30D -- The D is for disappointment for 10D users

[ericpetersonphoto]

LOL. Pretty funny stuff. If I told you all 5 years ago you could buy an 8MP 5 FPS camera with really low noise at 1600 under 1400.00 you would have all stoned me and called me a wack job moron. Now the same camera isn�t good enough? How many people that own a 20D really print dozens of photos over 13*19? Or use 5FPS all the time? I print photos with my 10D at 24*36 all the time and they look great. If you the 20D, XT or 10d doesn�t meet your needs and desperately need more than 8mp you really need to upgrade to the 5d not the 30d. I just find this all very amusing. Now all the red asses can call me a wack job moron. Cheers.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Maybe everyone would be happier if Canon had opted for a more modest name - 20Ds. "S" for spot metering. Everything else seems like minor tweaks, sort of like a "." software release. It does not rate a full release number.

[pturton]

A used 20D will make a good third body to accompany my 10D's. Another few 18 month cycles picking up yesterday's bodies and I might have a body for each of my lenses;-)

[phyrpowr]

Eric Peterson is a wack job moron, and also very unkind to call attention to my problem posterior

 

I'm keeping my 20D: not enough here to call an upgrade, more of a "tweak"

[ilkka]

Canon is good at marketing and that is why they call it 30D. But in reality, the upgrade is really so small that it should have been called 20D mark II. Much less of an upgrade than 10D to 20D. Interesting question: Is Canon running out of steam? 5D was a grounbreaking announcement. 30D is not. Now is the time for Nikon and Sony to come up with something big to shake up the tree where Canon is clearly at the top.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Nikon tweaked the D70 and called it the D70s. I don't recall that minor upgrade generating threads like this (no, I'm not going to search to verify - but I'm sure that someone will).

[beauh44]

<I>I print photos with my 10D at 24*36 all the time and they look great. </i><P>

 

I'm with Eric and I don't print *that* big. ;-) But a 10D - with its "lowly" 6 megapixels - makes a much better print than I've ever gotten from any 35mm film camera.<P>

 

If I was a wedding photographer and already owned a 20D (a lot of them do) I think this camera would make a lot of sense as a second body. If you're starting out, it'll be a little cheaper than the 20D with a little more bang for the buck. Nothing wrong with that.<P>

 

I think Canon spoiled a lot of people when it came out with the 5D. It was a pretty big leap even if it is a bit costly - a full frame sensor for around $3 grand! Just a year ago lots of people would've thought that would be impossible.<P>

 

So there's all this buildup to a new Canon product... People Photoshop fake pics of "new" cameras, speculation flies around, would-be buyers put off their decision in the hopes of some great new feature or benefit...<P>

 

And when the product is announced and turns out to be more evolutionary than revolutionary everyone's a little disappointed.

 

But it's quite likely that the 30D will be a slightly better camera than the 20D and a slightly cheaper price point and really now, as I said before, what's wrong with that?<P>

 

Besides, it's easy to have too many camera bodies... but who can't always use at least one more lens? Lots of people can buy new glass instead.

[daniel_taylor]

Maybe Canon didn't stick 10 MP on an APS-C sensor because they found it compromised image quality in some other way (i.e. signal-to-noise, dynamic range, color fidelity, banding *D200...ahem*). Or mabye with their current fabrication technique getting it right made it a bit too expensive.

 

Who cares? It's a decent upgrade that shows the DSLR market is maturing. Don't expect to upgrade every 18 months. That should make people *happy* since for years now all we've heard is that digital sux because you have to keep upgrading while film bodies last 50 years.

 

Well, now you don't have to upgrade.

 

I'm keeping my 10D and aiming for either the 5D or the 1D mkII. (Hey...there's another reason the 30D probably stuck to 8 MP, and for Canon's lineup it makes sense.)

[andrew robertson]

"Actually, everybody should be happy about the 30D. Canon is acknowledging the maturity

of digital."

 

I don't think that we're going to level off at 8-10 MP for APS-C sensors. Heck, you could

have said the same thing years ago when Canon replaced the D60 with the 10D!

[andrew robertson]

"Is Canon running out of steam?"

 

For the first time in several years Canon doesn't totally annihilate Nikon's darling DSLRs, and

they're running out of steam?

 

I would say that the 5D set the bar a while back. The 1Ds and 1Ds II also set the bar.

However, PMA has only just started - Canon may say 'Oh, and one more thing...' in typical

Steve Jobs fashion.

[justin_goeden]

"<i>I'm with Eric and I don't print *that* big. ;-) But a 10D - with its "lowly" 6 megapixels - makes a much better print than I've ever gotten from any 35mm film camera</i>"<p>

<p>

wow, now that's something new. what lenses and films did you use when shooting 35mm? that's funny that @ 16.7MP the 1Ds Mk II just caught up to Velvia 50 and you're saying that your 10D always got better prints?. how do you shoot? with the lens cap on?

[oceanphysics]

Please direct me to all this "hype" produced by Canon. They didn't even admit it existed until today. What hype there was was produced by Internet wankers with seemly nothing better to do all day than to debate the precise Greenwich Mean Time when the announcement would be made.

 

Really, there are a lot of people here and elsewhere on the net who need to get lives. If you like the camera, buy it. If you don't, don't. There's no need to go on about it. For crying out loud, get over it.

[daniel_taylor]

"wow, now that's something new. what lenses and films did you use when shooting 35mm? that's funny that @ 16.7MP the 1Ds Mk II just caught up to Velvia 50 and you're saying that your 10D always got better prints?. how do you shoot? with the lens cap on?"

 

I get better prints from my 10D than I did from Velvia 50.

 

Of course "better" to a photographer includes things like grain/noise, MTF, color fidelity, etc. For the film fetish crowd these things mean nothing, only lpmm count at the extinction point matters. You know, the line pairs that never actually make a difference on a print.

 

But you keep patting yourself on the back for shooting 35mm Velvia. At least as long as the film is available....

[ericpetersonphoto]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml

 

Please read above. I ve gotten better results out of my 10D and XT than any of my 35 mm film when making enlargements. My Mamiya 6 is still better than my current digital much less convenient. * I never intended to impune anypersons backside. So, Sorry ;*

[rendy_setiadjie]

Why should you disappointed? This mild improvements from 20D are great movement from Canon to secure this big segment users. 8 MP resolution is more than enough for most average users like myself. <br> <br>

FYI, Beside Canon EOS 20D I'm using Olympus E-300 (4/3 system with smaller sensor and 8 MP). I've print out (without any Photoshop adjustment except interpolation resizing only) up to 4 x 2.5 metres without any significant jaggies at all on the printout result ! <br>

The conclusion for me, megapixel race is not everything to be the best on its class for the new EOS 30D !

[justin_goeden1]

First off i'm not "patting myself on the back for using velvia". i rarely use it, i'm out of e-6 chems. and better is not always mtf charts, lpmm, etc...I describe better as more pleasing to the eye. If you have a 16x20 print of each of course the 6MP is going to look soft. maybe on a certain type of photo it'll be ok but i mean if you have a landscape you need that sharpness. shoot...even with regular films portras and nps/npc i dont' see how the 10D could always outperform...i dunno it just sounds too not smart. imho.

[pbizarro]

"Photographers" keep discussing megapixels and such.

 

"Real Photographers" will appreciate the introduction of spot metering and RGB histograms, for example.

[neild]

What's the obsession some people have with Mp's? If the 30D had have had 10.5 Mp instead of 8.2 Mp then you'd only be getting 1.13 times the number of pixels on a side anyway - big deal! To revive an old expression, <i>"That's three-fifths of bügger all!"</i>

<p>

Now, if the 30D was a 1.3x crop camera...

[andrew robertson]

"f you have a 16x20 print of each of course the 6MP is going to look soft."

 

I have razor sharp 20x30 inch prints from my 10D. I also have made some pretty nice large

prints from Velvia. The main difference is that 20x30 inch prints from a slide /

internegative cost me $200+ at the lab, and I can get the same from digital files for $30.

 

Side by side, the digital prints look much nicer to my eye mostly due to a lack of grain.

[andrew robertson]

Oh, and Paulo, thanks for helping us get back on track. After all, when new equipment

comes out, 'real' photographers never spend any time or effort considering it or debating its

merits. That's why all 'real' photographers are still using Kodak Brownies and Leica

Standards, right?

[digitmstr]

To add my 2 cents:

 

As an old 10D owner now 5D owner I'd say that yes, at the time the 20D came I didn't see enogh of a reason to change cameras. But, it is fair to say that the 30D is more than an incremental update to the 10D.

 

Noise is much lower, instant ON, larger LCD, picture styles, better AF, etc... I would be tempted if I were still shooting the APS-C, 1.6. crop sensor. However, my goal was to eventually go FF which is why I "jumped' on the 5D when it became available.

 

Canon's scope may be different than we all thought: making a 20D with 10.x MP senseo *may* start to cut into some of the 5Ds market, for those who need/want more pixels. I think that Canon wants to keep a healthy pixel difference between models.

 

Or, maybe they do not have a 10mp sensor on the table since Canon may have decided to go directly to 12mp with the next batch of APS-C cameras (the 40D?) while the next 5D may go to 16mp and the 1DsMKIII may well go to 24mp.

 

The next PMA will tell for sure...

[shawngibson]

I believe we are far from 'there'. I'm inclined to agree that the 30D was a letdown because of the lack of a resolution increase. Why? Well, for me personally, it DOES make a difference. I want big prints.

 

But most importantly, the mere fact that film does seem to be slowing becoming more and more the type of thing I can imagine, in 5 years, you are only able to purchase as a specialty item, digital cameras are not merely trying to catch/best the 35mm user - they are replacing the whole IDEA of film (for the average consumer), and at this stage, they are not even close, when you consider a medium format, or even large format film camera's quality. Of course, if you have a couple of Mercedez in the garage, you can probably also get an MF back, though...

 

I would have been much happier if Canon did nothing EXCEPT increase the resolution and put the 2.5" backend on the 30D, and keep/lower the price.

 

But I know I am part of a minority...

 

Shawn

[ted_marcus1]

As far as I can tell, Canon made some minor but welcome usability improvements to a popular camera that was widely regarded as superb. So why the "disappointment"?

 

The marketeers blew it (slightly) with the camera's name. "20D Mark II" or "20Dn" would have been more accurate (and also avoided any confusion with the ancient D30). But then we would have had a similar chorus of "disappointment" about not getting a 30D. Either way, I don't think the ever expected many 20D owners to upgrade. Rather, people who previously would have bought the 20D will now buy the 30D (and get a somewhat more usable camera). The update might possibly convince a few people who couldn't decide between a Rebel XT/350D and the 20D to go with the 30D because the usability improvements make spending the extra money even more appealing.

 

The real problem is the possibly-unreasonable expectation of rapid "paper" advances in specifications with each new model. I call it "paper" because, realistically, a 10-megapixel sensor wouldn't make much difference in image quality even though it looks better on paper. The computer industry (of which DSLRs are a part) seems to be nearing a plateau. I was recently amazed to find that my computer, which I got in November 2004, is not obsolete-- the processor and motherboard it's built around are still available, and at about the same favorable spot on the price curve where they were back then. The 30D seems to represent the same phenomenon.

 

So if you were planning to get a 20D, you'll now end up with a more usable camera than you expected. If you were planning to upgrade your 20D based on a fantasy that Canon did not fulfill, you can either save your money and concentrate on enjoying what you've got, or you could always spend a lot more money for a 5D. I don't see what the problem is.

[gaetano catelli]

"I would have been much happier if Canon did nothing EXCEPT increase the resolution and put the 2.5" backend on the 30D, and keep/lower the price."

 

amen to that.

 

contrary to the speculations of some of the resident kitchen-psychologists, a desire for more resolution is not necessarily a matter of insecurity about manhood.

 

in event photography, you don't have a lot of control over the background, or even the framing -- because it's happening too quickly to fuss with the background and framing. therefore, for those of us whose primary focus is shooting events, there is no way there can ever be too much resolution, or too little noise, for doing tight crops.

[gaetano catelli]

i don't agree that it's an "unreasonable expectation" to believe that 18 months is more than enough time to reduce noise at ISO 1600 and 3200 at the same price point.

 

we can't all be imagining that this is a major letdown.