There is really no “original man”. There is a graded scale from one species to another based upon genetic characteristics that are passed down through the parents. We could discuss what a man is and if we can reach a consensus about exactly that is then we could possibly decide at what point evolution reached that point.
My personal take is more along the lines of Punctuated Equilibrium. That is that a species evolves slowly, much as outlined by Darwin, by natural selection with successful minor changes in heritable traits being handed down for the reason that they help the individual organism better survive and pass on these modifications. But that major evolutionary changes, changes that lead to new species are, on an evolutionary timescale, fairly quick and are caused by radical changes either in environment or circumstance (isolation of a population for example) which leads to a smaller genetic pool which in turn allows certain traits to become more important. Puntuated Equilibrium also gives reason for why you have a new species while the older source species continues to survive, at least for a while. If both the new and the original species are competing for the same resources, then the more capable of the two will win out eventually driving the less able one to extinction.
Human evolution is a complicated, convoluted process with no clear path from point 3.3 million years ago with a species called Anthropithecus Africanus, which if you were to see it you would say “ape” not “man”, to our present form of Homo Sapiens. We have to rely on the fossil record which is sparse at best. There have been many species in the tree which eventually went extinct. No one can say for certain which limb leads to which branch. It is all just educated guesses that change when additional information is unearthed.