DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Edifsdubs** · 07-13-2006, 12:15 AM

I get images from the D30 and 1D from photographers all the time to use in my design work. There are many $300 pocket cameras that can give a better image. The quality of the optics and electronics is great but the image sensor pixel count is way to low to be competative today. I think its just the fact that the camera cost $2000 in its day and people want to feel that its still superior. With film cameras that worked, not digital.

If you looked at a full size image from the D30 and a 350D you would see a world of difference. The D30 and 1D still take great photos but the softness is due to the low pixel count. The good news is that noise is very low. If you are going to use it for anyhting larger than 3x5s a newer camera would be better. The 350D image was downsized to the same resolution as the full size 1D image.

1D which is better than the D30:

350D

07-13-2006, 12:15 AM	#4
Edifsdubs Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 620 Senior Member	I get images from the D30 and 1D from photographers all the time to use in my design work. There are many $300 pocket cameras that can give a better image. The quality of the optics and electronics is great but the image sensor pixel count is way to low to be competative today. I think its just the fact that the camera cost $2000 in its day and people want to feel that its still superior. With film cameras that worked, not digital. If you looked at a full size image from the D30 and a 350D you would see a world of difference. The D30 and 1D still take great photos but the softness is due to the low pixel count. The good news is that noise is very low. If you are going to use it for anyhting larger than 3x5s a newer camera would be better. The 350D image was downsized to the same resolution as the full size 1D image. 1D which is better than the D30: 350D
	Quote