Canon EOS D30 Canon’s first “in-house” digital camera, 2000 CE

<p>Canon EOS D30 Canon’s first “in-house” digital camera <br /><em>Kadlubek CAN 1412</em><br /> <br />May 2000<br /><br />As I indicated in an earlier post ( http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00dyGv ) , the dam finally busted, and I ended up getting some earlier digital cameras in the Canon EOS line, to wit: the Kodak DCS 560 (=Canon 6000), the Kodak DCS ProSLR /c (uncredited Sigma Foveon “14MP” full frame with a Canon EOS lens mount), and the “built-here” Canon EOS D30 of 2000.<br /> I remain uncertain about where on P.net I should actually post this. Only at the last minute did I take the advice of some Nikonistas who said they wouldn’t see it on the Canon EOS forum. Really, I’d prefer to have it in modern or classic cameras forums, but I guess that’s not on yet.<br /><br /><br /><br />It would seem to make sense to do these chronologically, earliest first, but several factors have led me to this point. <br />I am awaiting some replacement betteries for these old models<br />After initial success, I am having some problems with the menus on the DCS ProSLr /c which I need to try to solve before shooting, although if worse comes to worse it is recording images.<br />Finally, the Canon EOS D30 [NOT to be confused with the later Canon EOS 30D] is the really in-house first for Canon establishing the path for the arguably central evolutionary line of the Canon double-digit D cameras (D60, 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D … ) aimed at the “Prosumer” or “Advanced Amateur”market. <br /><br />It is so much the ancestor and prototype for the later series, in fact, that at least some grumpy old guys are going to ask why I bothered to post this at all. <br /><br /></p>

<ol>

<li>While the true answer is certainly that I like doing these little excursions, there is the further indisputable fact that most “old film” people here were still shooting film before 2004 CE, so really don’t know much about these historically important early digitals.</li>

<li>, the image quality of the earlier digital cameras were still “less” than Kodachrome, at any rate, so it is arguable whether these cameras are still “users” unless you are only posting on the internet.</li>

<li>Given the issues of low “megapickles” as one of our departed (?) colleagues used to call it, I’m not even going to make a pretense of getting out and shooting the sort of classy images typical of so many others on the Classic Manual Camera forum.</li>

<li>Finally, I’m still recovering from an illness that has kept me home bound for a couple of months, so it would still be hard to get out and do justice to the Kodak DCS cameras. This post is more in the “from-my-driveway” series, including the much admired “polyspheroid water tower” series.</li>

</ol>

<p><br />So if you are offended or disinterested, this is a good place to stop. <em><strong>Now</strong></em>, that is.<br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>This was Canon’s first in-house digital camera (3.3 MP) for the “amateur” market , in May, 2000, two years after the 6 MP Kodak/Canon DCS 650.<br /><br />Some specs:</p>

<ul>

<li>22.7x15.1 mm CMOS sensor (2160x1440 pixels) (APS-C, 1.6 crop)</li>

<li>ISO speed equivalents: 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 .</li>

<li>Quality can be set from small JPEG (1440x960, 0.4 MB) to Large JPEG (2160x1440, 1.3 MB)), and to RAW (2160x1440, 3.4MB - TIFF)</li>

<li>3 fps continuous shooting (max. 8 frames)</li>

</ul>

<p><br />This camera clearly sets the direction for the later mid-range XXD Canon EOS cameras. APS-C CMOS sensor, built-in flash, and even the same wired remote that still works on the later XXD Canons and others besides. Same BP-511 battery as so many of the XXD cameras have.<br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>The mount is standard EF mount.<br>

Like its two immediate descendants, the D60 and the 10D, however, it will <em><strong>NOT</strong></em> take the later EF-S lenses made especially for APS-C cameras. Otherwise, no user of any of the XXD line of Canon EOS cameras will find anything particularly odd about the menus or command buttons on the D30. <br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>But, wait, where is the ISO setting? <br />It’s there. One way is to go into the menu settings, but, fortunately, one of the custom functions can be set so that you can set the ISO speed by pressing the SET button and turning the control or dial as you look at the LCD panel. (C.Fn-12-2). Not obvious, but it works better than going in and out of the menu structure. In order to make it easier to use, many persons used to the later models in the line need to go into the menu functions and set preferences accordingly.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />So why would anyone want a 3.1 (effective) MP camera when the Kodak versions had 6MP? The ¥358,000 price compared to the over ¥3,000,000 price for some of the earlier digital cameras explains a lot. Actually, the XXD line has tended to circle around a price of US$2000 to 3000 ever since, despite drastic currency fluctuations. Canon has apparently decided to keep these “affordable” in this range for the US market, anyhow.<br /><br />Here is what 3.1 effective megapixels can do.<br />First, the view down Ennuisgaten and Bohring Way from my house with a EF 100-400mm on the D30, mirror lockup, and that long-current remote. Here at ISO 100. [All with mirror lockup and remote]<br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>And a 100% clip from the a full-sized APS-C image (2160x1440) at ISO 1600.</p><div></div>

<p>But of course, I know my audience, at least the ones who are still here.<br>

Here is the world famous (really, not just here on P.net) Carbondale Polyspheroid Water Tower:<br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>And just for the sake of it, here is a 100% clip from the ISO 100 image and the same from a ISO 1600.</p>

<div></div>

<p>For those like me, who grew up on GAF 500 slide film and High Speed Ektachrome, frankly it's surprising how relatively good the ISO 1600 image was. I mean, this is truly DAWN AGE (EOS, right?).<br /><br />However, it was inevitable that we’d come here. Here are some mailboxes at the foot of the water tower…..</p><div></div>

<p>Well, you were warned ( http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00dyGv ). <br />Here are some of my earlier posts for EOS film cameras, from which this is a kind of logical progression:<br /><br />EOS 650 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vlot<br />EOS 620 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vv2v<br />EOS 630 http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00YFVd<br />EOS-1 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WvBD<br />EOS 10S http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WxgJ<br />EOS 700 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wn8K<br />EOS 5 =A2e http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wrxy<br />EOS-3 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WyuM<br />EF-M - http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Zyz7<br /><br /><br>

end</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi everybody,<br>

Just thought I´d post a super quick introduction since I just joined. I´m super excited to be part of this community. I´m looking forward to learning a lot from y´all and hope that I can give some back to the community.<br>

I love photography, extreme sports. Turns out they both go together quite well. I am amazed by how powerful small action cams have become and love to shoot with them. Only thing that can be a challenge is shooting with them in low light.<br>

hope to speak with all of you real soon!<br>

John</p>

<p>I must have the professional version. It has the BG-ED3 Battery grip, and was used by a professional tennis photographer. It came with an older EOS 10s, that was used at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992. I recently picked up the nifty 50, and both cameras seem to work fine. I haven't put film through the 10s yet, but will someday.<br>

I never got a charger for the D30, but I have a Powershot G1 that takes the same battery, so I can power this monster up.</p><div></div>

<p>Actually, the battery grip can be fitted to any D30 camera. I was able to confirm that, although it's close, the battery grip for the 20D, 30D, and some following models does not quite fit the D30, however.</p>

<p>While I like the heft of the grip on the smaller Rebel XT (XXXD) bodies, I found the additional size made the XXD camera grip a little too large for my taste. If you shoot with chimping turned off, etc., the single battery lasts for a long time between chargings anyhow.</p>

<p>Of course, the extra size does make it easy for the uninitiated to to mistake a "double-digit" EOS camera for a "single-digit" one (1D, Walter Mitty style). :)</p><div></div>

As always, JDM, an informative post. When my family had a camera shop we sold EOS film cameras, but closed before

the digital models came out. I remember trying out the EOS 620 and being favorably impressed. Thanks for posting.

<p>there is always the Canon EOS forum. My actual question is when when does one f these enter the realm of being a classic. When I use a digital I use a EOS Rebel XS that I purchased in 2009 used but seems fine to me. I have been told that the lenses that canon sld with it were kind of "junky".</p>

<p>I'd personally rather put it into a Modern Film Cameras that was renamed and re-purposed into Modern Collectible Cameras -- thus no "classic" sensibilities need to be outraged or defined.<br>

I discussed above and in the prior post my problem with the nature of the participation and flavor of the existing Canon EOS and Nikon forums.<br>

This time, if I had it to do over, I might well put it in the Canon EOS forum since so far the promise of Nikonista interest seems unfulfilled. :|</p>

<p>I might venture that you have a higher visibility here and classic manual cameras. A lot of the people who know of you may not go to the other fora that much.</p>

<p><strong><em>After thoughts</em></strong>.<br /> For the record, I got the Canon EOS D30 on eBay, but I bid for it there because the vendor was KEH of Atlanta. I've had such good luck with KEH in direct purchases that I took a chance on eBay, hoping for a bargain, but there were other bidders.<br /> It was a 2 to 3 pizza purchase, as it turned out, which is not much of a bargain, but not over payment either. In short, it was "market value". As you can see in the pictures, it is a nice clean copy.</p>

<p>The Canon company support for manuals and software seem to have expired. After 16 years, that seems pretty understandable.<br /> The original Canon user manual is available at http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/5/0900007485/01/D30_Hardware.pdf</p>

<p><em>Other Sources</em><br /> Google is indeed your friend, and there are many sources available for contemporary reviews, etc. Phil Askey's October, 2000, review in DPREVIEW ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30 ) is very useful if you want to know more about this camera.<br /> There are even some sites that offer software and updater files.<br /> I have a gap in my old photo magazines for the turn of the(this) century, so others can fill in other reports and previews from that period if they wish.</p>

<p>Sixteen years later, the dSLR hasn't changed much. Improvements, more megapixels, but the D30 probably will stand as the first of a long line of a particular type of digital cameras. I personally strongly suspect that there will not be much more evolution of SLRs with actual mechanical mirrors.<br /> How crude all that machinery will probably seem to future users that will have totally solid-state cameras, or maybe only phones.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I believe one advantage of these early EOS digitals, D30 and D60, is that they are fully compatible with some Sigma lenses which only work at maximum aperture with later cameras.</p>

<p>I, too, have succumbed to the temptation to acquire "classic" digitals, and would support the inclusion of them in a renamed "Modern Classics" forum. I've got a Nikon D1H, which despite its tiny by current standards 2.6MP, is capable of very nice images. It does make you wonder ... some examples here:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00dIv0</p>

<p>As a matter of fact,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>(advantage) is that they are fully compatible with some Sigma lenses which only work at maximum aperture with later cameras</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have a Sigma Super-Wide II 28mm f/2.8 that came with my older Kodak digitals that is exactly that and it does work with the D30 as well as the Kodak DCS cameras. It doesn't work at all well with the 20D or later.</p>

<p>further addendum:<br>

I got curious and tried taping over some of the pins on the Sigma (as is done with the Canon Teleconverters) and found that the Sigma could be used as a manual lens (at full aperture, of course).</p>

You are one of the people making me interested in old cameras. I own a couple of them now.

I've always love reading your reviews.

Last year i have bid on a D30 on our local online market, but someone was willing to spend to much money for it.

He/she probably thought it was a 30D.

<p>For sure, there is a lot of confusion between the D30 and the 30D, not cleared up any by the current Nikon use of Dxx as opposed to the current Canon xxD nomenclature.</p>

<p>I warn you though,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>at first it was just one little camera, and then I got another, and another, ......</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But it's legal, and you can have a lot of fun for the price of a pizza or two. ;)<br>

Thanks Marcel.</p>

uncredited Sigma Foveon “14MP” full frame with a Canon EOS lens mount

 

Actually, although I thought this was true, it was a misinterpretation.

How about write up something for the first Nikon DSLR? The E2.

How about write up something for the first Nikon DSLR? The E2.

 

From

The DCS Story: 17 years of Kodak Professional digital camera systems 1987-2004 (LINK)

by Jim McGarvey

 

What is arguably the first real "digital" camera was based on a Canon F-1

Electro-Optic Camera (1988)

By 1987, Kodak had developed the world's first

megapixel CCD imager, the M1. A US Government

customer contracted with the Federal Systems Division

(FSD) to incorporate the M1 into a standard 35 mm

camera body to create the first megapixel portable

digital camera, truly the prototype of the digital

camera system (DCS) product line.

 

But for various reasons, including Kodak's impression of market viability, by 1989 they had shifted to using Nikon bodies in the 1990 IRIS and by 1991 the

Kodak Professional DCS was released (from Nikon F3), and some 987 units actually sold.

 

The rest is, as they say, history, which you can read in McGarvey's history at the link given above.

 

Although these early Nikon and Canon digital cameras were based on film bodies, as I understand it (a shaky proposition), this was done by Kodak without the direct involvement of the OEMs.