Kodak dcs 14n vs. Sony DSC 828 + Canon 10D or Rebel

[adam_wallacavage]

I just purchased the Kodak 14n and my first impression is that I

don't like it. I have always shot with Nikon lenses and I wanted

something with a ful sensor to cover my wide angle lenses plus

the resolution. The photos I am seeing with the 14n have

horrible lens flare i.e. red blurs around lights and I'm not too

hapy with the flash sync . I have tried all the different settings as

well as different lenses. I only have 3 days to return the camera

and am thinking of returning it for two camera systems instead,

the Sony dsc 828 (because I want higher resolution than the Dsc

727 that I already own, plus I like the way these types of cameras

photograph small products in the studio) and a Canon 10d or

Digital Rebel for fashion and situations where I need faster slr

cameras (I willing to switch to Canon lenses). I'm not sure what

Canon I want, I think the Rebel has a smaller magnafication

than the 10d which will be good because I like to use extreme

wide angle lenses but the 10d may be a better professional

camera. Should I give the 14n a chance? Should I get the Rebel

or 10d? I am running out of time. Any help? thanks!

[greg_erker]

You may get more help on the 14n problems from the people on

dpreview Kodak SLR forum.

 

Greg

[peter_foiles2]

The 14n has not been that well reviewed so I am not suprised that you are not happy with it. The 828 should work well for small product photo work but it may not be all that much better than the 717 that you already have. The sensor is the same size for both models, all Sony did was cram more pixels in the same amount of space. More pixels means smaller pixels and that is not entirely a good thing.

 

As for 10D vs Rebel they both us the identical imaging chip so there is no difference in crop factor. As a pro you should appreciate the extra features of the 10D.

[rick_helmke]

Dollar for dollar I suspect the 10D will make you the happiest. I don't know much about the 14n but have not been overwhelmed with what I have heard. For the price it ought to be making the coffe while it produces Ansel Adams quality photos. If you are going to invest in Canon lenses as I did then what you save by switching from the 14n to the 10D will cover much of that cost and will set you up with lenses for this format ie. a 17-whatever zoom and something a little longer will do 90% of your work. Kick in for a dedicated flash and you're off. I'm not shooting sports these days, I stay mostly in the studio and on location but that is how it has worked out for me and I'm pleased so far.

 

Rick H.

[steve_chan5]

I second the suggestion to look on the dpreview Kodak SLR forum. From reading the comments there, it seems that you need to invest some time in figuring out how to use the Kodak before you can appreciate it.

[garry edwards]

I bought the 14N a couple of months ago. As with any equipment, there is a sharp learning curve and I don't think that you can make a reasoned judgement without first learning how to get the best from it.<p>It <i> did</i> get a bad press in the early days, but I think that there were two possible reasons for this - firstly it is best suited for studio use, in raw mode only, and it's possible that testers were expecting it to perform well outdoors in jpeg mode, and secondly although the quality was superb at minimum ISO it was poor at ISO200+. This is not important in the studio and anyway has now been fixed by a firmware upgrade.

[qdb]

I agree that you won't get the best from the Kodak 14n with a few days use. Used as intended (low ISO in particular), it is capable of breathtaking results, as good as a $12k medium format back. A Rebel or 10D are really not in the same league for studio work.

 

If you want to read an unbiased 14n review, read Thom Hogan's review at http://www.bythom.com/14n.htm Thom gives the 14n high marks, and now uses it himself. It has been further improved since his review with the latest firmware (make sure your test camera has this!)

[jon canfield]

Make sure that you're using the latest version of the firmware (v4.4)and PhotoDesk(v3.2) - you can download them from the Kodak website. There are huge improvements in quality with the latest stuff.

I think you'll find that the Sony isn't going to give you improved results with the extra megapixel - smaller pixels usually mean more noise, and I haven't seen anyone talk of improved color with the addition of the emerald sensor.

Of course some of the Kodak issues may be based on the type of shooting you do. Everyone seems to love it for portrait/studio work - including me. I also use for landscape and other work and have been happy with it within it's limitations. Namely, I try to shoot at ISO 200 or lower, I shoot RAW, expose for highlights to avoid noise in the shadows, etc. There are some examples from the 14n outdoor use at http://www.joncanfield.com/nimitz_all.htm

 

Jon

[adam_wallacavage]

Thanks for the advise, this website is amazing. I just took a look

at the Sony DSC 828 and the D100 and was impressed. I

originally bought the 14N for the studio but had hoped to use it

for some of the other things I shoot such as magazine editorial,

movie stills, action sports, artwork and interiors. As far as

shooting studio products, the Sony F717 I have is great because

of the depth of field when shooting small products like jewelry, it

also works great for shooting movie stills and I use it like a

polaroid as a test before shooting film. The f828 has a better

zoom, has a faster triggger, feels sturder, and I guess has better

resolution. The resolution on the 14n is great but I really don't

need that all the time, most of the art directors I work with still

want film for big shots. I'm really leaning on returning the 14n

and buying the Sony f828 as a cheap carry around backup and

the Nikon d100 (for slightly more professional jobs such as

fashion and web stuff ) and also buying some new Nikon lenses

and investing in a high res slr later . Maybe Nikon will come out

with one? I have to make my desision by tomorrow at noon est.

Thanks

[craig_gillette]

Have you considered the Fuji S2 instead of the D100? It's also a Nikon mount camera, not surprisingly, has it's loyal followers as well.

[patrick_drennon]

I agree with the previous poster. I have a Fuji S2. Bought because multiple reviews

rated it the best (6mp range) in sharpness, effective resolution and skin tone accuracy

(dpreview for one). It has never disappointed me in any way. If you're looking at a

camera in the 6 mp range it's a great camera. It won't replace a 14N but neither will

any of the other choices you gave. The camera has some drawbacks, annoying battery

arrangement, limited viewfinder size, etc. but it takes great pics.<div></div>