it ready yet? Maybe.
the Pro 14n is clean, though as you can see from these photos,
it has a bit of a paunch both in front and back (see Handling
section in review).
the front, the top connector on the right is the PC Sync,
the bottom is the 10-pin remote control connector. Fortunately,
the hand strap comes connected from the factory--it's a real
doozy to get back on correctly, so don't take it off if you
think you might want to use it later. At the far bottom left
you can just see the vertical shutter release peeking out.
Unfortunately, there's no command dials or other controls
to go with it.
camera back is relatively uncluttered and laid out logically--in
the menus, you normally only use the direction pad and the
two buttons just above it.
top plate of the camera is essentially unchanged from a Nikon
N80, by the way. As is the low-power internal flash that pops
Nikon users will have no trouble picking up this body and
starting to use it.
February 12, 2004, Kodak announced an update to the Pro 14n,
called the SLR/n. This new version of the camera had an updated
sensor, a different filter over the sensor, new power management
facilities, a visible write-to-card light, a 60 second shutter
speed, and a few other refinements. The
new sensor does not require the Lens
of the Pro 14n and has lower noise and less purple
fringing tendency than the existing one. ISO range is calibrated
from 160 to 800, with the full extended ISO range being 6 to
1600. This new version of the camera began shipping February
16, 2004. Owners of Pro 14n cameras were for a short time able to have the sensor and analog
for US$1500, and once done, that camera is referred to as a Pro
14nx. In general, this review is applicable to all three variants of the camera, with the SLR/n being slightly preferred due to a few less obvious issues in side-to-side color variation and noise.
Kodak also continued to update the firmware of the cameras for some time after they stopped actively selling them. It's highly recommended that you make sure you have the most current software, as a few of the problems mentioned do tend to be ameliorated or erradicated by subsequent revisions. For example, I note in the right column that long exposures are iffy, but with the later low-ISO support, this problem seems to be non-existent. Likewise, side-to-side color issues with a few lenses did get better (though not completely fixed) with later firmware revisions.
get the weeds cleared before we get to the camera: Kodak shot themselves
in the foot handling this product's introduction. They then proceeded
to get a sledgehammer and hit themselves in the same foot. When
they stopped screaming, they tried to kick in a metal door with
that foot. Frankly, I don't think Kodak's digital camera marketing
team is quite ready to play soccer with Nikon and Canon yet.
the heck did I mean by that last paragraph? Well, if you didn't
follow Kodak's inept marketing introduction for the Pro 14n, let
me fill you in on the highlights. Or is it lowlights?
Photokina in the fall of 2002 Kodak launched the Pro 14n with great
fanfare. One of the original claims made at their booth was that
it would sell for US$4000, another was that it would ship in a couple
of months (interpreted by the press as meaning November 2002). Indeed,
the product manager sent a message to several forums titled "This
camera rocks." He got rolled. Kodak quickly pulled back on
the price ("the official price is US$4995, though you may find
some selling it for less"). Then the expected ship date started
slipping. By Christmas. No, in January. Mid-January. February. "Hey,
we shipped at PMA" (I'm not 100% convinced they did--it appears
that they shipped a demo model to each official dealer coincident
with PMA in March 2003, but I only heard of two users who received cameras
during that time, and both of those were purchases of dealer demos).
the delays were accumulating, Kodak posted a few sample shots from
the camera and was immediately hit with criticism from the nay-sayers.
Two things seemed obvious: there was a lot of noise in those shots,
and fine detail had this tendency to go Matisse (blotchy, indefinite,
splotchy, plastic; take your pick of the appropriate term). "Oh,
but I only had a few hours to do those shots," was the first
response. But further samples, while better, still tended to reveal
noise and blotches. If super models had skin that blotchy, no teen
woman would ever want to emulate them and Sports Illustrated
wouldn't be publishing a swimsuit issue. Still, you have to admire
Kodak's Chutzpah. When they finally did get around to letting a
few Pro 14n's out to reviewers, the image quality defects were most
certainly there and the camera was almost universally called a disappointment
(well, a few went further and totally panned it). Every review went
right to three issues: noise at all ISOs that ratcheted up to unusable
at anything above 200; loss of fine detail when the mandatory noise
reduction routines kicked in; and unsaturated colors that weren't
always right. Some reviewers found other faults to pick, but the
primary impression was that the image quality wasn't up to snuff,
so who cared about anything else?
starting back at Photokina, I asked politely to be put on the reviewer
list for the camera. Over a period of six months, I asked five times.
Twice I was told that "you're on the list." Perhaps the
list was resting. Perhaps the list was confused about by my first
name and was waiting for "Thom" to appear in a spell checker.
Perhaps the list was soooo long with Nikon experts waiting to audition
the camera that I'm just further down than I'd expect to be. (About
a week after my long-on-order Pro 14n showed up from the dealer,
Kodak called telling me that they finally had a demo unit for me
to borrow. Too little, too late.)
from my sarcasm you're starting to get the idea that I'm no fan
of Kodak's marketing, you're dang straight. If I had ever executed
product marketing so poorly at any company I worked for, I would
have expected to be immediately dismissed; I would have been shamed
into leaving the tech industry for a job at McDonald's, assuming
of course, that I had enough skill left to beat out the local teens
at flipping burgers.
Here's why all that is important to know: you must learn to
ignore all of Kodak's totally inept and amateurish marketing.
Instead, pay attention to the wizard behind the shutter curtain.
Pretend that the name on the camera is Honda or Sony or Disney or
some company that understands marketing. Further, forget all those
previous reviews you may have read of the camera, because the one
thing that Kodak's marketing team said along the way that has proven
to be correct is this: "new software updates will improve it."
so we begin.
features are the ones that catch everyone's attention: 14-megapixel
resolution and full 35mm frame coverage. That's it. If you don't
already want a Pro 14n after hearing that it has those two features,
then don't bother reading on--a Nikon D70, Nikon D100, Fujifilm S2 Pro, or Fujifilm S3 Pro runs
off basically the same body design and all do perfectly fine jobs
at smaller sensor sizes and resolutions than the Pro 14n. I mean
it. The reason to pay all that extra dough for a Pro 14n boils down to those
two features; you either need one or both of those features, or
you can just immediately pocket the extra bucks or spend it on lenses
for your D70/D100/S2/S3.
so why would you want 14 megapixels? Well, at 300 dpi, we're talking
a 10x15" print direct from the camera, with no interpolation
other than the Bayer demosaicing. Compared against a desktop-scanned
slide blown up to that size, the digital camera's picture has one
tremendous advantage: no grain. Further, Kodak chose not to put
an anti-aliasing filter on the Pro 14n, so that 14 megapixel resolution
is real, not filtered down a bit by softening filters (which force
you to sharpen the image back up after the fact). In theory, if
you get everything set right in your Pro 14n and take a picture,
you can pop it directly over to an Epson 2200 and get an archival
11x17" print with no extra resolution fiddling.
why would you want full frame? Well, suddenly your wide angle lenses
are wide angle lenses again. No more 1.5x field of view crop, which
makes your 14mm act like a 21mm lens. Your 14mm lens gives you 114
degrees of angle again, not the 92 degrees the other Nikon DSLRs
give you. Fisheyes are fisheyes again. You can shoot in close quarters
in small rooms again. Depth of field charts (and scales on the lenses)
all give you the right numbers again. Heck, you can even drop the
word "equivalent" from your vocabulary.
the Kodak Pro 14n doesn't use a Kodak sensor to achieve those two
important things (and here I thought Kodak was spending its R&D
money trying to make itself more of a digital leader; silly me).
Instead, Kodak buys sensors from FillFactory. It's unclear from
either company's materials just how close the relationship is. Did
Kodak help FillFactory in the design of the chip? Who knows? I don't,
and I don't think either company wants me to know exactly who did
what based upon the material I've read. It's not that Kodak doesn't
have sensor technology of their own, but I think the 14mp figure
got Kodak's attention. Indeed, that's 3 megapixels more than the
nearest competitor, the Canon 1Ds [the 1Ds Mark II has now eclipsed it, as Canon upped the resolution to 16mp for the new model], and well over double the 6 megapixels
found in most of the other current competitors (Nikon D1x, D70, D100,
Fujifilm S2 Pro, Fujifilm S3 Pro). It's an impressive number,
no doubt. Good thing the photosites are all aligned in rows and
columns to make the math easy, otherwise someone might still be
counting them. The question is whether or not Kodak can hold that
advantage as others increase their resolutions. Perhaps. I expect
most of the next crop of digital SLRs to be in the 10 to 12 megapixel
range [the D2x is 12.4mp, the 1Ds Mark II is 16mp, so I underestimated], so the Pro 14n isn't going to simply fall off the resolution
Beyond those two things, there's not a lot that's unique to report. The 14n has a
feature list that's similar to most of the other DSLR bodies. To
Pro 14n has a feature set that sounds a bit like the D100, mainly
because it was built from the same base body, the Nikon N80. (Kodak's
marketing team, like Nikon's, tries to claim otherwise. For example,
Kodak claims that the Pro 14n is "derived" from both
the N80 and F100, but "derived" seems to mean that a
couple of F100 parts were borrowed and added on, in particular
the PC Sync socket and 10-pin remote connector. The top-deck is
exactly the same as the N80 with two minor cosmetic differences.
The shutter is the N80's. The autofocus and metering system is
the N80's. The viewfinder and grid system is the N80's. The internal
flash is the N80's. Heck, the custom settings are the N80's, only
autofocus system is fast, and features five sensors (CAM 900)
that can track rapidly moving objects, or direct autofocus to
a specific area of the frame. Autofocus detection works from EV
�1 to EV 19 (specified at ISO 100). The metering range extends
from EV 0 to EV 21, plenty wide for virtually any shooting you
might do. Note that the spot metering range is slightly lower,
from EV 3 to EV 21. Unless you make a habit of spot metering in
unlit situations at night (not likely considering the noise issues
that would trigger with this camera), you're not likely to encounter
speeds can be controlled in 1/2 stop increments from 2 seconds
to 1/4000. Single shot and continuous firing at 1.7 fps is supported,
with an 8 shot buffer. (Kodak now is producing a 512MB buffer
upgrade for US$595). But Eight 14-megapixel images is a lot of
memory, though--you'll need big CompactFlash cards to
take advantage of the upgraded buffer, should you choose to get
Pro 14n manages matrix metering the old-fashioned way, with a
10-segment metering pattern. Likewise, the white balance is not
set by the matrix metering system, but from data from the CCD.
This results in a post-shot custom white balance setting system
that is actually quite handy. Carry a small gray card around with
you with this camera and you should never get the white
matrix metering also incorporates information about the focus
point you�re using if you�ve mounted a �D-type� lens. Nikon also
lists �subject positioning,� �overall scene brightness,� and �scene
contrast� as factors in the matrix metering calculations. In short,
it�s hard to second guess the camera as there are so many factors
being considered. If simplicity suits you, the spot meter option
is a better choice.
(Centerweight is 60/40.)
befitting a serious camera, Kodak retains the simple N80 mode
selections: Program, Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority, and
Manual are the full lineup. Program mode is easily adjusted by
spinning one of the control dials. There's also an automatic adjustment
of the program due to focal length of the lens used; thus there
is no �Program High� or other special automatic modes as there
are in some other Nikon bodies. Like all Nikon bodies, you can
override the programming using the rear command dial, something
Nikon calls "Flexible Program."
exposure compensation button gives you a +/- 3-stop range in 1/2-stop
steps. A built-in bracketing system allows two or three shots
at half-stop values. Exposure (as well as autofocus) can be locked
by on-camera controls. Kodak has converted the Multiple Exposure
setting on the Frame Advance dial to "Exposure Lock,"
a nice touch--photographers are always asking me how they lock
exposures in manual exposure mode so that an accidental touch
on a command dial doesn't change exposure; here's the answer).
ISO values from 80 to 800 in one-third stops can be set, though
current software locks you out of the higher values when shooting
at the highest resolutions (currently, 400 is the highest ISO
you can set shooting RAW).
sync is 1/125 second. Flash metering uses five TTL sensors and
can be balanced, slow-synced, and synchronized with the rear curtain.
However, if you want to shoot in any TTL mode, you'll need either
the SB-28DX (not the older SB-28), SB-50DX, or SB-80DX Speedlight.
That's because Nikon's TTL modes normally use reflections off
the film surface during exposure to determine when to turn off
the flash. The Pro 14n's CCD is not very reflective (and certainly
not the same reflectivity as film stock), thus only flash units
designed specifically for the digital bodies (the DX suffix) work
in TTL mode.
important for those migrating from Nikon 35mm SLRs to the Pro
14n to understand the operational differences in the flash system.
With a DX-type flash on the Pro 14n, the camera performs the same
matrix and pre-flash adjustments as, say, an F5. However, the
Pro 14n doesn't alter any flash decision once the
shutter is opened (i.e., it doesn't monitor the light reflected
back during exposure to fine tune when to shut off the flash).
This difference is subtle, but can show up if you have a moving
object with high reflectivity in the scene (e.g., jewelry, metal
surfaces). Also, rapidly changing light conditions can produce
strange results. For example, in a situation with lots of other
flash photographers with my F5, I found that rarely did another
photographer's flash mess up my exposure (well, at least not too
badly). With the Pro 14n--like the D1 series and D100--I've had
troubles and inconsistencies that I didn't have with the film
bodies (or the Fujifilm S2 Pro). In short, you've got to be a
little more careful when you've got moving subjects with high
reflectivity or rapidly changing light conditions. Balanced Fill-Flash
modes are more problematic than Standard TTL in this regard, so
I generally only use Standard TTL on the Pro 14n.
the plus side, DX Speedlights perform pre-flash and full TTL capabilities
even when the flash head is set to a bounce position (on 35mm
bodies, setting the flash head to any angle other than normal
or down -7 degrees cancels some of the more advanced TTL features).
The internal flash only supports TTL modes.
correctly and mounted on a Pro 14n, the DX Speedlights display
D-TTL on their LCD as the flash mode, by the way (instead of TTL).
the viewfinder, you'll see 92% of the full frame, which means
you're not seeing between 120 and 180 (!) pixels worth of information
at every edge. Shutter speed, aperture, exposure mode,
metering method, focus indicators, exposure compensation, and
flash ready are all visible in the viewfinder, even to eyeglass
wearers like me. On the color LCD on the back of the camera, you'll
see 100% of the image. Probably of most use on the color LCD is
the ability to see a histogram of any picture you take, allowing
you to tinker with exposure to get every last bit of dynamic range
out of the sensor (like slide film, always expose so that the
brightest highlight doesn't blow out--you can usually recover
shadow detail that blocks up, but blown highlights are obnoxious
to the eye and not easily fixable).
Pro 14n takes any Nikon F mount lens (well, lenses earlier than
the AI manual focus Nikkors damage the mount if you try to put
them on the Pro 14n, and a few specific lenses won't work on the
Pro 14n, usually because they have elements that stick into the
mirror box and require mirror lock-up, or have things that stick
down and hit the Leno Chin [read on]). Non-CPU lenses don't allow
metering and must be used in Manual exposure mode.
Pro 14n produces several different types of files: JPEG, JPEG-ERI,
and RAW. The JPEG options work as you'd expect, but you pay a
significant penalty for using that format: the files are compressed
and lose a bit of detail, plus they are converted to 8-bit format,
losing some of the Pro 14n's tonal range in the process. Noise
also tends to get encoded into JPEG compression in ways that are
very difficult to remove. The JPEG-ERI format is specific to Kodak
(and requires that you install a special filter into Photoshop
if you want to use those images in that product). The ERI portion
refers to Kodak's Extended Range Imaging JPEG format, which retains
additional highlight detail and gives you some ability to adjust
exposure after the fact with the JPEG image. On this, at least,
Kodak should be applauded: the Pro 14n most definitely has the
broadest dynamic range capturing JPEG images of any camera currently
RAW format contains the data that came from the
CCD, without camera processing. To access these RAW images, you
use Kodak's Photo Desk software. (Photo Desk deserves a review
all of its own. While Nikon Capture has gotten quite good with
repeated iteration and CaptureOne DSLR embodies PhaseOne's long
experience with raw digital data, both could learn a few tricks
from Kodak's workflow and tools. Photo Desk is a reasonably mature
product with a nice feature set. Working pros will especially
like the ability to build "job assignments" in Photo
Desk and then link pictures to jobs as they shoot. Even for someone
like me this can be useful: if I know the locations I'm likely
to shoot at during a workshop, I can pre-assign each location
a "job" and then have a much easier time later sorting
images into my folder-based filing system (e.g., North America/California/YosemiteNP/Valley).
Like the Pro 14n, it seems like a work in progress though: each
new incremental version seems to add ability that wasn't there
before [which is a good thing, but can be frustrating if you have
multiple systems to upgrade, as I do]).
apparently wanted to have only one package throughout the world.
You get the charger/AC adapter with the camera, but you also get
cables for the charger for a wide range of international plugs
(5 in all). Quick Start Guides in English, French, German, Italian,
Spanish, Portuguese, Simplified Chinese, and Japanese come along
with an English manual (foreign versions of which are on the CD).
Yes, the camera itself supports all those languages, too. You
get one battery, the IEEE-1394 cable, neck strap and hand strap.
And if you look hard enough, you'll even find the N80 viewfinder
eye cap somewhere down in the bowels of the boxes.
I haven't seen anyone really mention a few anomalies between the
manual and the camera. For example, there's cryptic mention of
GPS in the manual. The port marked "Test" on the side
of the camera is actually a serial port and the Pro 14n supports
NMEA-standard GPS devices at 4800 baud, much like the D1h and
D1x do. My upcoming book will have the pinouts you need to hook
up Magellan and Garmin units.
plenty of good news and a bit of bad. Let's get the bad out of the
is a big camera. Pamela Anderson has had less extra mass added than
the Pro 14n adds to an N80. Weighing in at 2 pounds (907g), that's
almost 14 ounces of extra bulk over the N80. So much so, that I
felt like I had lost weight when I first picked up the 14n body.
And that extra mass is distributed, well, in unflattering ways.
The "Leno Chin" on the front bottom of the camera gets
in the way of a few lenses, tripod collars, and other accessories,
for no apparent reason. The 85mm PC-Nikkor is probably the most
notorious problem, but the chin can be a nuisance with regular lenses,
too. For example, if you hold the 17-35mm AF-S the way I learned
to hold lenses (hand under the lens), you feel a bit pinched for
space when using the zoom collar (perhaps folk with large hands
might feel differently, but the point stands: if you have a lens
zoom or focus ring close to the mount, the lip forces your hand
further forward than you'd like).
other bulges get in the way, too. The right hand grip sticks further
out front than the N80 (or D100 or S2 Pro). Again, small hands may
find this problematic, though the finger notch is very nicely positioned
and helps you grip the grip. One problem with the increased girth
of the front grip is that the Depth of Preview button is a long
reach for short fingers.
Pro 14n also has a beer back (like a beer belly, only on the other
side). The color LCD and buttons around it all stick out further
than the eyepiece. I measure this back bulge at 1 cm beyond the
eyepiece (about half that with the rubber eyepiece in place). That's
not a trivial hump. Moreover, the entire back below the
viewfinder sticks out at least this far (the bottom adds
another half centimeter and makes it difficult to move the direction
pad lock lever). The net result is that if you've got a big nose,
expect it to hit the color LCD before your eye gets to the rubber
eyepiece. What usually happens is that the photographer goes into
"cheek kiss" mode: they turn their head sideways to clear
the beer back, as if they were letting the camera give them a kiss
on the cheek. If you don't wear glasses, you won't like this shooting
position. Those of us who wear glasses are used to being forced
back from the viewfinder, though, and I don't find the shooting
position bad, just a bit awkward.
final handling problem is inherited directly from the N80: the exposure
compensation button is in the wrong spot. It should be the right
hand button behind the shutter release, but the 14n joins the Fujifilm
S2 Pro and the Nikon N80 as the only Nikon bodies with the exposure
compensation button as the left handbutton behind the shutter
release. Not an issue if you only use those bodies, but definitely
an issue if you switch between many Nikon bodies, as I do.
the bad out of the way, we can start down the "good" list.
And that list is long and includes things that other camera manufacturers
of you who like to hold cameras with one hand will love the Pro
14n (as long as it's the right hand we're talking about). Besides
the nice finger notch on the front grip, we have a well designed
(and padded!) thumb notch on the back. Couple that with the supplied
hand strap, and this is a photojournalist's dream (too bad about
the noise performance at high ISOs, though, as that pretty makes
the dream go "poof").
PC sync socket is in a nice location and doesn't get in the way
of hand holding the camera with something plugged into it. I'm less
convinced of the AC adapter position, which forces the cord to hit
the lower palm of my left hand. At least you get the AC capability
included with the camera, not an add-on cost as with the Nikons.
and SD/MMC card slots live at the bottom back of the camera behind
a simple door. There's plenty of finger room to grab the edge of
a CF card and pull it out, thanks to a thoughtful tab on the door.
would have liked the four-way direction pad a little higher on the
body back than it's position (you have to move your thumb out of
the thumb notch to get to it), but this pad is much better than
the ones on the D100 or S2 Pro. Better still, the plethora of buttons
to support the digital features totals only eight on the Pro 14n,
and you're really only going to use three or four of those most
of the time. Which brings us to one of the Pro 14n's better features:
the software design is pretty darned good, and flexible. I'd quibble
about a few things (such as the CF Card menu entry being both where
you find selections to both let you pick the image file format and
format the card), but once you learn the basic navigation (10 seconds,
tops), you're home free. One really nice aspect is that anything
that you can get to via menus you can assign to a "hot key,"
making one-button specialized menu access possible. If you've ever
scrolled through the 30+ custom settings on a Nikon D1x looking
for the one you want and use most, you'll know why that's important.
If you don't know why, you haven't shot enough digital yet.
of the reason the software design is so good is that the second
LCD on the back (below the color LCD) is used to present text descriptions
of what it is your current selection means. Nice. For example, scroll
down to Long Exposure and you get "Optimizes
image quality for exposure times > 1/2 second." Scroll over
to Enabled and you see "Enables Long Exposure
image quality optimization." Clear enough. Where this facility
really starts to shine is with the Custom Settings. Not only do
you have the pretty clear menu choices, but there's no guessing
as to what certain things mean. For example, Focus Area
Light can be set to Auto, Off,
or On. What's the difference between Auto
and Off? "Displays AF brackets in low light"
and "AF bracket lights always displayed." If you can read,
you can figure out the custom settings without a manual or cheat
histogram function is also very nicely implemented. If you can't
read this histogram, there's something wrong. Moreover, with ERI
enabled (more on that in Performance, below), you can clearly see
whether or not ERI is the only thing saving your butt with highlights.
The histogram supposedly has tick marks for EV steps, but I find
Kodak's markings a bit optimistic: the histogram is telling me on
most shots that I have 8 stops of dynamic range plus ERI.
No, not quite, especially once we consider noise levels. Still,
it is a good tool for judging how much to raise or lower exposure
(if the tick marks indicate you have a stop of headroom at the highlights,
then if you set +1EV exposure compensation you'll find your highlights
right against the ceiling).
balance is a snap, especially if you have a neutral object handy.
Take the picture, select the Click Balance option in the menus,
and the picture is color balanced. You can save that Click Balance
(and many others, should you need multiple custom settings) and
apply it to subsequent images. This is one heck of a lot easier
than some Custom White Balance routines (the cryptic D100 white
balance routine comes to mind).
amongst folders, images, and even within an image is pretty straightforward
once you learn how the buttons interact. If you use Kodak's Photo
Desk, you can even build "jobs" and assign images to jobs,
as I noted earlier, a very nice workflow touch. Unlike the restrictive
options of the Nikon bodies, you can actually name folders
on the Pro 14n. Sure, you only get five characters, but it's still
better than nothing.
the camera's software is also simple, yet another nice feature.
Put the update file in the root directory of a CompactFlash card,
select Update on the camera's menus, and follow
the instructions (which basically consist of pressing the OK
button to acknowledge that you want to do this). When the camera
resets, you're ready to shoot with the new software.
appears, too, that Kodak did a good job in making the in-camera
software extensible and changeable. As new firmware updates have
appeared (we're on the sixth such update already), features have
moved around, gotten extensions, been reworded, and just about anything
else you might expect from a flexible code base. (This has the one
drawback of making the manual not match the camera, though.) In
all, a very nice job on the software design and flexibility, one
that no other digital SLR comes close to matching.
boils down to a few things: autofocus speed, battery life, motor
drive performance, and image quality. I'll tack on one other: start-up
bad news is that you can't just flick the power switch to ON and
shoot immediately. Like me waking from a nap, it's best not to prod
it when the 14n is first turned on. We're only talking about a few
seconds here, but compared to the Nikon digital bodies (or even
the Fujifilm bodies), the Pro 14n is just a grumpy waker.
leads one to leave the camera on, but then we get to another slight
issue: the camera's electronics are always on and using power if
the camera is left on, so you get less battery life (measured in
shots per charge) when you do this (the SLR/n partially fixed this, by the way). The batteries are light, charge
fast, and have decent performance if you're constantly shooting,
so it's not all bad news. With those 14-megapixel files you're going
to be changing CompactFlash cards a heck of a lot more than you
are batteries, anyway, so I just don't see this as a big issue.
If you want a DSLR that can shoot all day on one battery and one
card, get a D70 and shoot one of the smaller JPEG sizes on a 4GB card. If you
want lots of resolution like the Pro 14n provides, then get ready
to card swap (shooting RAW+JPEG gives you 23 images on a 512MB card;
you'll swap that card at least 10 times before you change batteries
if you're shooting constantly).
so how is the battery performance, you ask? (Darn, I thought I was
finessing the question in the last paragraph.) Well, it's not as
bad as some make it out to be. The problem, of course, is that there
are so many variations in shooting style, tempo, and options use
that everyone will get somewhat different results. But here's some
empirical evidence for you: I put a new card into the camera and
formatted it. Then I placed the camera on Intervalometer and had
it take 3.4MP JPEG images at 10 second intervals. While there was
no autofocusing going on (static shot), I did leave the camera set
so that the color LCD was on during all but the shooting period.
Thus, this is a maximum drain situation: camera always active, color
LCD on more than 80% of the time, and constant image processing
and card writing. I ran the trial three times with two different
batteries (six times total). The fewest number of images I got on
a battery charge was 450. The highest count was 462 (the difference
could be explained by me getting more efficient in the setup and
by one battery being better conditioned at the time of the tests).
That's not bad, actually. But, as with many things with this camera,
there is a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde thing going on: more than half
of those pictures were taken with the battery indicator showing
is the old N80 story: great if you restrict yourself to the central
sensor in low light. In bright light, all five sensors function
adequately. But do yourself a favor and cancel Closest Subject Priority
in Single Servo AF right from the get-go. You'll be glad you did.
If you have to ask why, go read my other Nikon body reviews or one
of my books on a Nikon body that supports this feature.
drive performance gives you a bit less than 2 frames per second
for about four seconds before you hit the buffer wall on the basic camera (longer on a body with the extended buffer). Obviously,
this is not a sports camera (the add-on buffer really doesn't fix
the problem, as the 1.7 fps speed just isn't up to the task for sports).
thing caught me by surprise: the gridlines in the viewfinder are
misaligned to the sensor (or is it vice versa) by a little over
1 degree. If I align a horizon to the gridlines, it'll be downhill
right in the image every time. Kind of makes the point of gridlines
pointless, doesn't it?
the only thing left to talk about is what you've been waiting for
all along: image quality. Do all those extra megapixels shine or
to the home of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Come right in and make yourself
comfortable. Would you like a drink or a snack whilst we discuss
the matter at hand. No? Okay, but should you decide you need one
as I run on about this subject, feel free to help yourself.
my, where to begin?
I write this, the Pro 14n is on the sixth iteration of its firmware
(4.0.0, 4.0.2, 4.1.2 [which is what most other reviewers used],
4.2.2, 4.2.3, and 4.3.1). [There have been several additional iterations since I wrote this review.] Some of these revisions were just to add
features that were incomplete when the camera was shipped (since
that still applies, we know there will be more updates). A few included
image quality "fixes." In particular, the latest version
of the camera firmware and Photo Desk seem to address the blotch
problem and the color saturation. Unfortunately, Kodak's descriptions
of changes tend to be vague (e.g., "Improved in-camera JPG
with all these changes we have a moving target. So take what
as applying to version 4.3.1 of the camera software or later. I continue
to play with processing images, and I find I'm still learning nuances
of making 14n images better; some image samples and commentary
follow this section.
first: it's there, and it's a problem at long shutter speeds or
high ISO values. And by "high ISO value" I pretty much
mean anything over the base ISO. In very low, unbalanced lighting
(incandescent produces very little blue spectrum), noise can be
such a problem that it is easily seen on the color LCD when reviewing
a picture! I actually think that Kodak may have made a design error
that they might want to reassess. Noise most certainly lives in the
shadows of any digital camera. But Kodak appears to be shooting
for a very wide dynamic exposure range, wider than the other cameras
currently produce, and this almost guarantees that they are going
to push the noise into the visible range in many cases. On one of
my early image experiments, I tried the Digital Velvia action that
I included with issue #4 of my Nikon Digital
SLR Report and, what the, a bunch of noise disappeared! Hmm.
This led me to a long, close examination of a number of Pro 14n
files. Noise isn't a problem in the highlights. Noise generally
isn't a problem in the mid-tones. Indeed, it isn't usually a problem
in shadows in well exposed images at the base ISO. But as you move
to higher ISO values, use longer shutter speeds, or underexpose
slightly, if you look down into the shadows, there it is. Blacks
just don't register as blacks, but as black-a-dots. So I find myself
doing the opposite with Pro 14n images than what I usually do with,
say, D1x images. With a D1x, I'm always exposing to give the highlights
some headroom and then pulling the low and mid-tones up
with a Curve. With the Pro 14n, I'm exposing the highlights more
aggressively and pulling down the deep shadows with a Curve.
Interesting. Note that I'm not always doing this. When
the dynamic range of the scene fits nicely into the range of the
camera and I expose properly at the base ISO, I don't see any serious
noise until I get beyond 1/2 second exposures, and even then it's
it very well may be that the Pro 14n was designed with studio photographers
in mind. Heck, one of the styles in fashion these days is high-key
lighting, which has very little deep shadow. The Pro 14n nails that
type of exposure with no sign of noise and pretty darned good highlight
rendering. (The Nikon DSLRs have problems with this type of shot--they
tend to lose highlight detail if you push the exposure too much,
so you end up having to really pump up the fill in the shadows to
get the look.) But the design poses a more serious problem to a
nature and scenic photographer like me. I find myself more often
than not shooting in either low light or with very distinct shadow
areas in very high contrast scenes. With the Pro 14n I've had to
rethink my approach to contrast control in the field. I'm now less
aggressive with the graduated neutral density filters and more aggressive
with the fill flash. Still, I run into the second noise issue: long
FillFactory boasts of their CMOS design's abilities in dealing with
this issue (Fill Factor is a term used to describe how well the
photosite handles holding onto light photons and keeps them from
spilling into adjacent wells). I'm not seeing it. The camera does
just fine down to about 1/4 second, below which point you can see
extra noise starting to "leak into" the pixels. The Pro
14n attempts to deal with this by applying some sort of dark current
type noise reduction at 1/2 second (if you enable this function),
but this does not produce the silky black we see from the Canon
10D or even the Nikon D100. If you're thinking of photographing
star trails with this camera, forget it. On July 4th I shot fireworks
with a Pro 14n and a Fujifilm S2 Pro side by side. The Fujifilm's
night sky is perfectly smooth and black, despite 20 second exposures;
the Pro 14n's sky got dotted with noise the minute I went beyond
1/2 second. You'll see less noise by sticking your nose up close
to a painting done by one of the famous Pointillists. This, actually,
is the most annoying image quality trait of the Pro 14n: if you
shoot at long shutter speeds, you get difficult-to-remove and obvious
noise. Keep the shutter speed in the "daylight" range
and it goes away (except deep in the shadows, which can be controlled
and/or hidden). [Kodak has addressed some of this with recent firmware updates--the new low ISO values allow for very long exposures with better noise tendencies, though still not perfect.]
many of you are probably thinking at this point "well, that
pretty well bullocks it, then, don't it?" Not necessarily.
The thing is, the Pro 14n has pixels to spare for most uses. At
the full 4500 x 3000 resolution we're talking about handing an Epson
2200 enough pixels to print beyond it's largest print size.
A little bit of dot gain, a rise of the black level to 20, and a
matte paper and, hmm, the noise is impossible to see at viewing
distances. Yes, it's still there. Yes, if you get your nose up to
the print you might see it. But frankly, I rarely put my nose against
a 11x17" print these days (my belly hits the wall too soon,
and I can't quite get that close). Moreover, the character
of the Pro 14n noise is a bit different than what I see in other
cameras. At least at the base ISO, when noise shows up, it shows
up like grain, not the colored mosaic fringing I typically see in
other digital bodies. Thus, some amount of noise is sometimes tolerable
on the Pro 14n, just as some amount of grain is often tolerable
another interaction going on here, too: even with no sharpening
Pro 14n images have a lot of detail in them. There's no anti-aliasing
filter in front of the sensor on the Pro 14n as there is on most
other digital SLRs. Those filters are what force us to run aggressive
Unsharp Masks on our photos (to get back the edges the anti-aliasing
filters blurred). Thus, shooting with a Pro 14n you don't tend to
sharpen up the image as you do with other cameras, though you still
tend to sharpen a bit due to the digital nature of the beast. And
thus you don't push that noise forward. Indeed, I think, but am
not yet sure, that there are actually post processing techniques
that help here. I've been experimenting with initially blurring
Pro 14n images instead of sharpening them. (An aside: I think Kodak's
noise reduction technique in Photo Desk must have been doing something
along these lines: if you first run a Median filter or other blur
tool on an image and then sharpen it, you tend to get that sharp-but-blotchy
effect the original Kodak software produced.) The trick is to find
the right balance and type of manipulation, and that's something
I haven't quite yet nailed down. The closest I've come to something
I like is sort of the opposite of the Edge Sharpening technique
(see Sharpening 101). In short: find
and select the edges, invert the selection, and blur. Of course
the trick here is distinguishing between edges and noise, which
is no small feat.
thing that is a concern with the Pro 14n is high contrast edges.
If you have a dark tree limb against a bright sky, for example,
there's a slight tendency for the camera to produce a bit of colored
(purple) fringe at the boundary. This problem isn't as bad as I
first feared it would be, but it is a problem.
JPEGs and the default camera settings, the color is relatively accurate,
though I've noticed a few minor drifts and saturation isn't always
exactly where I'd like it to be. When you run images through Photo
Desk, you get a number of "looks" by which you can process
the image. None of the supplied looks are perfectly accurate for
my work, and several definitely reduce color saturation a bit. Others
pump up the color. Many seem to show slight cyan shifts in the skies
and a slight magenta shifts in trees/leaves, though neutral colors
seem to stay neutral (i.e., whites don't drift cyan/magenta). But,
then again, these looks are labeled with things like "Product,"
"Portrait," and "Wedding," and I'm out taking
pictures of landscapes. Perhaps when I get a chance to play with
them more I'll be able to speak with greater certainly about the
relative merits of the various looks. But for the moment, I need
more experience with a wider variety of images before I can do that.
I will say that the Pro 14n seems to get violet and purple
flowers slightly more accurate than I've been able to get out of
the Nikon bodies. Indeed, my one nemosis with the D1x has been getting
violet right (without everything else going bonkers). This afternoon
I was shooting fields of small purple flowers, and the Pro 14n came
close to getting the color right, though still not perfect (at least
through any of the looks that I can apply via Photo Desk at the
white balance right on this camera is a snap, so there's really
no excuse not to get good starting color. I don't see much harm
in the color rendering as it comes from the camera. I know other's
have reported color shifts, especially in the reds, but I've yet
to see that in the pictures I've taken to date (admittedly not a
great number yet). One thing that I'm going to have to investigate
more thoroughly are the Kelvin numbers that Photo Desk is reporting.
In almost every case, the number Photo Desk is reporting is lower
than I'd expect. I haven't yet had a chance to run a color meter
against these numbers, but they seem low to me. For example, at
noon today I shot several images in sunlight. Click balanced, Photo
Desk is telling me the color temperature was 4800K. Based upon my
experience as a videographer, I'd have guessed it to be substantively
over 5000K, maybe even the 5500K average for noontime sun in these
parts. My Nikon tells me that the white balance was 5600K. That's
an odd discrepancy.
the Pro 14n offers a 6mp output in addition to the 14mp. While others
have touted this ability and proclaim the output excellent (and
I'll admit I want this option left in the camera), let's put this
in perspective. Yes, when you shoot at 6mp on the Pro 14n you end
up with better overall noise characteristics than at 14mp. But if
you wanted to shoot at 6mp in the first place, why didn't you just
buy a D100? And the lack of an anti-aliasing filter means that you
have to watch very carefully for moire.
what am I to conclude from all this? Well:
that the software keeps improving. If
Kodak could make another improvement as big as the one that came
with the 4.3.1 firmware, this camera would be dead on competitive
with anything, including medium format digital backs, in moderate
and bright light. [They did with the 5.x.x versions. And for the most part I was right. Still, the camera works better in bright light than dark.]
it away at night. The
low light capabilities just aren't there. If you regularly shoot
at 1/2 second shutter speeds and slower, this is not the
camera for you today, and may never be. [The 5.x.x firmware has helped some, but not enough to make the Pro 14n a camera I use at night.]
the tools. With the right settings and post processing, this
camera can indeed produce stunning full-sized images out of an
Epson 2200. Few of us need more resolution than that. But you
may find that to do this, you need to do it Kodak's way, not the
way we've been doing it with other DSLRs. Everything you learned
about Unsharp Masking will need to be relearned, for example,
and the Curves and other processing you apply will be different
with when you use this camera. [I'll admit that improvement in my post processing skills with Photo Desk and Photoshop CS have improved my finished Pro 14n images. But not everyone can spend the time working the nuances of post processing every image.]
follows is a pass at trying to point out some of the characteristics
of the Kodak Pro 14n's image quality.
start with a full frame of the image we're going to be
examining. I picked this particular image for a couple
of reasons, but the primary one being that it has an
enormous dynamic range, which the Pro 14n (barely) held,
and the wide range of saturated color and neutral areas.
With my D1x, for example, my choice in exposure would
the sky and white stripes blow out completely or the
brass plaques lose all detail in the shadows. And while
as if there's plenty of light, I used ND filters to get
down to 1/4 second with this exposure (at ISO 80) in
order to test noise. Overall, color is punchy, dynamic
range is wide, detail is good, and noise well under control.
But let's examine each of those assertions individually.
begin with the level of detail the camera can capture.
The top is an unsharpened sample at 100% from the left
is the same area
sharpened. Either way there's no denying that this camera produces
enormous detail. One would think that we'd see color moire
here if it were a real problem, but there's very little
(the worst is in the "N" in Chapman). In actual prints,
this level of color fringing just can't be seen.
There is a slight falseness to the smallest detail, something
that is better with the current software than it was with
previous versions, but it's still there. Some have described
it as a plastic look, I tend to call it a slight flattening
of detail. I have not tried to reduce or hide it in this
example--generally you can do better than this by not using
PhotoDesk's sharpening. Note: diffraction can be an issue, too, and add to the faux look of edges. Avoid apertures above f/11 if you want the full acuity the Kodak cameras are capable of.
thing the Pro 14n was criticized for early was it's color
fidelity. But I just don't see that problem. Here's a 100%
crop (no sharpening) from the lower right corner. I've
other digital body hold neutral (gray), saturated red, and
violet at the same time. On my D1x, the violet goes a bit blue
if the red saturation is correct, for example.
common problem of the Pro 14n, however, is that very
high contrast edges tend to pick up a purple "bloom."
width of this
bloom decreases substantially once it is gray granite against
green foliage. This is the one image fault of the Pro 14n
that bothers me, actually. On straight edges like this,
to remove, but on complex edges it can be quite dicey to
get rid of.
of you want to know about noise, since that was the primary
fault attributed to the camera. Well, here's a spot
where it should show up (remember, this is a 1/4 second image,
at ISO 80). Moreover, I've turned noise reduction off in
PhotoDesk in this image. The top is a 100% crop at the
camera produced. Since
the bottom crop is done with a very aggressive Curve. Yes,
there's a wee bit of noise there, but nothing more than I'd
expect with the D1x in the same situation. Moreover, I like
the character of this noise a bit better. Still, this
so I do find that I often have to run my images through Neat
Image to denoise them prior to sharpening, especially if
I'm using long exposures or high ISO values.
there's just a bit of chromatic aberration in this example,
which I haven't made any attempt to remove.)
When it's there, it can be bad. If you need high ISO values
or long shutter speeds, this isn't your tool.
The software never seems to get done, and each little increment means you
have to pay attention to the changes and perhaps learn new tricks.
You're paying a premium over a D100 to get more megapixels
and full frame. That better be what you need. (Some would say
that the Pro 14n is less expensive than the
Canon 1Ds, the other high resolution, full frame DSLR. True,
but I see that as a flaw of the 1Ds, not a virtue of the Pro
14n; once cameras get into the price range of high quality used cars, we demand more).
bulges annoy, the lithium battery could last longer, the startup
time could be shorter, and the viewfinder could actually show
me the full frame, not 92%.
You'll be downsizing your output to get 8x10 prints!
The Pro 14n had the highest resolution of any DSLR when it was
Frame. Wide angle is back. So
are fisheyes. What you learned in framing, focus, and perspective
with 35mm cameras applies perfectly.
a tank. I
can't complain about the body build. Robust.
Pluses. Nicely designed software with excellent
menuing and help. Easy software updates. Exposure lock. A nice
hand strap. Lots of little things that other camera companies
should notice and fix on their offerings.