Jump to content

Canon's nearest digital equivalent to Kodak's DCS Pro SLR/c?


r._j.

Recommended Posts

I would like to hear opinions, good and bad, on the Kodak DCS Pro

SLR/c Digital Camera. It seems to be getting overlooked, despite some

impressive specs.

 

Is it comparable with the 1d-mark 2 or perhaps closer to the 1Ds-mark

2? Pricewise (in New York) it seems to match the 1d mark 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's direct competition would have been the 1ds, however the Kodak's 'slow to do everything' specs make it only suitable for the kind of shots medium format gear is used for.

 

If you need the resolution and can live with the responsiveness, then it's good value. Personally I'd rather have the Canon, which is just a nicer camera. The 1d MkII is a different beast entirely, aimed at PJ's but now sporting a higher resolution than they're used to. The 1ds MkII is a massive improvement over the Kodak, but then it costs so much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DCS Pro SLR/c is a direct competitor to the Canon EOS 1Ds. It's a camera for high resolution photography in a studio, for example. The 1Ds Mark II is a superfast camera for (sports) journalists.

<p>Have a look at <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kodakslrc/">dpreview's review of the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c</a>, for example.

<p>The main problem seems to be that it is very slow: slow startup time, very slow with writing images to the memory card, slow with reviewing images. The EOS 1Ds is more expensive, but better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Kodak DCS and the Canon 1Ds (mk1 & 2) are both primarily aimed at

studio photographers.

 

In that respect they both perform well however the 1ds has the edge when it

comes to image quality and noise.

 

In general speed is not an issue in the studio so the DCS is not

disadvantaged in this setting.

 

However ....

 

Although the studio is the natural environment for these cameras it is

inevitable that given the high investment required for these systems, they will

also be used on location, particularly for wedding and event photography and

this is where the DCS falls miserably behind.

 

Note I have not said sport, photojournalism or nature photography here as

neither of these cameras were designed for this type of work.

 

There are a number of reasons why the 1d cameras are better design for this

type of work not only speed but also iso noise and sensor size.

 

For this type of photography a smaller sensor with the crop factor has some

advatages.

 

So in summary

 

In a studio under controlled conditions the DCS and 1DS are both

comparable.

 

If you need to use the camera outside the studio then the 1DS has the edge.

 

For sports/action photography then the 1d is the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giampiero Scuderi

 

You say this with such authority I am glad that you have been fortunate

enough to receive one so you can carry out detailed testing and be able to

offer everyone the benefit of your first hand knowledge.

 

Or are you just repeating hype you read elsewhere.

 

From what I have read and seen so far in a comparable controlled studio

setting yes the 1ds mk2 is better but the mk1 and DCS are certainly up to the

job and if you have budget constraints certainly the DCS is worth looking at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...