Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c

I can agree with what has been said about the artifacts, slow file save, and clunky nature. The ONLY thing that this camera has going for it is the use of Nikon 135 lens, and full frame sensor.
I had to drop in and get on someone else's studio workflow. Getting up to speed had me reading thr manual every single night for a week. No kidding.
But, things did move forward, and the results were great. Every camera has a style and set of issues. Newer designs have huge lcd backs and less buttons.
This was made in 2003, and it shows. My 8 mp nikon has a much better sensor, and that really is what makes a great shot. Unless you need 12 x 18" full bleed work, for 300 dpi, move on. I spent hours - no days - retouching those magenta highlight artifacts. ( not billable time eh? )

Full Frame
Pretty cheap eBay prices
Use your 135 lens
Great Kodak web site support ( are you listening Nikon?? )

see above

Nikons and Canons DSLR

What do we have here? A full frame sensor with great resolution! I don't understand why this body is so underrated. The benefits of this model are huge. No need to change any lenses for starter. I got the impression throgh reviews that this model is designed only for studio work but I found out that it's possible to do anything with it. I did even sports... It isn't the best possible body there is but from the other hand I don't understand why all the improvements made on the smaller sensor's models weren't possible here. As a Nikon owner I didn't see any other model in the market because my main goal was to keep working with the old lenses. All the old lenses function very well on this body and I don't have any problem. I bought it hardly used with four lenses for only 1000 euros! This is the deal of my life!

Great reesolution
well built
No image cut factor
To my opinion not even difficult to use
old cable release
hot shue

Can be faster
speciall batteries cost too much

Nikon D2X
Canon D20

non

I was debating wether to drop the 8 grand on a canon 1DS MK11 or if it could be possible that the Kodak really was a great bang for the buck. I can now honestly say that there is a reason why canon is so much more expensive...cause it is just that much better. First impressions of just looking at and holding the camera is that its a hunk of junk. It's bulky, doesnt feel well in your hands, and it just doesnt feel solid. When I turned it on (it took me a second to find the misplaced "on" dial)... I was terribly confused by the several layers of menues and could never find the ISO expansion setting and was forced to shoot at ISO 160. I did some studio testing with it and the MKII and was not pleased with the kodak at ALL. Even at ISO 160, black eye brows turned to red green and blue noise dots. shadows showed only acceptable noise levels, and at ISO 400, all shadows and blacks showed unacceptable noise levels. Not to mention that it took the camera quite a bit to focus on the subject...and it took 12 seconds to view an image on the back of the small, off colored, unsharp screen. Looking at the images close up showed a nice bit of detail, but was beat by the 1DS MKII at all times and even my 8 megapixel 1D MKII showed better moise and detail than the kodak, not to mention the photos were sharper and more color accurate.

makes for a great hammer and door stop

too many to list...what was kodak thinking???? Come on kodak, stick with digital backs and film.

1DS MKII 1D MKII IDS 1D D1X

non

Despite some initial misgivings about this camera, I decided to purchase this camera two months ago. I've just been able to formulate some initial impressions that I would like to share. First of all this is a full frame sensor, consisting of some 13.5 Million usable megagixels. That is, there is no 'crop factor' with this camera, so your all of your frames will be shot at the stated focal length of the lens. So get ready for some changes in how you shoot if you are coming from the less than full frame world. I'm finding that I am more concerned about camera support than I was before. The increased resolution of this camera makes unsharpness and bad focussing very obvious, so you'll have to limit how many hand-held shots you take. Also, if you are shooting with cheap lenses, this will show up too, as you'll be more apt to examine your frames at 100%, and you'll be disappointed if you see optical artifacts. That said, I should address several aspects of this camera that have been discussed in reviews of the camera on popular web sites. First is the slow writing of files to your memory card. Slow is a relative term. Don't buy this camera if you are doing sports or other photography that demands a very fast frame capture rate. That said, I must say that for my purposes, the camera is fast enough. I do landscapes, and this doesn't demand the ultra fast frame rate of the Canon 1D Mark II for instance. I find that the camera is superb for shooting RAW files and you can shoot 19 in a row. It takes a minute for the buffer to clear. For me, the camera is always ready to shoot, as I am becoming very careful about composition and exposure now. I wonder about the value of encouraging photographers to consider how fast the camera is to be one of the major buying points when it isn't necessary. This isn't an excuse for a slow camera, but I think the emphasis has been too great on this issue. Secondly, image quality and possible artifacts from lens optimization. I first encountered this issue myself when I started with the camera. There were magenta or green color casts on the right side of the frame, and there was severe banding in the shadow areas. Honestly, Kodak didn't get lens optimization right IMO and it has caused me some consternation. I solved the problem by setting lens opt. to 1 and upgrading the firmware in the camera.

Huge frames with high resolution and incredible detail, GPS capability to store the coordinates in the RAW file where the picture was taken, mirror lock up feature for reduced vibration, Kodak photo desk software (you don't need Photoshop CS to process your RAW files), Canon lens mount, Kodak support is great, $1000 rebate available on this camera. Camera includes a wireless remote, but for other cameras this is an expensive accessory. Firmware updates fix many issues, and new versions of Photo Desk are free too for registered owners. Very low noise at 160-320 ISO. Camera shoots at 6 and 12 ISO! Great for long exposures. Ergonomics are not bad. The camera feels pretty comfortable in my hands. My nose doesn't press any of the buttons on the back of the camera. This issue is actually mentioned in the manual. The camera is pretty light and easy to handle.

I would have liked to have a way to close down the viewfinder on the camera besides using a tiny piece of plastic to do so. You need to update firmware TWICE, this is really important to do. If you do it only once, you'll have problems. Very large RAW files (~ 15 MB each), fills up cards fast but this is what you get with almost 14 MP. Lingering uneasiness about color casts and image artifacts (I think they are solved but I'm not 100% sure). Don't shoot at over 400 ISO. Intolerable noise above 400. Concerns about Kodak's long term viability, as they are laying people off and maybe they'll drop support for their DSLR? Battery life is a bit short, and it's a proprietary battery. I bought a spare in case I needed it in the field.

Olympus E 20

I called them about the color casts and artifacts caused by lens optimization. They told me to update the firmware again, but do it twice. After that I don't see it. I am continuing to test to see if this is the case.