Capable of Amazing Images

Paul Petersen wrote:

Still to this day this camera can make very special images.

However it is one of the hardest bodies to get to work reliably as far as metering and AF reliability. It is very slow to write and often displays corrupted images on the screen.

Paul Petersen

Its a great Camera in bright light, and there the colors are from pleasant to fantastic. Mine seems to be fast compared to my DP3 Merrill.

Definitely is one of the hottest Camera ever, specially under the Battery chamber.

J.

Paul Petersen wrote: Still to this day this camera can make very special images. However it is one of the hardest bodies to get to work reliably as far as metering and AF reliability. It is very slow to write and often displays corrupted images on the screen.

I never use anything AUTO Paul - always focus manually to ensure I get the DOF I want for every image and never use the internal metering - always a handheld meter used and marked for the Zone8 Exposure System. So, have never experienced the problems you mention - and never had any scrambling of any images, either on the card or on the viewing rear screen.

The only problem I developed (good word that - although the body did back-focus originally - my signature shows my link to my article on how to resolve that!) - was the message about the CF card door being open - which got resolved easily thanks to ExpatUSA Ted's post a couple of weeks ago. Other than that, has been an excellent performer all the time I have owned it - as is also my original SD9, still going strong. Have posted one recent image "Old tree ...." as example of recent work.

Direct Link: http://www.photosnowdonia.co.uk/ZPS/Tree4larry.jpg

A point to mention is all the Sigmas, from the original SD9 on, have been `proven to be perfectly suitable for sports fast action work by showing hundreds of examples - obviously by experienced workers as posted many times in the past in this Forum. I think it is the photographers who can only shoot with equivalent of motordrive that say they cannot. Those with top quality abilities and knowledge of any sport (etc) requiring fast shooting (not multiple "hope I get one" shooting) have shown top quality action captures that rival anything produced by any camera system.

Chuck Lantz comes to mind - check this link for some of his samples via Sigma SD15 but search his name (I have not the time now) and you will find hundreds of examples from earlier SD9, SD10 and the SD14 models showing equally fine action images:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39916485

But Richard, you've not noticed the subtle reduction in colour transitions in the red parts of the engine. Sd14 is so much better here.

Seriously for a moment, image quality is not bad except for a problematic green cast which has to be wrestled with and the fluorescent red blow outs which occur seemingly random. The big problem is the lockups/freezing that occurs in so many of these bodies. Battery life is also poor. For many people the Achilles heel of the 14 is just basic reliability. Take no notice of Brian for he thinks the Kodak 14n is a good camera. Honestly' the 14n and the sd14 were never of merchantable quality unless you got lucky.

DMillier wrote:

G

But Richard, you've not noticed the subtle reduction in colour transitions in the red parts of the engine. Sd14 is so much better here.

-- hide signature --

"...while I am tempted to bludgeon you, I would rather have you come away with an improved understanding of how these sensors work" ---- Eric Fossum
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmillier/

DMillier wrote: Take no notice of Brian for he thinks the Kodak 14n is a good camera. Honestly' the 14n and the sd14 were never of merchantable quality unless you got lucky.

Proof of the pudding, Dave, as always is in the quality of the end image. Perhaps I was lucky with all my equipment .... but on that basis, are you seriously claiming that other make cameras/models are free of problems? I can assure you that is definitely not the case. I can only speak from my own experience - and do not have the problems you seem to have experienced. The Kodak, whilst perhaps does have a limited range of topics/situations where it excels ... nevertheless it can excel if handled with experience.  It is, for me, how the end image translates into the highest quality print - I really am not excited about viewing images on monitors - rather like film transparencies which had to really be projected to view sensibly - switch off the projector (also read computer) and you've got nothing to view.  In addition, the resolution of any image on a monitor is a mere fraction of the image quality (including definition) available even from the least expensive inkjet printer.

Zone8 wrote:

Hi BrianThe problems I have had with the sd14 have merely been operational. Like many owners I have found it to simply be unreliable in everyday use. I have not experienced any other camera consistently locking up and requiring the battery removed to reboot. The problems with the 14n are about image quality. Happy to share files with you if seeing is believing.

DMillier wrote: Take no notice of Brian for he thinks the Kodak 14n is a good camera. Honestly' the 14n and the sd14 were never of merchantable quality unless you got lucky.

Proof of the pudding, Dave, as always is in the quality of the end image. Perhaps I was lucky with all my equipment .... but on that basis, are you seriously claiming that other make cameras/models are free of problems? I can assure you that is definitely not the case. I can only speak from my own experience - and do not have the problems you seem to have experienced. The Kodak, whilst perhaps does have a limited range of topics/situations where it excels ... nevertheless it can excel if handled with experience. It is, for me, how the end image translates into the highest quality print - I really am not excited about viewing images on monitors - rather like film transparencies which had to really be projected to view sensibly - switch off the projector (also read computer) and you've got nothing to view. In addition, the resolution of any image on a monitor is a mere fraction of the image quality (including definition) available even from the least expensive inkjet printer.

-- hide signature --

Zone8: Although I am a handsome genius, when I stand in front of a mirror, I vaguely recognise the ugly idjit standing on the other side!
LINK: For B+W with Epson 1400 (and other models) using black ink only PLUS other useful tips:
http://www.photosnowdonia.co.uk/ZPS/epson1400-B&W.htm
Cleaning DSLR Sensors, including Kodak DSLR Factory Cleaning method:
http://www.photosnowdonia.co.uk/ZPS/KodakDCS-sensorcleaning.htm (Includes links to "bassotto's" images)
Solving back/front focus problems on Sigma and most other DSLRs
http://www.photosnowdonia.co.uk/ZPS/backfocus.htm
PDF format list of lenses you can print or download - covers Italian Flag YES/NO for DCS 14n but applies to others. http://www.photosnowdonia.co.uk/ZPS/ItiFlagLensList.pdf

No where of course - but that's what the people who think 20 sec write times are normal say. Or something...

Richard Franiec wrote:

DMillier wrote:

But Richard, you've not noticed the subtle reduction in colour transitions in the red parts of the engine. Sd14 is

so much better here.

Where ?

-- hide signature --

"...while I am tempted to bludgeon you, I would rather have you come away with an improved understanding of how these sensors work" ---- Eric Fossum
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmillier/