My apologies for the previous posting which was still in draft version and which got sent by mistake. Please ignore the previous one.
Have managed to have a play with the Nikon 14n this weekend. I like it! It is much better than some of the early reviews seem to have suggested and although there are some issues which need to be adressed a conversation with Kodak support suggest they bare now moving very quickly on these. The following are my immediate thoughts about the camera - as friends will affirm I am not especially gifted when it comes to technical or digital matters so really my comments are just based on how the camera feels and performs for me as a photographer. Sadly it is still just a demo model as although Kodak delivered cameras to selected dealers some 10 days later they still have to deliver a camera to an actual customer. They are also still working on the software with updates seemingly appearing on a day to day basis which might explain why they are seemingly delaying the actual delivery of saleable bodies. I was hoping to compare with a Canon but the limited time has meant that really my comments relate to the Kodak D760 with which I have been working for about eight months. I have used it on two shoots where I was required to deliver about 800 50mb files and with the obvious constraints of a single pass camerta creating a 17Mb file have been delighted with the results and the ease of handling the files as I find Kodak's software - Camera manager & PhotoDesk really easy to use and sensible in the way they operate. Physically the 14N is much smaller than the 760 - it actually feels like a camera as opposed to a darn great brick and balances well in the hand. The myriad flaps and digi-orifices mean it is not a pretty thing and there is a really tacky "coin-cell" battery compartment. It comes with an excellent instruction book - intriguingly dated Nov 2002. Clearly an indication of the degree of confusion which Kodak have been through. Although it is claimed to be a total new Kodak build it is obviously Nikon based and the use of some Nikon named components would suggest that there is some form of co-operation between Nikon and Kodak. Given that the 760 was the field leader and its software so much better than Nikon, I would hazard that Nikon has accepted the fact that the Kodak 14n gives a platform for their lenses which enables them to compete with Canon but without the hassle of of having to develope their own really high-end platform. Sadly the fact that Kodak are not great camera builders is obvious as there is at least one area of suspect build - I have now spoken to two dealers whose demo models both have defective battery compartment catches, one was loose when it was taken from the box. Rendering a �3500 cameras useless because of missing 5p clips suggest that Kodak still need to address some issues in this area! The body is a great improvement over the 760 - the image viewing screen is a much clearer display and views well, even in bright light. The screen itself is slightly recessed so not so likely to get scratched and there is also a smaller "info" screen. The viewfinder is large and bright and one can pull up a grid pattern from the menu. The actual control navigation system is a great improvement over the 760 - easier to understand and very quick to move around in. Really like it. Image appearance choices are accessed through sub-menus and there is a programmable "hot-key" to allow one swift access to specific items. Have never used a "pop-up" flash before but after just a few shots think it is brilliant for very subtle fill-in to lift skin tones etc. I could not check the download using fire-wire as did not have the appropriate cable. The revised "Photo Desk" works well and the noise supression programme was very effective. Annoyingly there is not a working Photo-shop plug-in for converting the Raw DCR files to TIF - one is promised but I find it really sad that they could not have managed what is really an essential part of a sensible work-flow and which makes the 760 so easy to use. Obviously one can work around this using PhotoDesk but this is slow. Bit like a car company selling you a car with just three gears and telling you " don't worry, we'll send you three more cogs next week then it really go fast". Currently no date admitted for this essential. File quality - bluntly it knocks the 760 into a cocked hat with good shadow detail - where there is noise the software deals with it very smoothly. The extra file size gives one much better colour rendition and martked absence of colour artifacts. Shooting speed: it will shoot 7 frames at 14Mb raw in a burst of about 3 secs and will seemingly shoot 1 frame at 6MB raw every 3secs or 6Mb jpg every 4 secs to an IBM Microdrive for as long as one wants. It has an seeming infinite number of colour temperature settings - the choice is large and one really needs to sort out exactly which suits ones shooting. I think the Luminous Landscape review which talked about the files being "too warm" had made this mistake as I found no such problem. Have been told by Kodak that they have just pocted a piece of software, on their web-site which enables one to compensate for the colour variations between different lenses. Sharpness - shot all my files without any software adjustment and was delighted with the results. This camera is sharp and as far as my limited testing was able to go, has good accurate colour rendition. I am sure I will find anomalies but was there ever any media which did not have the odd quirk? GRIPES: Unlike the 760 it will not work with non CPU Nikkor lenses. One can use the lens but it does not connect with the metering system so one has to use sperate meter and set the aperture on the lens. Focussing: Personally I think that Kodak have made an serious mistake here - one which suggests to me that this camera has never been used seriously by a working professional during its development period. The protocol which allows one to set the image area on which one is focussing is totally naff - if the image display is switched off [ quite likely if one is trying to conserve battery power ] then simply activating the focus by gently depression of the shutter button means that if one then touches an omni-directional button on the back of the camera that point of focus is changed. This means that the simply letting the camera back rub against ones body can alter the point of focus. Bad ergonomics. Files - naming: One cannot organise file names on a memory card inserted into a laptop - instead one has to use the camera software which is rather slow and even then one is stuck with Kodak's choice of three initial numbers starting with << 100 >>. Cannot see the point and it certainly does not help me as the user when organising my files to be lumbered with their inflexible numerical system. Peripherals: Annoyingly enough none of the cables, chargers etc which came with the 760 are common to the 14n so one will be lugging round two of everything. The battery charger is quite bulky - given that the battery is supposed to be based on a Nokia phone battery it seems strange that the charger should be so large especially when you think how small are the multi-voltage chargers which power computers. Still these are just personal points and others will no doubt others will not be bothered by them. I like the camera - there will never be such a thing as the "perfect" body. There was never the perfect film - in its time Kodachrome was pretty near it but could be totally infuriating. I suspect that this camera will be the same. CONCLUSION: In short, I think this camera has the potential to be a benchmark piece of kit. There is no point in comparing it to digital backs at twice the price - its direct competitor is the Canon 1DS and the Kodak is currently a good deal cheaper. I really do think that this body is a grerat improvment on the 760 which for so long has been the benchmark 35mm digital camera. The sad fact seems to be that Kodak's marketing mouth seems to have got in the way of a sensible launch. The launch at Photokina promised delivery by early December and since then we have been treated to a series of rumours and some amazingly poor quality pictures. Quite why the marketing muppets should have allowed such manifest rubbish to be released is beyond me but the whole affair is remarkably amateur and reminds me of the arrogant Kodak in the early 80s when they proceeded to throw away the marvel that was Kodachrome and rip-us off with their machinations over film price increases during the Bunker Hunt silver price hype. The extravagant promises of the marketing people clearly put the technical people under a great deal of pressure to deliver - my first impression is that they have nearly succeeded but there are still some gltiches to be sorted. After all the messing about it is perhaps rather a leap of faith to buy a camera which is still lacking some bits and pieces but clearly Kodak have invested a huge amount in this and it is not in their interests to relax so I will be getting one just as soon as they can supply it. ******************************************************* To change your subscription or leave this List read the information at www.aophoto.co.uk/forum =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
