much I couldn't tell you. THAT ALSO
DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T PREFER THE D60 PICTURE. Out of the 17 pairs
of pictures I took, I preferred the D60's 11 times.

So, this isn't really a "why is my d60 underexposing" thread... its
more of a "which do you prefer" thread based on my sample pictures.
Being a beginner I'd like peoples opinion on how off the exposure
is (if at all) and which version people with more experience than I
prefer.

To bypass the rest of my blabbering, here is the link to the images:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

The cameras were shot with the same lens and same settings. I used
my "sharpest" lens, a 50mm f/1.4. I would take 3 pictures with one
camera and then retake the same three pictures without moving with
the other camera. The pictures are close, but obviously not an
exact match since this was handheld. I also varied the aperture
for each pair. The sky was overcast and there was no variation in
lighting from one camera to the next. These are just point at the
first thing I see pictures and not meant to be good... I just
wanted anything.

Both cameras were set to partial metering. One thing I though
people meant when they said the D60 was underexposing was that the
actual exposure settings were being detected differently by the
cameras. But with the exception of a couple pairs, each pair had
the same exposure settings. The difference in the pairs that are
different are likely due to my error rather than the camera or
lighting.

I did nothing to the pictures except resize it (I know, full size
is better). The pictures were shot in raw mode and converted with
BreezeBrowser as non-linear files with in camera defaults. They
were then resized with photoshop.

I was going to remove the camera information from the gallery to
have a "blind" test, but that would be more difficult since you
would have to say "I like number 1,3,5,14, etc, etc." Hopefully
knowing which picture was taken by which camera won't influence
your decisions (subconsciously of course ;-) )

To my untrained eye, this is what I saw:
D60 is darker... I don't know if this is considered an
underexposure or not though.
D30 always seems to have more of a red cast to it
D60 seems to have a green cast at times
D60 seems sharper... is this due to a darker image?

I think overall I like the D60 better. I imagine its easier to fix
the slight underexposure than it is to fix a slight blown
highlight. Please give me your opinions on the D60 vs. D30
images... which would you want.

Anyway, hope I get some replies here :-)

Anyway, here is the link again:
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger/d30vsd60

thanks,
Jeff

--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
Sorry but I can;t see any difference at least not enough to make me spend another £2000 sterling.
--
Chris Clark
 
If you click the "original" link in the PBase gallery interface you get fullsize images (for both D60 and D30 shots for the few I tried). Seems to me Jeff did exactly what he thought he did...

-Z-
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi
from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way
(changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30
is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip.
So they are both "full size at 72ppi."
It sounds like you may be a confused about DPI. This might help:

http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#dpi

The files you posted are reducitons. They're not full size in any
way.
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.
That doesn't sound right. If you shot in jpeg, just post the
originals, which will be much smaller than this. If you shot in
RAW, then use a RAW converter to product jpegs. They'll be the
same size as what you would have gotten from the camera.
Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.
Are you confusing the amount of memory the file takes in Photoshop
(shown on the bottom left) with the file size? These are two very
different things.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Nevermind. Sounds like Jeff reuploaded the images...

-Z-
-Z-
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi
from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way
(changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30
is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip.
So they are both "full size at 72ppi."
It sounds like you may be a confused about DPI. This might help:

http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#dpi

The files you posted are reducitons. They're not full size in any
way.
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.
That doesn't sound right. If you shot in jpeg, just post the
originals, which will be much smaller than this. If you shot in
RAW, then use a RAW converter to product jpegs. They'll be the
same size as what you would have gotten from the camera.
Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.
Are you confusing the amount of memory the file takes in Photoshop
(shown on the bottom left) with the file size? These are two very
different things.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
yep ;-)
-Z-
-Z-
Well, technnically neither are full size since I changed the ppi
from 180 to 72. But, they were both converted the same way
(changing the ppi and converting to 8 bits in photoshop). The D30
is just smaller because of the lower resolution of the D30 chip.
So they are both "full size at 72ppi."
It sounds like you may be a confused about DPI. This might help:

http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#dpi

The files you posted are reducitons. They're not full size in any
way.
I can't post the actual files since they would be about 18MB (d30)
and 36MB (d60) each. Even converting them to 8-bit jpegs leaves me
with a 8MB and 16MB file respectivly.
That doesn't sound right. If you shot in jpeg, just post the
originals, which will be much smaller than this. If you shot in
RAW, then use a RAW converter to product jpegs. They'll be the
same size as what you would have gotten from the camera.
Unless I'm doing something wrong?!?! If this isn't the way to do
it let me know and I'll do it. However, even at 8bit, 72ppi its
about 22mb worth of files.
Are you confusing the amount of memory the file takes in Photoshop
(shown on the bottom left) with the file size? These are two very
different things.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
I think I mostly agree.. there is little significant difference. But there is more to the camera than just image difference. I like the faster shutter and more images in continuous mode (I know, I know... if I want a fast camera get the 1D... wanna give me the $3000 extra ;-) ) And its the newer camera... LOL... just kidding.. .I'm a marketing person's wet dream.

Like I said, I'm leaning towards keeping the D60, but it isn't necessarily because of the image difference I'm seeing. Although I don't think those are great examples... its been cloudy and overcast here since the moment I got my D60 and haven't been able to test it in good outside light.

Thanks for the input.

Jeff
Sorry but I can;t see any difference at least not enough to make me
spend another £2000 sterling.
--
Chris Clark
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 
I had problems downloading these images - slow connection, so I gave up in the end.

But let me ask a question: The D60 has roughly twice the resolution, so it ought to be able to support prints of roughly the same quality at twice the print area. So for example if the D30 produces excellent A4 prints, the D60 should be able to produce excellent A3 prints.

But, even if we assume this is true, can you see any difference between the A4 prints produced by both cameras?

In other words, is the advantage of the D60 simply that it can produce prints that are twice the size or can you actually see an improvement in the smaller prints too?

I ask this because I have an E10 (strictly amateur use) and I find it fine for A4 prints. I'm considering a D60/D100/S2/SD9 but there seems little point in shelling out large amounts of cash if the extra quality is only visible in very large prints...
Like I said, I'm leaning towards keeping the D60, but it isn't
necessarily because of the image difference I'm seeing. Although I
don't think those are great examples... its been cloudy and
overcast here since the moment I got my D60 and haven't been able
to test it in good outside light.

Thanks for the input.

Jeff
Sorry but I can;t see any difference at least not enough to make me
spend another £2000 sterling.
--
Chris Clark
--
--------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D30, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top