Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n: New 14Meg Full Frame Sensor

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by deryck lant, Feb 12, 2004.

  1. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    deryck lant, Feb 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    from deryck lant <> contains these words:

    > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory


    > All new electronics


    > Still based on Nikon N80 body


    > Good low light performance


    > ISO 6-1600


    > Available early March


    > Sample gallery


    > Whoopee!


    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021209kodakdcsproslrn.asp


    Much more . . .

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/SLRNA.HTM

    http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6452-6696

    This is going to be the year of the Nikon system.

    Deryck
    deryck lant, Feb 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. deryck  lant

    George Guest

    Have they given any hint on pricing? Any hints on what upgrade pricing is
    for existing DCS-14n owners?

    "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The message <>
    > from deryck lant <> contains these words:
    >
    > > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory

    >
    > > All new electronics

    >
    > > Still based on Nikon N80 body

    >
    > > Good low light performance

    >
    > > ISO 6-1600

    >
    > > Available early March

    >
    > > Sample gallery

    >
    > > Whoopee!

    >
    > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021209kodakdcsproslrn.asp

    >
    > Much more . . .
    >
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/SLRNA.HTM
    >
    > http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6452-6696
    >
    > This is going to be the year of the Nikon system.
    >
    > Deryck
    George, Feb 12, 2004
    #3
  4. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    I read somewhere upgrade pricing would be 1500 USD for sensor plus some
    electronics excluding memory.

    Deryck

    The message <>
    from "George" <> contains these words:

    > Have they given any hint on pricing? Any hints on what upgrade pricing is
    > for existing DCS-14n owners?


    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The message <>
    > > from deryck lant <> contains these words:
    > >
    > > > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory

    > >
    > > > All new electronics

    > >
    > > > Still based on Nikon N80 body

    > >
    > > > Good low light performance

    > >
    > > > ISO 6-1600

    > >
    > > > Available early March

    > >
    > > > Sample gallery

    > >
    > > > Whoopee!

    > >
    > > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021209kodakdcsproslrn.asp

    > >
    > > Much more . . .
    > >
    > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/SLRNA.HTM
    > >
    > > http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6452-6696
    > >
    > > This is going to be the year of the Nikon system.
    > >
    > > Deryck
    deryck lant, Feb 12, 2004
    #4
  5. deryck  lant

    KBob Guest

    KBob, Feb 12, 2004
    #5
  6. deryck lant <> writes:

    > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory


    with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the ISO/noise limitations, and
    symmetric photodiodes to eliminate color gradation due to
    angle-of-incidence effects. And a new IR filter to reduce center-spot
    flare effects with certain lenses, and equalize sensitivity of the
    three color channels.

    > All new electronics


    New analog board, higher memory bandwidth. Better power management for
    much longer between charges.

    More careful dark-frame calibration for much faster startup. I think
    this may be included in the latest DCS 14n firmware.

    > Still based on Nikon N80 body


    With the addition of a "card busy" light on the storage card door.

    > Good low light performance


    Well, *better* low light performance. I bet it still will lag behind a
    number of other cameras. But presumably it will retain the enormous
    dynamic range of the 14n.

    > ISO 6-1600


    With special long-exposure mode, already present in latest DCS 14n
    firmware.

    > Available early March
    >
    > Sample gallery
    >
    > Whoopee!
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021209kodakdcsproslrn.asp
    >
    > Deryck


    --
    -Stephen H. Westin
    Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
    represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.
    Stephen H. Westin, Feb 12, 2004
    #6
  7. "Stephen H. Westin" <westin*> wrote:
    > deryck lant <> writes:
    >
    > > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory

    >
    > with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the ISO/noise limitations, and
    > symmetric photodiodes to eliminate color gradation due to
    > angle-of-incidence effects. And a new IR filter to reduce center-spot
    > flare effects with certain lenses, and equalize sensitivity of the
    > three color channels.


    But no microlenses, so I doubt it will live up to the hype. Maybe it'll be
    another stop faster: ISO 160 instead of 80. That'll be a big improvement.
    But competitive with Canon dSLRs? I seriously doubt it. Also, the lack of an
    antialiasing filter in a Bayer camera is unacceptable.

    > > All new electronics

    >
    > New analog board, higher memory bandwidth. Better power management for
    > much longer between charges.
    >
    > More careful dark-frame calibration for much faster startup. I think
    > this may be included in the latest DCS 14n firmware.


    I.e., they've fixed the worst of the design flaws... Unfortunately, the N80
    body is almost unusable with glasses (my glasses, any way). Sigh.

    > > Good low light performance

    >
    > Well, *better* low light performance. I bet it still will lag behind a
    > number of other cameras. But presumably it will retain the enormous
    > dynamic range of the 14n.


    Hmm. I need to look more closely at what the 14/n does when it works well.

    > > ISO 6-1600

    >
    > With special long-exposure mode, already present in latest DCS 14n
    > firmware.


    The long exposure modes sound interesting. Still, my experience (with MF
    landscape photography) is that even ISO 100 is pretty painful: it doesn't
    take much wind to make long expososures not an option.

    Still, I hope Kodak does succeed in fixing the worst of the problems. Even
    if it only works at ISO 160, that would put pressure on Canon to get off
    their duffs and come out with a US$3000 3D with the 1Ds sensor in it.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 13, 2004
    #7
  8. deryck  lant

    DJ Guest

    On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 18:08:16 +0900, "David J. Littleboy" <>
    wrote:

    >Also, the lack of an
    >antialiasing filter in a Bayer camera is unacceptable.


    Sounds like you are lending credence to the foveonite Belief that an AA isn't
    required on a Foveon sensor??
    DJ, Feb 13, 2004
    #8
  9. "DJ" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 18:08:16 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"

    <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Also, the lack of an
    > >antialiasing filter in a Bayer camera is unacceptable.

    >
    > Sounds like you are lending credence to the foveonite Belief that an AA

    isn't
    > required on a Foveon sensor??


    An AA filter is required for any sampled data sensor.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Feb 13, 2004
    #9
  10. "DJ" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 18:08:16 +0900, "David J. Littleboy" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Also, the lack of an
    > >antialiasing filter in a Bayer camera is unacceptable.

    >
    > Sounds like you are lending credence to the foveonite Belief that an AA

    isn't
    > required on a Foveon sensor??


    Sorry. Didn't mean to. What I meant to say was that it was unconscionable
    not to include one in a Bayer camera since the yucky artifacts would result
    in more noise from the Foveon idiots.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 13, 2004
    #10
  11. deryck  lant

    The Dude Guest

    The Dude, Feb 13, 2004
    #11
  12. David J. Littleboy, Feb 13, 2004
    #12
  13. "David J. Littleboy" <> writes:

    > "Stephen H. Westin" <westin*> wrote:
    > > deryck lant <> writes:
    > >
    > > > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory

    > >
    > > with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the ISO/noise limitations, and
    > > symmetric photodiodes to eliminate color gradation due to
    > > angle-of-incidence effects. And a new IR filter to reduce center-spot
    > > flare effects with certain lenses, and equalize sensitivity of the
    > > three color channels.

    >
    > But no microlenses, so I doubt it will live up to the hype.


    I don't think you understand how the FillFactory chip works. Each
    sensel has a photosensitive area much larger than the photodiode
    itself; it uses the volume behind other circuit elements. See
    <http://www.fillfactory.com/htm/technology/htm/high_fill.htm>.

    > Maybe it'll be
    > another stop faster: ISO 160 instead of 80. That'll be a big improvement.


    Looks like about 400 to my eye. And a number of folks have been happy
    at 160-200 on the 14n.

    > But competitive with Canon dSLRs? I seriously doubt it.


    Hmm. "Competitive"? Perhaps not in ISO. In resolution and dynamic
    range, better.

    <snip>

    > > Well, *better* low light performance. I bet it still will lag behind a
    > > number of other cameras. But presumably it will retain the enormous
    > > dynamic range of the 14n.

    >
    > Hmm. I need to look more closely at what the 14/n does when it works well.


    I think you do. There are several subtle points to working with the camera:

    o Unlike most DSLR's, the margin for error is in overexposure. Like negative
    film, expose for the shadows and develop for highlights. A full 2 stops of
    overexposure can be pulled back.

    o Kodak chose to reproduce detail way down into the shadows; I think at least
    11 full stops. There is now a processing option in Photodesk to crunch the
    black level (to use a video term) to something more typical of other cameras,
    thus losing quite a bit of noise.

    A number of people have been very happy with the 14n; I think you can
    find Michael Reichmann on the Web, and others (e.g. Jono Slack) have
    posted some tasty images to the Kodak SLR forum at DPReview.

    The 14n is a camera with maddening limitations, but they are more
    maddening because of the image quality available under optimal
    conditions.

    <snip>

    --
    -Stephen H. Westin
    Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
    represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.
    Stephen H. Westin, Feb 13, 2004
    #13
  14. deryck  lant

    The Dude Guest

    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:c0ilhu$e17$...
    >
    > "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    > news:402cc802$0$70216$...
    > > Very noisy at iso800. Looks like a D100 @ 3200.
    > >
    > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/YGD4F0164.HTM

    >
    > That's a _lot_ worse than the 10D at 3200. That's seriously ridiculous.


    While the 10D/300D are quieter at low ISO than the D100, at high ISOs they
    are a bit noisier. Perhaps it is even worse then a D100 at 6400 (HI-2). In
    any case, so much for the SLR/n sweeping the floor with the competition.
    The Dude, Feb 13, 2004
    #14
  15. deryck  lant

    W6DKN Guest

    The Dude wrote:
    > "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    > news:c0ilhu$e17$...
    >>
    >> "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    >> news:402cc802$0$70216$...
    >>> Very noisy at iso800. Looks like a D100 @ 3200.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/YGD4F0164.HTM

    >>
    >> That's a _lot_ worse than the 10D at 3200. That's seriously
    >> ridiculous.

    >
    > While the 10D/300D are quieter at low ISO than the D100, at high ISOs
    > they are a bit noisier. Perhaps it is even worse then a D100 at 6400
    > (HI-2). In any case, so much for the SLR/n sweeping the floor with
    > the competition.


    That was a crap image to start with. Look here for examples of what the
    Kodak 14n can really do :

    http://snipurl.com/4hnl

    Looks like Kodak "raised the bar" for Canon and Nikon both with this one...

    = Dan =
    W6DKN, Feb 13, 2004
    #15
  16. "W6DKN" <> writes:

    > The Dude wrote:
    > > "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    > > news:c0ilhu$e17$...
    > >>
    > >> "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:402cc802$0$70216$...
    > >>> Very noisy at iso800. Looks like a D100 @ 3200.
    > >>>
    > >>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/YGD4F0164.HTM
    > >>
    > >> That's a _lot_ worse than the 10D at 3200. That's seriously
    > >> ridiculous.


    But the ISO 400 images looked quite usable, and the large dark areas
    in the 800 image are the worst case, at least for this camera. It
    would be interesting to play with the raw file; I bet the noise could
    be reduced.

    > > While the 10D/300D are quieter at low ISO than the D100, at high ISOs
    > > they are a bit noisier. Perhaps it is even worse then a D100 at 6400
    > > (HI-2). In any case, so much for the SLR/n sweeping the floor with
    > > the competition.

    >
    > That was a crap image to start with. Look here for examples of what the
    > Kodak 14n can really do :
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/4hnl


    Or rather,
    <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/cameras/proSLR/sampleImages.jhtml?id=0.1.18.18.5.14.4&lc=en>;
    your link was to the old 14n images.

    > Looks like Kodak "raised the bar" for Canon and Nikon both with this one...


    Well, we have two of the silly opinions about the camera here. First,
    that it's a loser because you really don't want to shoot ISO 3200 with
    it, and second, that it's better at everything than other DSLR's. The
    14n is a camera of great capabilities but maddening limitations; the
    Pro/n loosens some of those limitations so that more people can make
    use of the capabilities. But it's not a fast shooter, at 1.7 fps, nor
    is it the ISO king. And flash syncs at only 1/125 max, etc.

    --
    -Stephen H. Westin
    Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
    represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.
    Stephen H. Westin, Feb 13, 2004
    #16
  17. deryck  lant

    KBob Guest

    On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:56:11 GMT, "W6DKN" <>
    wrote:

    >The Dude wrote:
    >> "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:c0ilhu$e17$...
    >>>
    >>> "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:402cc802$0$70216$...
    >>>> Very noisy at iso800. Looks like a D100 @ 3200.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/YGD4F0164.HTM
    >>>
    >>> That's a _lot_ worse than the 10D at 3200. That's seriously
    >>> ridiculous.

    >>
    >> While the 10D/300D are quieter at low ISO than the D100, at high ISOs
    >> they are a bit noisier. Perhaps it is even worse then a D100 at 6400
    >> (HI-2). In any case, so much for the SLR/n sweeping the floor with
    >> the competition.

    >
    >That was a crap image to start with. Look here for examples of what the
    >Kodak 14n can really do :
    >
    >http://snipurl.com/4hnl
    >
    >Looks like Kodak "raised the bar" for Canon and Nikon both with this one...
    >
    >= Dan =
    >


    One thing that bothers me about the 14n's imaging is the "smearing"
    effect that can often be seen (for example) on blades of grass. Like
    various areas have been gone over with a blending stub. This is a
    severe enough problem that even smaller 11X14 prints will show it.
    Hopefully the SLR/n has addressed this.
    KBob, Feb 13, 2004
    #17
  18. deryck  lant

    KBob Guest

    On 13 Feb 2004 12:06:14 -0500, westin*
    (Stephen H. Westin) wrote:

    >"David J. Littleboy" <> writes:
    >
    >> "Stephen H. Westin" <westin*> wrote:
    >> > deryck lant <> writes:
    >> >
    >> > > All new CMOS 14Meg full frame sensor built in new factory
    >> >
    >> > with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the ISO/noise limitations, and
    >> > symmetric photodiodes to eliminate color gradation due to
    >> > angle-of-incidence effects. And a new IR filter to reduce center-spot
    >> > flare effects with certain lenses, and equalize sensitivity of the
    >> > three color channels.

    >>
    >> But no microlenses, so I doubt it will live up to the hype.

    >
    >I don't think you understand how the FillFactory chip works. Each
    >sensel has a photosensitive area much larger than the photodiode
    >itself; it uses the volume behind other circuit elements. See
    ><http://www.fillfactory.com/htm/technology/htm/high_fill.htm>.
    >
    >> Maybe it'll be
    >> another stop faster: ISO 160 instead of 80. That'll be a big improvement.

    >
    >Looks like about 400 to my eye. And a number of folks have been happy
    >at 160-200 on the 14n.
    >
    >> But competitive with Canon dSLRs? I seriously doubt it.

    >
    >Hmm. "Competitive"? Perhaps not in ISO. In resolution and dynamic
    >range, better.
    >
    ><snip>
    >
    >> > Well, *better* low light performance. I bet it still will lag behind a
    >> > number of other cameras. But presumably it will retain the enormous
    >> > dynamic range of the 14n.

    >>
    >> Hmm. I need to look more closely at what the 14/n does when it works well.

    >
    >I think you do. There are several subtle points to working with the camera:
    >
    >o Unlike most DSLR's, the margin for error is in overexposure. Like negative
    > film, expose for the shadows and develop for highlights. A full 2 stops of
    > overexposure can be pulled back.
    >
    >o Kodak chose to reproduce detail way down into the shadows; I think at least
    > 11 full stops. There is now a processing option in Photodesk to crunch the
    > black level (to use a video term) to something more typical of other cameras,
    > thus losing quite a bit of noise.
    >
    >A number of people have been very happy with the 14n; I think you can
    >find Michael Reichmann on the Web, and others (e.g. Jono Slack) have
    >posted some tasty images to the Kodak SLR forum at DPReview.
    >
    >The 14n is a camera with maddening limitations, but they are more
    >maddening because of the image quality available under optimal
    >conditions.
    >
    ><snip>


    Maddening is the right word--at times the 14n can deliver images that
    are truly second to none. Guess we'll all have to bend over and send
    them in for the upgrade...I do however get the impression that Kodak
    is using us as expensive guinea pigs. What the hell, it's only money,
    right??
    KBob, Feb 13, 2004
    #18
  19. "Stephen H. Westin" <westin*> wrote:
    > "David J. Littleboy" <> writes:
    > > > with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the ISO/noise limitations, and
    > > > symmetric photodiodes to eliminate color gradation due to
    > > > angle-of-incidence effects. And a new IR filter to reduce center-spot
    > > > flare effects with certain lenses, and equalize sensitivity of the
    > > > three color channels.

    > >
    > > But no microlenses, so I doubt it will live up to the hype.

    >
    > I don't think you understand how the FillFactory chip works. Each
    > sensel has a photosensitive area much larger than the photodiode
    > itself; it uses the volume behind other circuit elements. See
    > <http://www.fillfactory.com/htm/technology/htm/high_fill.htm>.


    Talk is cheap. Lets see the noise performance.

    > > Maybe it'll be
    > > another stop faster: ISO 160 instead of 80. That'll be a big

    improvement.
    >
    > Looks like about 400 to my eye. And a number of folks have been happy
    > at 160-200 on the 14n.


    The ISO 800 shot I downloaded was a joke (far worse than 10D ISO 3200):
    extrapolating, I'd say ISO 100 would probably be problematic.

    > > > Well, *better* low light performance. I bet it still will lag behind a
    > > > number of other cameras. But presumably it will retain the enormous
    > > > dynamic range of the 14n.

    > >
    > > Hmm. I need to look more closely at what the 14/n does when it works

    well.
    >
    > I think you do. There are several subtle points to working with the

    camera:
    >
    > o Unlike most DSLR's, the margin for error is in overexposure. Like

    negative
    > film, expose for the shadows and develop for highlights. A full 2 stops

    of
    > overexposure can be pulled back.
    >
    > o Kodak chose to reproduce detail way down into the shadows; I think at

    least
    > 11 full stops. There is now a processing option in Photodesk to crunch

    the
    > black level (to use a video term) to something more typical of other

    cameras,
    > thus losing quite a bit of noise.


    If you read between the lines in the above, what you just said is that Kodak
    overrates the ISO by two f stops.

    I realize people have been able to get good studio shots from the 14n, but
    it appears to still be a disaster in the ISO area.

    > A number of people have been very happy with the 14n; I think you can
    > find Michael Reichmann on the Web, and others (e.g. Jono Slack) have
    > posted some tasty images to the Kodak SLR forum at DPReview.


    MR isn't a great source: it took him 6 months to notice the hideous blue
    channel noise in his Kodak MF back. And even when he noticed it, it didn't
    bother him.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 13, 2004
    #19
  20. "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    news:402d3646$0$98813$...
    >
    > "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    > news:c0ilhu$e17$...
    > >
    > > "The Dude" <> wrote in message
    > > news:402cc802$0$70216$...
    > > > Very noisy at iso800. Looks like a D100 @ 3200.
    > > >
    > > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/YGD4F0164.HTM

    > >
    > > That's a _lot_ worse than the 10D at 3200. That's seriously ridiculous.

    >
    > While the 10D/300D are quieter at low ISO than the D100, at high ISOs they
    > are a bit noisier. Perhaps it is even worse then a D100 at 6400 (HI-2).

    In
    > any case, so much for the SLR/n sweeping the floor with the competition.


    Sorry, I didn't intend to argue Canon vs Nikon, I intended to disagree with
    your assesment of the value of that image: there's almost no valid
    information there. It's a pitiful joke.

    As I mentioned in my other note, it seems that Kodak is overrating the ISO
    by several f stops and claiming that it has more headroom. This is right up
    there with the Olympus "parallel rays" lie and the Foveon snake oil.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 13, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. J. Sm
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,153
    Mark Roberts
    Oct 8, 2003
  2. Mark Roberts

    Kodak upgrades DCS 14n with new sensor

    Mark Roberts, Feb 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    316
  3. Steven M. Scharf
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    4,394
    Crownfield
    Apr 3, 2005
  4. Newsgroups
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    393
    ASAAR
    Jun 1, 2005
  5. RBrickston

    SLR Cameras with a full frame sensor

    RBrickston, Oct 7, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    665
    C J Campbell
    Oct 14, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page