Paul Yi wrote:
I am absolutely stunned by the detail and colors this camera brings out .... Also, the metering and as well as DR is just way better than my 5D MkII....
Hi Paul. I see you finally found a Kodak SLR/c and that it's serving you well. Congrats.
I can't agree, though, that the SLR/c metering and DR is "way better" than the 5D Mark II.
Having owned both (I sold my SLR/c a couple of years ago and still own the 5D II), I can say for sure that, in the right hands, the Kodak is a great camera, has excellent color rendering and accuracy, has very good DR, provides a very high level of detail (thanks in part to a lack of AA filter), etc., etc., etc.....
... But only in good-to-excellent light and only at ISO 100-400. Beyond ISO 400, its DR begins to go downhill pretty rapidly as does its color accuracy. From ISO 640 on, it is no match for the 5D II and the vast majority of current high end DSLRs. Detail gets lost, DR is reduced pretty dramatically, colors get a bit washed out and noise blotches are all over the place.
In other words, at low ISOs, it's a superb camera in many ways. But it has nowhere near the versatility and adaptability of the 5D II. These Kodaks were really designed for studio use for the most part, which is why they can (and do) suffer from unpredictable color shifts when used outdoors in certain situations and environments.
Is it just me or does Jarenas's shots look pixilated? I think something went wrong when he uploaded to the web. The edges of the flowers have jagged edges, not smooth.
Veroman, nice Big Sur coastline/Bixby bridge shot! What lens was that shot with?
As someone else mentioned, these colors definitely remind me of the M8.2 and the 1D. I miss that alot about those cameras. My 5D, while nice, doesn't seem to have it like those did.
And I told myself I would stay away from this thread.
wayne seltzer wrote:
Is it just me or does Jarenas's shots look pixilated? I think something went wrong when he uploaded to the web. The edges of the flowers have jagged edges, not smooth.
Veroman, nice Big Sur coastline/Bixby bridge shot! What lens was that shot with?
Thanks for pointing that out. This is only my 2nd attempt to upload images. Next time I'll choose a higher res setting. Thanks.
Jim Schemel wrote:
veroman,
Thanks for sharing your experience with this body.Helps me to evaluate picking one up or not.
-Jim
You're welcome Jim.
Reading over my post, it seems to me I may have made the camera sound worse than it really is.
We all have different standards and tolerances for things like noise, color shifts, DR and the like. I think the SLR/c (and I guess the SLR/n ... although I have no experience with that variation) is a camera worth trying, especially at today's prices.
I've seen them go for $750 or so in really good condition and with low shutter count. Even at $1,000, there aren't too many cameras that can come close to the SLR/c's performance at low ISOs ... although my continuing preference for a low ISO camera is the D2x. In fact, I'd take the SLR/c over a Leica M8/M8.2 or Sigma SD9/10/14, the other two cameras without AA filters.
Paul Yi wrote:
I don't know...I think my 5D MkII is going to have a long vacation.... Taken with C/Y Planar 100 with no PP at all, on the way to work this morning.
They're nice shots, Paul. But they're not particularly challenging to the camera. Also, the lack of an AA filter does have its advantages. There's also some downside to no filter ... which will rear its ugly head from time to time.
In any event, here are some 5D II shots that compare pretty well to the Kodak and might even have presented a bit of a challenge to that camera ... or should I say "would have ...."
Paul Yi wrote:
Hey....that lake in the second shot looks very familiar...
Was that taken at the nature center at Closter, NJ?
If so, I go there pretty often to take pictures....
It was shot at the McFaul Environmental Center in Wyckoff. But if it resembles a nature center in Closter, then that sounds like a great place to shoot. I'll give it a try myself ...
For people like me, who knows practically nothing about post processing, Kodak DSLR is great......
Maybe it's a matter of taste, but I really like the colors from it.
I love my Kodak SLR/C camera too. I also like the software that comes with it: Photodesk. If you have Photodesk, make sure and go to Kodak web site to get the Custom Looks Addon software for it (free).
Paul Yi wrote:
Thanks.... For people like me, who knows practically nothing about post processing, Kodak DSLR is great......
Interesting you should say that, Paul. I've always thought the SLR/c needed lots and lots of post-processing work to get the best out of the RAW files ... more than most cameras, anyway. Oh well...
Which software did you use to convert the Raw file?
I've used Photo Desk, and practically all of my pictures were done with just one click.
Save as JPEG..... and done.
