getting there, though Werner 02:53:19 03/26/01 (0)
 Re: DIgital Not There Yet Des 18:41:36 03/23/01 (4)
 i own the D30... Steven R. Rochlin 08:44:12 03/30/01 (2)

...

Show full thread outline!

 getting there, though Werner 02:53:19 03/26/01 (0)
 Re: DIgital Not There Yet Des 18:41:36 03/23/01 (4)
 i own the D30... Steven R. Rochlin 08:44:12 03/30/01 (2)
 Resolution R B 06:37:39 04/03/01 (1)
 Re: Resolution Steven R. Rochlin 15:54:05 04/04/01 (0)
 Re: DIgital Not There Yet BillyL 19:32:17 03/23/01 (0)

Des

• http://www.LUMINOUS-LANDSCAPE.com/iso100-400.htm

And of course, imaging chips are getting better each year, but I
have to say so as I am co-founder of one of their design houses.

TNT Audio Netzine

• samples

As i own the Canon D30 after trying it and deciding it was better for my work/useage than the Hasselblad 503CW kit, i miss the Hasselblad but LOVE the uability of the D30. Of course medium format film is MUCH BETTER than 35mm as in the comparison link you provided. Still, the D30 is VERY good and yes, you can easily bring it to 8x10 without problems IMHO. For print magazines you will probably see NO difference between the D30 and 35mm. Print magazines generally use only 150 line/inch. Even if they used 300 line/inch i feel that the D30 is superier as CMOS captures an image in a different way than film (plus add in the variables in developement of analog film).

i AM NOT saying the D30 equals or betters 35mm, but that the Canon D30 is a viable alternative to film for a profesional photojournalist IMHO. If you do web work as i do, analog film is worthless compared to the D30 usability.

Of course another factor not mentioed in the review (i believe) is that the quality of the lens can make a BIG difference. FYI: i use the basic Canon 28-135 f/3.5-4.5 IS USM lens for most things, but when i want true quality i go to my 70-200 f/2.8 L USM lens. Yes, you can see a difference between them on the D30'sm image output.

Just my 2 yen.

Enjoy the music,

Steven R. Rochlin

.................Canon D30 is a viable alternative to film for a profesional photojournalist IMHO...............

Depends on the work they are doing, if its web based their shooting for, than yes 72dpi & backlit on monitors they will get away with it.
The most I have seen photographers do is to shoot on film & then digital darkroom from there. Improvements in print quality can be seen from slide film up to 6000dpi. What’s the best dpi your Canon D30 can give? I'm not sure at what point the trained eye comes into it, as some of the digital shots look pretty good to me.

regards rod

>>>What’s the best dpi your Canon D30 can give? I'm not sure at what point the trained eye comes into it, as some of the digital shots look pretty good to me.<<<

DPI is deceiving as DPI can be anything you want AS LONG AS you have enough pixels to cover them. If i was looking to have large blow-ups (over 14x20) or do wall-sized images then no, the D30 is not it. For photojournalists there are plenty of pixels for normal print media. Besides, most images a reporter has in audio magazines are small shots and not of the full page variety.

If you want good photos that blow up well i would start with a Hasselblad or other medium format variety and go up from there. Of course there ARE super high rez digital backs for medium format cameras, but the price is still a bit too steep for "normal" photo folks to schwing :-(

Enjoy the music,

Steven R. Rochlin