EOS d30 - Still viable today?

[neil s.]

I've noticed that the EOS d30, now about six years old, is selling used for around $350. Even given its age,

that still seems like a decent price. I shoot with a Canon Elan 7n which I love. I was thinking of possibly

adding a d30 body so I can use all my same lenses and flash. I'm aware of the auto focus issues, the

slower start up time and the shutter lag. I'm not looking to print any bigger than 8x10 and I'm not looking

to shoot action photography. Is the d30 still viable in any way? $350 is cheaper than many digital point

and shoot cameras these days. Is that a good deal or a waste of money? Thanks a lot-

 

Neil

[davidmccracken]

I guess it all comes down to what you can afford. There have been many new cameras since the D30. You might want to look at a second hand 10D, 20D, 300D etc etc. The problem with buying such 'relatively' old technology when you are starting out in a format, is that if you like it, you will wish you had bought a something better.

[ratface1]

If it's just for fun, you don't earn income, etc, just for a hobby, sure, go for it.

I earn my entire income each year from a fairly beat-up 10D, so I can't imagine it's predecessor (s.p?) can be that bad. My understanding is it's just a bit slower and the resolution is slightly lower.

[jmichaelc]

I've still got the D30 and it is the best camera out there for the value now. I would highly recommend this camera since you are just starting out....it would be the perfect system for you to learn the in/outs of digital on.

[lovcom_photo]

For another $400 just get the Rebel XT....it is a much better camera then the D30, which I had for years. I friend's XT provides much better performance, and image quality.

 

Isn't getting a much better camera worth another $350 - $400?!?

 

Of course.

[neil s.]

Thanks for all the responses. Honestly, I'm not a big fan of the XT. I've held it and it's just

way too small. The 10d is certainly an option, but I definitely don't have $1,000 or more to

throw around on a new camera. I have seen the 10d used for around $650, which might be

doable. I know the 10d is a better camera than the d30, that's a given. I guess I'm curious,

given that's it's six years old, an eternity in digital terms, if it's even worth it. If I end up liking

this whole digital SLR thing, and I can't imagine I would hate it, will the limitations of the d30

really upset me in the long term? I'm just a serious hobbyist- I'm not a professional and I

never sell my work.

[phule]

Personally, I'd buy a used 300D and apply the hacked firmware which gives you most of the functionality of the 10D with the lower cost. You get a sensor and internal processing that provides better noise reduction at higher ISO for not much more than a used D30.

[jmichaelc]

"will the limitations of the d30 really upset me in the long term?"

 

Well, only time will tell based on the decisions you make.

 

However, i own the 1DMII, 10D, and D30. 95% of my wedding work is done with the 1DMII and about 75% of all my fun family type casual shooting is done with the D30. I hate the 10D and will grab the D30 over it everytime for general carry along shooting. Matter of fact, here's one taken last night.....<div></div>

[grant g]

I still like mine. And I don't think I'd ever sell it. It is the perfect backup for situations where you are running out of card room. I don't think there is another Canon DSLR that'll shoot 3MP RAW files. Framed properly, it will easily print up to 8x12, IMO. I like it enough that I bought a broken one too to ensure that I had spare parts for it in the future. In the low ISO range, the images are hard to beat.

 

Now that I think about it, I probably should pick up another *working* one...

[KenPapai]

Interesting Jammey, as you "hate" thje 10D so much. I cannot really think of anything the D30 does better than a 10D. Noise-wise the 10D trumps the D30. Resolution we know. Build-wise, the 10D is a very solid bodied camera, not a plastic Rebel. SO the equal there of the D30.

 

I just wonder how you come to that conclusion. My 10D is nearly 3 years old now and has never once hiccuped on me. WHAT a camera!

 

Personally my advice to Neil is to get a good quality 10D on the used market (no way would he be satisfied by a Rebel body).

[John Crowe]

I bought a used 10D back in the fall and love it. Whatever camera you end up buying make sure it comes with a battery, battery charger, cables, and software. All the accessories add up quickly if they are not with the camera.

 

 

When I bought my 10D for $600 USD I had been looking at the D30 for $400. I bought the 10D for about $100 USD less than most at that time and jumped at the deal. If you can find a 10D for $500-600 USD it would be worth the extra. Good luck.

[jmichaelc]

"I just wonder how you come to that conclusion"?

 

Focus accuracy is far worse than that of the D30

 

D30 color rendering is much more accurate than that of the 10D

 

The image of the D30 is "Unique" and it's something that is very hard to explain but alot of D30 users have noticed it and commented on this uniqueness throughout many forums and online reviews

 

And i do like the 3.1 RAW file size

 

I do like the construction of the 10D over the D30 and by far like the construction of the D30 over the rebel series cameras....much more solid and heavier....better balanced.

 

It's just a personal preference that i'm sure is different from user to user but the evedience of the D30 has proven itself to me to be a better image grabber :)

[terry_smith2]

I've had a D30 for two or three years and I'm quite pleased with it. I really don't care for digital and still shoot mostly Sensia100 in my RT, 10, 3, and 7n. The D30 does everything I need it to; it uses my existing lenses, makes good imagesfor what I do with them, and was not hard to learn. You can't beat it for the money, and it also works with older Sigma lenses.

[lovcom_photo]

Why anyone would like 3.1mp is beyond my thinking, and logic.

 

And why is3.1mp so great? "Oh, it saves lots of room on a card".

 

Most peculiar thinking...as if cards are $1,500 each for 1gb or something strange.

 

I would prefer the 10D over the 30D for no other reason then the 100% boost in MP....for enlargments past 5x7, you better have more then just a pitiful 3.1MP...the D30 was a nice camera at the time...I had one for years and loved it, but I'm too smart to idealize it, romantize it...at the end of the day, it is noisy, painfully slow and is not at all responsive, and if you want to enlarge, better be prepared for pixelization, and other unwanted digital artifacts.

 

And as for color....a 10D can get the same exact color and even exceed that provided by the D30 if one only just adjust the saturation, contrast, and other parameters on the body. This is no mystery....the D30 does NOT have the market cornered from the 10D for color, contrast, saturation, etc...I know, I had both.

[jmichaelc]

"I would prefer the 10D over the 30D for no other reason then the 100% boost in MP"

 

And that's the exact logic i can't explain. Some make decisions based on specs and some make decisions based on what they see with their eyes at initial capture. Not what you can do in tweeking but what takes place at the time of recording.

 

Different strokes for different folks :)

[grant g]

Dan,

 

When you are on your last GB at a shoot with another hour to go and, that card becomes PRICELESS. :)

 

And *I* think you are right most counts about the 10D comparison, but the smaller pixel density will allow files to 'look' sharper and pleasing right out of the camera. Mediocre lenses will appear to produce better pictures in general on the D30. But that's more opinion than fact.

[jsbc]

I am primarily a Nikon user, but sometimes I still use my D30. It is certainly viable. The question is, at this price point, are there better alternatives.

 

I think a D30 is justifiable, but see if you can negotiate an even lower price.

 

 

Also, one critical thing that I don't think any one has addressed - the ability to use EF-S lenses when you have a small sensor. Very important.

[jan_thomas1]

Neither the D30 nor the 10D support EF-S lenses.

[terry_smith2]

Dan--I don't think I've ever printed a single image from this camera since I've owned it. For putting things on the internet or for sending photos in emails, it's great. We don't all need to make huge enlargements or to shoot fast action. I paid USD 400 for mine and I've made that back many times over by using the photos it takes to sell items on ebay.

[jim_larson1]

I personally consider the lack of support for EF-S lenses an ADVANTAGE. ;)

 

And if you are running out of CF card space: Run out to Walmart and buy another gig or two. The price on these things is not going up. Recently, the price I paid for a 2gb card was HALF what I paid for my first 512mb card. And all my 512mb cards work just fine, thank you.

 

And yes. . .I routinely buy bigger HD's and more DVD's to store RAW images. These costs are truely low. (say, $200 per year)

 

As to the 10D vs 30D: Recently, you could get a *new* 10D from B&H for $800. I would think the 10D would win hands down. I think to double resolution is worth the extra cost alone. Not to mention the 10D AF system is clearly superior -> when the 10D came out, the improved AF capabilities were welcomed by the community that was hot on the 6mp D60.

 

I personally don't think there are any real issues regarding startup time and shutter lag (but I am not a d30 expert)

[saltcod]

I've got a D60 and love it - though its not without issues. It is a little slow on startup and when you fire a pile of shots consecutively. Also, it doesn't shoot all that great above iso400. Aside from that, I paid about 500 for it, added a 420ex speedlight and I'm getting some pretty good results. For the sake of $100 I'd get this over the D30 for the extra megapickles.

 

T

[michael_sydenham1]

I agree with Terry - try to get a D60 - a much better camera than the D30 but not a lot more $$. Much better in terms of (not limited to): (1) better low light performance, (2) illuminated top LCD panel, (3) illuminated focus regions in viewfinder, (4) 6M pixel. You can say the same about the 10D, but it's likely to be higher in price again for little extra benefit in my opinion. To me, the main benefit of the 10D over the D60 is the much-improved zoom-in capability during image playback.

[derekinseattle]

If you're shooting casually, don't want to spend a zillion dollars, and don't think you'll

print larger than 8x10, I'd say go for it. I've been shooting with a second-hand D30 for

more than a year, and I shoot quite a bit. I've printed lovely 8x10s, though I'll agree that

noise issues are there above 400 ISO. Seriously, don't worry about the 3.1 megapixels if

you're printing 8x10, or even 8x12. Sure, if you're a pro who has to sell museum-quality

prints it might be a problem, but those photogs also are likely shooting film or 10+

megapixel cameras anyways. For us regular guys who like to have nice looking pictures on

our walls, you don't need a jillion megapixels. I think in some ways the marketing blitz has

led some to think they NEED all those pixels. That said, the new cameras do offer a lot of

nice features that I want, but they'll cost a lot too.

 

One thing to consider though. Mine was second-hand, and now I'm having trouble with

the shutter. Even if you spend $300 on the D30, you should probably try to get it from

someone you can trust to give you an honest history of how the camera was used. If you

have to get it fixed, it could be another could hundred bucks.

 

If you like the D30, and you have the money, go for it. Buy it, be happy, and shoot as

much as you want. Everything in my portfolio was shot using a D30.