goalerjones wrote in post #19040587
It's funny, I returned to photography after a 25 year hiatus and bought a 5D Mk2. Then the GAS set in and it wasn't enough so up the ladder I went. Then, when my wife said, "reduce your inventory" so I could justify new lenses, i went back out to get images with it so I could post them when selling.
I was surprised by what I was seeing from that "inferior" camera. My understanding had grown quite a bit, the camera didn't change.
I was given a book on the history of photography while I was laid up after knee surgery: "Photography, the Definitive Visual History" by Tom Ang.
I was intrigued to see the Canon D30 on a double-page spread, highlighted because it was their first APS-C CMOS sensor DSLR to be essentially built from the ground up - previous ones had Kodak internal components, or were tiny. It was introduced in 2000 and caused a massive stir.
I looked up the DPReview site and found two articles reviewing the camera, both of which were highly complementary.
The original review: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30
The throwback review: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/63...-canon-eos-d30 - DPR have killed that one!
Recently I found a reference to an article from the Luminous Landscape website, by the respected photographer (the now late) Michael Reichmann. You may be able to view this for one time by going to this site:
https://luminous-landscape.com/d30-vs-film/ After that, if you are not a member it may block most of the article.
In this article he makes an effort to compare the output from the D30 with that of a film camera, using the same lens on both units. While perhaps not having the full academic rigor, his process seems sound and has been backed up by other authoritative sources. I was surprised at the results:
Here is a video with some more of his reflections (and an interesting look back in history at how digital tech was viewed in those days).
So, I wondered how much one of these would cost and I picked one up on eBay, never used, for $30US. The reason it was unused was because the otherwise pristine body was scored across the back - apparently an unpacking accident. It had lain in a display case until it was retired. I picked up another body for spares that had a perfect case ($25US) and had Canon pair the two and give it a good clean. They confirmed the original body had no wear at all.
I took it out for a test run with the EF17-40L lens. The following images were taken in dim light, hand-held with very light post processing.
Frankly, for publishing on the web (which is most of what I, and many others do) I think this 3.2MP camera does a great job.
For the heck of it I bought the Canon D60 (predictably a 6MP sensor) with lens for about $60US, and that does a great job too!