Rob's 14n Review

[swarrine]

No offence to Rob's review, but the Major Features of the 14n probably should have been called Major Limitations.

1/125 Max Flash Synch
400 Max ISO
1.7 FPS

Ouch. Kodak has really blundered. Did they really tell photographers these specs? I would have asked them if they were joking.

Thanks for the review Rob.

 

[BJN]

No offence to Rob's review, but the Major Features of the 14n
probably should have been called Major Limitations.

1/125 Max Flash Synch
400 Max ISO
1.7 FPS

If those were the only limitations of the 14n, I'd probably buy one when the price dropped. But the 400 ISO is only usable if you noise-reduce images to the point that details really suffer. Even low ISO in low light is poor - the slow shutter speed limit kills the camera's versatility. Color rendition is poor as well. For landscape work, I don't care about the flash sync or FPS - Kodak made a lot of promises, but never that the camera would be good for action/sports. Rob's review tells it all, it's just done with such a light touch the review doesn't seem as harsh as it really is. The conclusion says it all.

--
BJN

 

[Still Learning]

Probably why Kodak has just hired the head of Digital from Olympus. He will be based in Kodak's Tokyo design studio.

No offence to Rob's review, but the Major Features of the 14n
probably should have been called Major Limitations.

1/125 Max Flash Synch
400 Max ISO
1.7 FPS

If those were the only limitations of the 14n, I'd probably buy one
when the price dropped. But the 400 ISO is only usable if you
noise-reduce images to the point that details really suffer. Even
low ISO in low light is poor - the slow shutter speed limit kills
the camera's versatility. Color rendition is poor as well. For
landscape work, I don't care about the flash sync or FPS - Kodak
made a lot of promises, but never that the camera would be good for
action/sports. Rob's review tells it all, it's just done with such
a light touch the review doesn't seem as harsh as it really is. The
conclusion says it all.

--
BJN

--
Still Learning, I Hope

 

[David Waterman]

I can't help but wonder if English is Rob's second language. I don't mean to offend other people who do have English as their second language, but Rob's usage is poor to say the least, and it makes his reviews difficult to read, to the point that I don't bother any more.

Max.

 

[tim martin]

Ouch. Kodak has really blundered. Did they really tell
photographers these specs? I would have asked them if they were
joking.

In my opinion, the most interesting piece of unreliable gossip that
I heard about Kodak and the DSLR market was this:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1026&message=4660931

It's just gossip, but it's certainly believable considering what a mess
the 14n is.

 

[Richard C]

No offence to Rob's review, but the Major Features of the 14n
probably should have been called Major Limitations.

1/125 Max Flash Synch
400 Max ISO
1.7 FPS

If those were the only limitations of the 14n, I'd probably buy one
when the price dropped. But the 400 ISO is only usable if you
noise-reduce images to the point that details really suffer. Even
low ISO in low light is poor - the slow shutter speed limit kills
the camera's versatility. Color rendition is poor as well. For
landscape work, I don't care about the flash sync or FPS - Kodak
made a lot of promises, but never that the camera would be good for
action/sports. Rob's review tells it all, it's just done with such
a light touch the review doesn't seem as harsh as it really is. The
conclusion says it all.

--
BJN

Is anyone else frustrated by the fact that reviewers keep comparing the 14n with the Canon 1Ds? I know Kodak have invited this but it isn't a reflection of pro photo reality. I have a far bigger investment in Nikon glass than the value of my Fuji S2 body. Going to Canon glass and the expensive 1Ds just to get a bit more resolution and a full frame sensor is out of the question but I might be tempted by a reasonably priced FF Nikon mount camera. Just how does the 14n compare with the S2? I suspect they haven't made the comparison because the S2 would eat the 14n for breakfast.

Fuji may well solve the problem sometime in the next year or so. They are currently gearing to manufacture a super CCD twice the size of a 36X24mm sensor (for their new MF back) so a Nikon based FF Super CCD camera has to be a possibility.
--
Richard C. South Australia

 

[*isteve]

If I were a Nikon user now I'd be getting impatient too. The 14N seems OK apart from the noise. Makes it useless at high ISO. A fuji super ccd high dynamic range full frame would be nice, but $5K for a F80 body still makes me feel queasy. Nikon really need to source a good FF sensor, and put it in their F100 (or even F5) body.

But where do they find a sensor?

No offence to Rob's review, but the Major Features of the 14n
probably should have been called Major Limitations.

1/125 Max Flash Synch
400 Max ISO
1.7 FPS

If those were the only limitations of the 14n, I'd probably buy one
when the price dropped. But the 400 ISO is only usable if you
noise-reduce images to the point that details really suffer. Even
low ISO in low light is poor - the slow shutter speed limit kills
the camera's versatility. Color rendition is poor as well. For
landscape work, I don't care about the flash sync or FPS - Kodak
made a lot of promises, but never that the camera would be good for
action/sports. Rob's review tells it all, it's just done with such
a light touch the review doesn't seem as harsh as it really is. The
conclusion says it all.

--
BJN

Is anyone else frustrated by the fact that reviewers keep comparing
the 14n with the Canon 1Ds? I know Kodak have invited this but it
isn't a reflection of pro photo reality. I have a far bigger
investment in Nikon glass than the value of my Fuji S2 body. Going
to Canon glass and the expensive 1Ds just to get a bit more
resolution and a full frame sensor is out of the question but I
might be tempted by a reasonably priced FF Nikon mount camera.
Just how does the 14n compare with the S2? I suspect they haven't
made the comparison because the S2 would eat the 14n for breakfast.

Fuji may well solve the problem sometime in the next year or so.
They are currently gearing to manufacture a super CCD twice the
size of a 36X24mm sensor (for their new MF back) so a Nikon based
FF Super CCD camera has to be a possibility.
--
Richard C. South Australia

 

[peripheralfocus]

I can't help but wonder if English is Rob's second language. I
don't mean to offend other people who do have English as their
second language, but Rob's usage is poor to say the least, and it
makes his reviews difficult to read, to the point that I don't
bother any more.

I'd just like to go on record with an opposing opinion.

While I wouldn't necessarily say that Rob is Hemingway, I generally find his writing to be better than much, if not most, of what is published in the photography press, especially on the web.

And if you're really not bothering to read his reviews and reports, you're missing some of the best-informed, most carefully done, and most fair-minded commentary on digital photography, especially as it relates to photojournalism. Rob's background in journalism shows in his balanced, well-researched, and fact-checked work.