10. Image Quality

It's not easy to define clearly what image quality is, but a few broad outlines can be given. First of all it must be understood that the final quality of an image will be the direct result of the quality of the optics used. A shoddy plastic 28-80 mm f:3.5-5.6 will obviously produce mixed results. Conversely, an exceptional 35 mm f:2 will give you flattering images. The sharpness of an image varies, then, depending on the lens; but with a such a high resolution, it would be a shame indeed not to give your DCS Pro the best lens that can be had. And from this point of view, Nikon takes a back seat to no one.

Aside from the sharpness of the image in the strict sense, the processing Kodak has built into the camera produces a fairly smooth image, with an undeniable digital look, but still pleasant to look at. Unlike other manufacturers' images, the pixels blend together in small groups, which gives an almost "painting" like impression when viewing the image at 100%. It's an aesthetic choice that reduces image definition, resulting in test-chart results that aren't as good as with a Canon EOS 1Ds, but just as usable.

As for colorimetry, the unit does well in most lighting situations, though it does show a certain redness when shooting outdoors and when mixing light sources. In general, the white-balance presets are not exceptional, and professionals are advised to calibrate balance themselves before each shoot.

Exposure rarely misses, and then only in situations where mistakes are to be expected. The competitors do no better, and users will have to learn to judge the difference between an overall measurement, center-weighted, and spot metering in order to make the right choice at the right time.

To sum up: The images are beautiful, clean, correctly exposed, and colorimetrically coherent. What more could you ask for? Absence of noise? That's exactly where the DCS Pro shows its limits.

Despite noise management that's truly exceptional in "longer exposure" mode, the camera produces images that are unusable at ISO 800, usable at 400, and impeccable at 160. In other words, we don't advise you to go beyond ISO 160 if you want to make use of your pictures. Beyond that point, high levels of noise appear, above all if you've forgotten to activate longer exposure mode, as can be seen clearly from our test images. In fact, this is without doubt THE major shortcoming of this camera, and the one that will keep reporters from using it. They need a unit that's faultless from ISO 50 to 400, and good at 800 and 1600, to deal with the different lighting conditions they run into in the field.

As we've seen, this shortcoming will be no problem for studio photographers, since they obviously have control over lighting.