Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n

[Grev]

What are your opinons for this full frame camera?

[gstark]

Presuming you're asking about the 14-N or the 14-C ...

Anything more than $0.50 and you're being ripped off.

It does not have a good reputation, it's firmware is poor, images display high levels of noise ...

[Heath Bennett]

As a studio camera it is good. I have peers who use this camera and bring out resolution equal to the D2x, with very nice dynamic range. Gary is right though, above the minimal ISO levels noise creeps in fast. Moire can also be a problem.

Shooting tethered (firewire is very useful) is how I would advise this camera to be used, and this is pretty much only going to happen in the studio.

[Grev]

I will buy it off someone for 50 cents!

But it sounds like a medium format back which have lots of noise at higher ISO...

[gstark]

You'll probably get better (certainly comparable) images from a D2X or an EOS1Ds MkII, depending upon which Kojak you're looking at. Either of those will be better and faster, I think.

The only thing the Kojok offers is FF on a Nikon body, but as much as I'd like to have that feature, the penalty of the Kojak body and firmware would make it a very poor choice, I believe.

[Sheila Smart]

I was talking to a photographer about six months ago and he mentioned he had the Kodak DCS and he said it was a real dog! Great in the studio but absolutely RS outside.

I think Kodak has withdrawn this body now.
Cheers
Sheila

[glamy]

It works best with a limited number of lenses, but for those into landscape it can be a very good tool.

[LostDingo]

It works best with a limited number of lenses, but for those into landscape it can be a very good tool.

you should add to your arsenal

[glamy]

From the ones I have, only the Sigma 12-24 seems to work well, which would be fine. At the moment the price of the SLR/N has gone up a fair bit, they are sought after by a category of people who use their Nikon lenses on FF

[sejanus]

hmmm

gstark, I really disagree with pretty much everything you wrote, no offence though

I used to have one when I used nikon and frankly from 160-320 iso it just made a mockery of the d2x. The kodak is an outstanding camera. You just need to treat it like a medium format camera i.e. do not expect it to product the goods at high iso.

You need to;

- Stay at low iso. 160-320 is it's optimum and 400 is still pretty decent. As an idea, I have printed a 16x20 black and white from this camera at 400 iso and it was stunning, one of the most impressive dslr prints I have ever had.

- Overexpose. These cameras have incredible highlight recovery - even more so than the Fuji's. What you need to do is rather than underexpose slightly to preserve highlights like you would on a d2x or similar, is deliberately OVEREXPOSE the picture by about half to 0.7 stop. Then you pull back the details in PP (easy to batch in ACR). This pretty much negates the noise argument. If you underexpose these cameras even a fraction yes you will get lots of nasty looking noise especially in dark areas.

the camera is slow in terms of image review, but from what I've seen of Padeys s3 it's probably a fraction faster than the s3. certainly no d2x, but it doesnt stop you shooting as it has a 21 raw shot buffer.

i wrote a little bit on this camera at ;

http://www.gavincato.com/camerainfo.html

If you find one cheap and can live with the fact the camera is no longer made and you will prob have to chuck it out in a few years, grab one.

I should note though my opinions are almost completely based on outdoor portrait photography with fast lenses, and this camera will likely be unsuitable for other photography i.e. long exposures or indoor work.

I really loved this camera and if it was female i would have married it

[gstark]

hmmm

gstark, I really disagree with pretty much everything you wrote, no offence though

None taken; I welcome your disagreement and discussion.

Your opinion in this aspect is far more relevant than mine in fact, because I'm only able to speak of this camera based upon the reports I've heard of it, most of which have been overwhelmingly negative towards it.

While I don't subscribe to the theory that "x users say this, so it must be correct", I do believe that as the majority of reviews of this camera stop just short of describing it as a PoS, there may be more than an element of truth in those assessments.

That said, I ask ..

You need to;

- Stay at low iso. 160-320 is it's optimum and 400 is still pretty decent. As an idea, I have printed a 16x20 black and white from this camera at 400 iso and it was stunning, one of the most impressive dslr prints I have ever had.

Why should you?

The camera is restricting you and your work processes, it seems to me. Given that one can produce high quality images of an even larger size using just a D70 shooting under similar contraints, where, apart from a choice of lens usage, would there be any advantage to using the Kodak?

Given the cost of this camera, one could go and hire a Canon EOS1Ds MkII and get even better results, more easily, and with far better high ISO performance for quite an economical cost. Even a 5D would probably produce similar results with minimal outlay, and either of those Canon solutions would offer the same (or very similar) FF lens choices and advantages, with none of the disadvantages.

- Overexpose. These cameras have incredible highlight recovery - even more so than the Fuji's. What you need to do is rather than underexpose slightly to preserve highlights like you would on a d2x or similar, is deliberately OVEREXPOSE the picture by about half to 0.7 stop.

Interesting. The contrast range that I've seen the D2X sensor is capable of providing is extremely wide - greater than one expects from trannies - and seems to be approaching that of CN film stock.

I think a shootout comparing the D2X, 14n (or 14c) and an EOS1Ds Mk II would be an interesting and enjoyable exercise.

If you find one cheap and can live with the fact the camera is no longer made and you will prob have to chuck it out in a few years, grab one.

There's the challenge. Bearing in mind the camera's heritage (F90 or F100 IIRC?) the basics of the camera should not be a major issue.

But the electronics are a different story.

I should note though my opinions are almost completely based on outdoor portrait photography with fast lenses, and this camera will likely be unsuitable for other photography i.e. long exposures or indoor work.

Interesting; others who have commented on this camera suggest it's ideal as a studio unit, preferably tethered, and basically unsuitable for field use. You seem to be of a totally opposite PoV.

And I'll totally refrain from offering any comment with respect to your choice of partner.

[sejanus]

hey gary

While I don't subscribe to the theory that "x users say this, so it must be correct", I do believe that as the majority of reviews of this camera stop just short of describing it as a PoS, there may be more than an element of truth in those assessments.

I think a lot of bad press and opinion were generated by the initial version of the camera (i.e. not the "/n" model - the very original one that had a base iso of 80 and was rubbish over that), the firmware versions really addressed a lot of the issues on it. The problem is the initial damage was done and then the word got out that it was a POS, regardless if people had used it or not.

With that in mind I was incrcdibly cautious about them and borrowed one for a weekend before buying.

A lot of canon guys will tell you nikon is rubbish over 400 iso as there is a perception out there that nikon is rubbish at high iso, but that doesn't make it true

Why should you?

The camera is restricting you and your work processes, it seems to me. Given that one can produce high quality images of an even larger size using just a D70 shooting under similar contraints, where, apart from a choice of lens usage, would there be any advantage to using the Kodak?

Well, the medium format backs are often 50-400 iso only as well, but that doesn't make them junk. It's just about the equipment limitations and know what you are working with.

Personally I rarely found the iso limiting - I mostly used it with 85/1.4 and shooting at f/2 to f/2.8 which is where I most often was, thats plenty of light even with low iso. So no i don't consider it a restriction. By the same token I wouldn't use a fuji s3 to shoot formula 1 - i.e. use the right tool.

What you get over the d70 is FF, 14mp, and excellent image quality. What you don't get is stuff like 1/500 sync, ittl, high iso etc.

[/quote]

Given the cost of this camera, one could go and hire a Canon EOS1Ds MkII and get even better results, more easily, and with far better high ISO performance for quite an economical cost. Even a 5D would probably produce similar results with minimal outlay, and either of those Canon solutions would offer the same (or very similar) FF lens choices and advantages, with none of the disadvantages.

Yes the 1ds mk2 is better but look at the price! but the kodak is relevant as it's the only F mount FF option.

The 5d is excellent but i think the kodak was a pinch better, just a certain snap to the images. the 5d flogs it at high iso obviously.

Interesting; others who have commented on this camera suggest it's ideal as a studio unit, preferably tethered, and basically unsuitable for field use. You seem to be of a totally opposite PoV.

I've used it in studio and yes it's fine there, but it's definitely also fine outdoors as long as you expose for the camera's habits and don't go over 400 iso.




[/quote]

[sejanus]

oh btw when i said indoor work i meant stuff like churches receptions and similar without controlled lighting

[Grev]

So how much is this camera right now in the 2nd hand market?

And sejanus, you don't shoot Nikon now?

[birddog114]

So how much is this camera right now in the 2nd hand market?

1/5 of its original price or maybe cheaper.

And sejanus, you don't shoot Nikon now?

He converted to Canon while ago after a looooong time as Nikon fan.

[sejanus]

nah birdy they go for a lot more than 1/5th, i think they were $3495 usd new?

heres from a quick look on ebay and this one still has a few hrs left but already at 2k usd

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kodak-DCS-Pro-SLR-n ... dZViewItem

the guys who know how good they are are keen to snap them up, i sold mine for an outrageous price