Pixelcount Feb March 98

www.penncamera.
com
11716 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705
1-800-347-5770
Ask any professional photographer about
quality digital photography and Nikon
will probably be the immediate response.
Ask about professional service or
selection and that answer will be Penn Camera.
Professional equipment like
Nikon scanners. Legendary
for unsurpassed precision,
reliability and performance.
Now, that same bench mark
quality is available from
Nikons full line of affordable personal
scanners. Expert results with superior Nikon features like precision
autofocus, internal drive-bay mounting, slide and negative
scanning, and high 2700-dpi optical resolution.
Professional or personal Nikon is the leader in superior
value for quality scanning.
Selections like the Nikon E2N Series Digital
Still Cameras. As easy to handle as 35mm SLRs.
Superior quality digital images, quickly and
simply. The Nikon E2N the choice of image
professionals around the world.
Penn Camera is an
aut horized dealer f or
Nikon elect ronic
imaging product s.
All product s include
t he Nikon Inc.
limit ed warrant y.
the pr o f e s s i o n a l
s o u r ce f or di gi ta l
e q u i p m e n t
For a superior selection of Nikon products and lots
of accessories come see us. Penn Camera. The
professional source for Nikon digital equipment
1

A

pixel

count

special edition: the Kodak DCS
520/Canon EOS D2000 digital camera unveiled

by Rob Galbraith, rdg@robgalbraith.com February 7, 1998

The blackout tape wasnt fooling any of the newspaper and wire service photographers in attendance at
SuperBowl. Even with its name plates masked, most shooters knew the camera that the Kodak folks were
toting around was the worst-kept secret of 1997, the DCS 520. If you were among the few pro shooters
there that didnt know, all you had to do was pick up a Kodak baseball cap - the one with DCS 520
emblazoned on the back!

All text and images in this document
are copyright 1998 Rob Galbraith
(unless otherwise marked). Reprint
permission is granted only if the
material is distributed for free, it is
distributed in its entirety, and the
material is credited to me. To contact
the author, please send an email to
rdg@robgalbraith.com. This
document was updated Mar 10/98.

Two weeks later, Kodak took the wraps off the DCS 520 for real, announcing the new camera February
2nd. Canon, who partnered with Kodak in the development, simultaneously announced the DCS 520s
twin, the EOS D2000 (Canon and Kodak will compete to get the camera into the hands of vendors once
its released). This edition of pixelcount offers some impressions of the DCS 520/D2000 based on working
with a pre-production unit for the past three weeks. Ive had an opportunity to put it through its paces,
and Im pleased to report that it will deliver on most of what it promises when it ships in late March.

Cover: Vancouver Canucks Bert
Robertsson appears almost as excited
as I am about the introduction of the
DCS 520/D2000, during the teams
recent loss to the Calgary Flames.
Photo was shot at ISO 800, I/500 at
f2.8, custom white balance off a blank
patch of ice (no Photoshop colour
correction whatsoever). Minor
dodging and burning was done on
Robertssons helmet and face, and the
Quantum Mechanic lter (on a low
setting) was applied to the entire
image.

This document provides a breakdown of the camera, feature by feature:

2 million pixel CCD

Proprietary le format

Improved calibration

Anti-aliasing lter

Revamped colour matrices

Improved image quality

Fully-functioning TTL ash

1.8 inch colour TV

3.5 fps burst rate

WYSIWYG viewnder

User-changeable battery

Vertical shutter release

Sound recording

IEEE 1394 FireWire interface

Software

Note:

Throughout this document I compare the DCS520/D2000 with the DCS3, its predecessor. The assess-
ments of the DCS3 apply equally to the NC2000e, its Nikon-platform counterpart. In other words, for the
purposes of the comparisons being drawn in the pages ahead, consider the NC2000e and the DCS3 to be the
same.

I recall the day a local Kodak rep came to the paper to show off the DCS 100, Kodaks new digital SLR. It
had some cool features, including an LCD screen for reviewing images. The only problem was that the
LCD screen was housed in a shoulder bag-sized pack tethered to the camera, making the whole rig pretty
A PIXELCOUNT SPECIAL EDITION: THE KODAK DCS 520/ CANON EOS D2000 DIGITAL CAMERA UNVEILED
A photogra phers view of the DCS 5 2 0 / D2 0 0 0 s key fea tures 2
TheDCS 520/D2000
digital camera
WYSIWYG
viewfinder
Full-frame viewing
of CCD image area
Quick Control
Dial switch
Enables/disables
the Quick Control
Dial
Quick Control
Dial (QCD)
Use to change
aperture,select
menu items and
functions on LCD
monitor (in
conjunction with
Select button)
White balance
Choose from Auto,
Daylight,Tungsten,
Fluorescent and
Flash
Select
Used in
conjunction with
the QCD to select
from and navigate
through menus on
the LCD monitor
Tag/sound record
Press briefly to tag an
image while editing
on LCD monitor;
press and hold
to record a
sound bite
Disp/Menu
Used to select
viewing and
folder options,
access the LCD
monitor bright-
ness control
and monitor
menus
Disk/battery door
Open to insert/remove
PCCard hard disk and
user-changeable
battery
Camera information display
Indicates battery status,card
inserted/busy,white balance,frames
remaining,frames shot
1.8 inch LCD monitor
Not a colour TV - darn
On/off
switch
AE Lock
A photographers view of the DCS520/D2000s key features:

2 million pixel CCD

3

unappealing to photojournalists. Now, about 7 years later, the LCD screen is back, but this time its carved
nicely into the back of the camera, a testament to how far digital photography has come in the 90s.

2 million pixel CCD

Like its predecessor the DCS3, the DCS520/D2000 is a single-shot CCD. Kodak dubs it a Full Frame CCD,
referring to its ability to capture red, green and blue light simultaneously in different layers of the chip
during a single exposure. The process of acquiring an image into Photoshop converts the CCD infor-
mation gleaned at the time of exposure into a full-colour image. Both Kodak and Canons websites
indicate the camera produces a 6mb le, though the le size is actually 5.7mb, derived from multiplying
the actual pixel dimensions of 1728 x 1152 by the three color channels (red, green and blue), then
converting the really high number that results into megabytes . At 5.7 mb, le size is up a healthy 54%
from the DCS3s 3.7 mb le. Part of the gain is on the edges - the DCS 520/D2000s CCD has the same 3:2
aspect ratio of a 35 mm frame, compared to the DCS3s 2.5:2. While the chip is physically wider than that
of the DCS3, it is about the same height. Kodak was able to boost the pixel count from 1.3 to 2 million
pixels primarily by tightening up the space between the pixels on the CCD. This means that lens magni-
cation is still around 1.6x (compared to 35 mm lm photography), the same magnication as the DCS3.
The wider aspect ratio means wide angle lenses will take signicantly more in at the edges however.
Figure 1 shows the relative frame sizes. Both photos were shot with 300mm f2.8 lenses, from the same
position at about the same moment.

Figure 1: DCS 520/ D2000 version (left); NC2000e version (right)

Note:

The colour in the photos in gure 1 is a bit odd because the arena lights were still warming up.

One of Kodaks primary goals when designing the DCS 520/D2000 CCD was to increase blue channel
response. Users of the DCS3 know that one of the biggest hindrances to image quality is blue channel
noise, even at low ISO settings. Thats because the polysilicon material in that cameras sensor sucks up so
much blue light, leaving little to pass through and register in the CCD. To produce a cast-free image, then,
the acquire module gains up the blue channel to match red and green, boosting the low-level CCD noise
along with it. The result is a noisy, icky blue channel, particularly in shadow areas in low light at high ISOs.

Proprietary file format

4

The use of Indium Tin Oxide (ITO) in the DCS 520/D2000 CCD in place of polysilicon has increased the
sensors blue channel sensitivity by about 30%. That means a cleaner blue channel, though as gure 2
demonstrates , its still not as clean as the other two channels.

Figure 2: Green, red and blue channels at ISO 800

Heres a quick table that summarizes individual channel response in the DCS3 and DCS520/D2000:
The gist of table 2 is this: while blue channel noise is reduced in the DCS 520/D2000, it is by no means
eliminated. In fact, it is still noticeable throughout the ISO range, and is a limiting factor in using ISO 1600.
The difference in red channel noise, however, is dramatic, and contributes to the noticeably cleaner look
of RGB images, both onscreen and in print.

See Improved image qualityon page 11 for more on how the
channels stack up.

ISO range is the same as the DCS3 by the way: 200 - 1600.

Proprieta r y le forma t

While it was rumoured that the new camera would produce nished JPEG les that could be opened in
Photoshop without an acquire plug-in, this did not come to pass. The proprietary le structure is similar
to that of the DCS3, though not exactly the same. Greater processing oomph in the camera enabled
Kodak to generate both full colour thumbnails and compress the hi-resolution le using a lossless form of
JPEG compression. Thats right, lossless JPEG - part of the JPEG standard is the ability to compress an
image without quality loss. By comparison, the DCS3 produces grayscale thumbnails and doesnt
compress the high-res image. The DCS 520/D2000s compression scheme doesnt shrink the les too
much - most of what Ive shot so far has shrunk from an uncompressed 4mb (a 2 million pixel raw le of

Tabl e 2: I ndi vi dual channel noi se compari son

Channel DCS3 charact er i st i cs DCS 520/ D2000 charact er i st i cs

Green
Cl ean at al most any ISO,
i ncl udi ng 1600
Cl ean at al most any ISO, i ncl udi ng 1600
Red
Somewhat noi sy throughout the
ISO range; gets hai r y at ISO 1250-
1600 typi cal l y
Incredi bl y smooth red channel
throughout the ISO range
Bl ue
Al ways somewhat noi sy, even
when per fectl y shot at ISO 200;
noi se i ncreases exponenti al l y
wi th underexposure; ISO setti ngs
over 1000 can be extremel y noi sy
Al ways somewhat noi sy, even when per fectl y
shot at ISO 200; sl i ght i ncrease i n noi se wi th
underexposure; noi se i ncreases noti ceabl y up
to ISO 1250; ISO 1600 i s onl y margi nal l y
useful

Improved calibration

5

12 bit data is 4mb in size) down to between 1.6 and 1.8 mb. A similar method of TIFF format tagging of
rotation and other information carries over from the DCS3.
The same PC Card hard disks compatible with the DCS3 are compatible with the DCS 520/D2000. Some
initial odd disk behaviour, experienced by other users of pre-production models, seems to have been
cleared up by new camera rmware. I tote around 105mb, 170mb and 260mb Intgral Peripherals Viper
cards, and all work ne in the DCS 520/D2000. The camera contains two slots for PC Cards now instead of
one, but dont get excited about the possibility of sticking two Viper cards into those slots. Thats because
a Viper card, or any other PC Card hard disk, is a Type III card, which means its thickness blocks off access
to the second slot. The camera now supports the thinner Type II cards, which will t two at a time, but
they offer less storage for a lot more money, making them a poor choice. Type II support, however, opens
the door for the DCS 520/D2000 to do cool stuff in the future, like transmit images wirelessly from the
camera, no laptop required. Thats one option thats rumoured anyway.
Because of the compressed le format, the number of images a disk will hold will vary. The counter on the
back appears to estimate the number of images remaining based on each image occupying 2.2mb of
space, when the average is probably closer to 1.7 or 1.8mb. Using 1.8mb as the average, table 3 displays
the disk capacity for the DCS 520/D2000 (and the DCS3 too, for comparison).
Intgral Peripherals has announced that 540mb and 1000mb Viper cards are in the works, so expect that
the cameras somewhat greater capacity requirements should easily be met by disk vendors.

Note:

If youve been concerned that the cameras beeer image size will mean longer modem transmissions,
fear not. If your standard procedure is to open a DCS3 image in Photoshop, then JPEG compress it to your hard
drive for sending, youll be happy to know that DCS 520/D2000 les compress more efciently, such that
compressed le sizes typically end up within 10% of the size of compressed DCS3 les. Using Photoshop 4 to
save at a quality level of 7 (baseline optimized checked on), average DCS3 les drop from 3.7mb to the 300k
range. Similar DCS 520/D2000 les drop from 5.7 mb to around 330k, a marginal difference. If this is puzzling
to you, the answer lies in how the JPEG format works. In a nutshell, the degree to which a le can be squeezed is
determined by the amount of colour variation, image detail and digital noise; the more noise in particular, the
larger the compressed le. It follows that the cleaner DCS 520/D2000 les will trim down proportionately more
than DCS3 les. Its true in theory, and in practice.

Improved ca libra tion

Not one of my newspapers 10 NC2000e cameras produces the same exposure at the same exposure
settings as any other. Thats because no individual calibration of NC2000e or DCS3 cameras occurs as they
roll off the production line. Kodak has addressed this with the DCS 520/D2000 - each unit is calibrated for
white balance, exposure and color. Thats on top of better-calibrated settings for different lighting
environments. All this should add up to more consistent color, contrast and brightness from camera to
camera, an important factor for organizations that swap and share cameras among different photogra-
phers.

See Revamped colour matriceson page 7

.

Tabl e 3: Di sk capaci t y

Di sk
capaci t y
DCS3
( 1. 3 mb xed l e si ze)
DCS 520/ D2000
( 1. 8mb average l e si ze)

105mb 76 58
170mb 123 94
260mb 189 144
340mb 248 189

Anti-aliasing filter

6

Anti-a lia sing lter

Up until now, one of the telltale signs that youre in the presence of a digital camera image is Christmas
tree artifacting in specular highlights and a blue/yellow moir pattern in objects like suit jackets. The
problem is a complicated blend of high-frequency and low-frequency wavelengths bombarding an
individual pixel element simultaneously, preventing the pixel from accurately rendering the color. When
shooting a scene with a lot of contrast, small detail or patterns, a CCD tends to roll over and play dead,
turning some pixels an apparently random shade of whatever colour it feels like. To counteract this,
Kodak designed a one-millimetre thick multi-coated anti-aliasing lter (g. 3).

Figure 3: Anti-aliasing lter

Theres no doubt that its effective at removing virtually all artifacting and moir. The shingled roof of my
neighbours house in gure 4 is a great example. Both it and gure 5 were shot at the same aperture, f16,
with the lens zoomed to 70mm. The NC2000e rendition of the roof is a blue/yellow mess; the DCS 520/
D2000 image is almost entirely artifact-free (look closely and youll see a just a hint of banding).

Figure 4: NC2000e image is a moir mess


7

Figure 5: Anti-aliasing lter eliminates most of the problemin the DCS 520/ D2000 image

Digital red eye is another problem that anti-aliasing virtually eliminates. Figure 6 (an extreme
enlargement) doesnt show the same subject in each side of the composite photo, however the lighting is
similar: off camera portable ash. The NC2000e image on the left is typical of how the camera reacts
when the scene is lit by contrasty point light sources, turning the catchlights different bright colours
when they should be white. This isnt red eye in the traditional sense, because the problem isnt caused by
light reecting off the retina; instead, it results from the NC2000es inability to determine the colour of the
catchlight pixel(s) at the time the photo was taken. The DCS 520/D2000 photo on the right shows only a
slight hint of blue artifacting in womans right eye. It is subtle enough that you have to hunt for it.

Figure 6: NC2000e image shows artifacting in catchlights (left); DCS 520/ D2000 image shows little artifacting (right)

Kodak was intent on wiping out the high-frequency/low-frequency problem before the light hit the CCD,
and designed an anti-aliasing lter to zap high-frequencies, the cause of the weird stuff shown in gure 4
and gure 6. In doing so, they sought to avoid the main pitfall of the anti-aliasing lter in the Nikon E2n/s,
which causes a signicant loss of sharpness. Im happy to report that Kodak has been largely successful.
While there is a loss of sharpness, its not signicant. Moreover, its easily corrected for printing by the
unsharp masking function in Photoshop. The lter doesnt seem to affect the sharpness of the viewnder
image, even though it sits between the lens and the mirror. While the anti-aliasing lter is removable,
there will be few shooting situations where its benets are outweighed by its drawbacks. Its also held in a
place by a tiny, fragile screw, so constantly removing and replacing it is probably not a good idea.
The anti-aliasing lter also limits the amount of infrared reaching the CCD, a key cause of magenta casts
in the DCS3.

Reva mped colour
ma trices

Kodak colour scientists have been busy, busy, busy building proles that control image colour, contrast
and brightness in the DCS 520/D2000, and wow, has their work ever paid off. Gone is the magenta colour
cast that typies DCS3 images. Gone are the pink skin tones of slightly overexposed images. And gone is


8

the weird, wild color in anything other than daylight-balanced light. Using a test target photographed
under daylight, 3050K tungsten and cool white uorescent, Kodak assembled colour proles, called
matrices, for each lighting environment. These matrices compensate for shifts in some colours and not
others that naturally occurs at different lighting temperatures, as well as sensitivity shifts that might
otherwise throw off exposure consistency. The matrices were incorporated into the cameras presets for
tungsten, uorescent, daylight and ash (daylight and ash are identical). The result is remarkably clean,
accurate, pleasing results using the tungsten and uorescent presets in particular.
Making use of the presets can be accomplished two different ways. First, let the camera gure out the
light, via its onboard sensor (g. 7). This feature works reasonably well as long as the light striking the
camera is the same as the light striking your subject. It can be tricked as well; if I wave the arm of my
green ski jacket in front of the sensor while standing under a tungsten light, the camera will briey switch
to the uorescent preset every time.

Figure 7: White balance sensor (white square)

The presets can be also be selected manually, which is probably a good idea in weird light or if you have
long colourful sleeves that may drape over the sensor. Figure 8 shows the cameras rear display in auto
white balance (left) and manual white balance (right) modes.

Figure 8: Auto white balance - daylight detected (left); manual white balance, uorescent selected (right)

While the presets are useful, Daylight in my pre-production camera tends to produce somewhat cool
images, even in late afternoon light. Ive had the best results in daylight or using ash by setting a custom
white balance. If you dont know how to do this, ask a video photographer, because the procedure is the
same: shoot something you know to be neutral under the same illumination as your subject, then instruct
the camera to set white from that. This is old hat for photographers at my newspaper, who are
encouraged to shoot the white side of a Kodak Gray Card for later Click balancing. I typically do it at the
end of a shoot. To make the best use of the DCS 520/D2000s custom white balance function, you must do
it before instead, because doing so instructs the camera to apply the white balance to all the images you
shoot immediately after. This is no big deal, but it does take some getting used to, at least for me. Figure 9


9

demonstrates why the custom white balance function is a boon in daylight: the photo on the left has
been shot with the preset on daylight, resulting in overly cool, blue colour, while the photo on the right
was shot after setting the white balance off the back of a white assignment sheet (yes, I sometimes forget
to haul my gray card from the car). The colour is noticeably more accurate, pleasing, and is more like I
remembered it to be.

Figure 9: Daylight preset (left); customwhite balance (right)

You may be thinking that gure 9 isnt a fair test; after all, heavy overcast light tends to be cooler than
sunny light, and might account for the blueness of the colour. That occurred to me too. My response to
that is gure 10. Both images were shot under very hazy, slightly warm late afternoon light. The photo on
the left has a noticeably purplish cast to it, reminiscent of the DCS3 on a bad day. The photo on the right
was custom white balanced off a Kodak Gray Card (I remembered to haul it out of my car this time),
resulting in colour that was more like I remembered it.


1 0

Figure 10

:

Daylight preset (left); customwhite balance (right)

Keep in mind that Im working with a pre-production unit, and that this apparent daylight miscalibration
may be tuned up before the camera is shipped. Ive also had some weird results mixing daylight ash
with tungsten and uorescent, but Im prepare to cut Kodak some slack as I know theyre still tweaking
many aspects of the colour, and likely will continue to even as production models are being boxed and
whisked out the door. The custom white balance function is going to be important to get to know
regardless, because of the many, many lighting environments news photographers nd themselves
shooting in. Its also buried a bit deep for my liking in the LCD screens plethora of menu items, instead of
being directly accessible via the cameras white balance button, so expect that itll take practice to set a
custom white balance quickly.

Note:

If you shoot with an NC2000, NC2000e or DCS3, Ill bet that the colour cast and pink skin tone problems
Ive been describing sound hauntingly familiar. Check out the PixelZone tutorial Getting the Best Colour Out of
Your Digital Camera Plug-In at <http://www.robgalbraith.com>, then follow the PixelZone link, for some great
colour cast solutions.

I havent been able to properly test the effectiveness of the Click balance in v5 of the digital camera plug-
in used to acquire DCS 520/D2000 images. Still in beta as I write this, stability problems have made Click
dangerous to the health of my Mac. Thats prevented me from testing out the theory that, because of the
cameras improved colour quality and strengthened infrared ltration, white balancing mistakes may be
corrected in part, or even 100%, after the fact with Click. But nothing beats opening the plug-in and
seeing all the thumbnails display with near-perfect colour, which is reason enough to try and get the
white balance right at the shoot.
Another untested theory is this: the cameras tungsten and uorescent presets are so good that using
tungsten and uorescent colour matching gels over a ash for ll will produce some really great colour in
lighting situations that previously scared the pants off digital photographers. In short, careful technique
with the DCS 520/D2000 should produce colour that cant be touched by the DCS3.


1 1

Improved ima ge
qua lity

The new CCD design, calibration, anti-aliasing lter, lighting presets and custom white balance add up to
vastly improved image quality. During a visit to Rochester early in the cameras development, I had an
opportunity to see some sample prints: studio-lit shots of brightly-coloured balls of yarn and that kind of
thing. I was immediately skeptical about the cameras ability to improve on the image quality of the
current digital cameras. Not because the photos didnt look good; in fact, the balls of yarn looked great.
No, it was because I dont shoot balls of yarn on the job, and I rarely shoot digital in the studio. As a news
photographer I spend my day shooting people, sometimes in some pretty tough light, so I chose to see
Kodaks balls of yarn test as a sign I should worry that the cameras colour might somehow collapse in the
real world. Clearly I didnt have reason to worry, given how much better it is.
The snappy onscreen colour holds through to the printed page too.
While only a handful of DCS 520/D2000 images have been printed
in my newspaper to date, each has looked better than just about
any NC2000e image. Perhaps the best example has been Calgary
Flames hockey. The light in Calgarys Saddledome is optimized for
TV, meaning that it is reasonably bright but at. It is also been
getting darker over the past couple of seasons. Overall, the
consensus among Calgary Herald photographers is that NC2000e
images from two years ago look better than those shot today,
thanks to the deteriorating lighting.
Enter the DCS 520/D2000. Two third period goals in quick
succession by the Los Angeles Kings sealed the fate of the Flames
and capped the night of goalie Dwayne Roloson. Condent I had
the picture of Roloson sitting dejected against the goalpost, puck
still in the net (I knew I had it because I peeked at the cameras LCD
screen), I slipped out of the game to the media room and trans-
mitted the photo. The picture was swapped onto the front of
Sports just after rst edition deadline had passed (left). The result
was the best reproduction of a Saddledome hockey photo in my
newspaper ever.
To be fair, the Calgary Herald converted to digital for shooting hockey before Fuji 800 was the rage, so it
still might be possible to surpass the image quality of the DCS 520/D2000 using colour neg. But looking
at the Wednesday, February 4th Sports front, its hard to imagine reproduction at my newspaper getting
much better. Figure 11 is a closer look at the same shot. Just like the photo on the cover of this issue, Ive
set a custom white balance off the ice and thats it - no colour tweaking whatsoever has been done in
Photoshop, though I did burn down the blue crease area a little.


1 2

Figure 11: DCS 520/ D2000 hockey, 1/ 500 at f2.8 at ISO 640

I believe there are two key differences between the DCS3 and the DCS 520/D2000 that make all the
difference shooting in controlled, at light like the Saddledome. First is the cleaner image at higher ISO.
The smooth red channel in particular makes all the difference in gure 11, since red is the predominant
colour, and is second only to blue/black for showing off digital noise.
Equally important in the look of this image is something I havent mentioned to this point: image contrast
and exposure latitude. Thanks to the response characteristics of the new CCD, and the work of Kodak
colour scientists, image contrast is noticeably better in two areas: highlight tonality and open shadow
detail. If youve read the PixelZone tutorial on plug-in colour I mentioned earlier, youll know that I think
DCS3 highlight handling sucks. Its not that the camera cant record a whoppingly large tonal range. In
there, the DCS3 is capable of taking in 9 stops of shadow to highlight goodness. Yup, you read that
correctly - 9 stops. The reason you cant take full advantage of the 9 stops of detail is three-fold: image
noise, the curve thats applied to the image during acquire, and some inherent limitations in the CCD that
prevent capturing highlight tonality properly. The CCD design of the DCS 520/D2000 actually has a
narrower theoretical range than the DCS3, but in reality it has more usable range. As I mentioned earlier,
open shadow area, which tends to block up and/or get noisy in DCS3 photos, remains clean and open
with the DCS 520/D2000. And highlight detail shows much smoother, more realistic gradations. What this
means is less sensitivity to overexposure. Slightly overexposed DCS3 images have a tendency to atten
out, turn pink and oversaturate in the highlights. Not so with the DCS 520/D2000. As exposure increases,
images simply get, well, lighter. No wild colour or saturation shifts at all.
Figure 12 demonstrates the difference between the current generation cameras and the DCS 520/D2000.
The brightness values of the subjects face, as displayed in Photoshops Info palette, are nearly identical in
the NC2000e image at left and the DCS 520/D2000 image at right. How the images look, now thats
another story. At left is the NC20000e (remember, the DCS3 responds similarly) at its worst: pink, oversat-
urated, at as a pancake skin. At right is the new cameras response to the same degree of overexposure:
face tones, while too light, display none of the highlight baggage of the NC2000e image. Which image
would you rather prepare for printing in Photoshop?

Fully-functioning TTL flash

1 3

Figure 12: Overexposed NC2000e photo (left); overexposed DCS 520/ D2000 image (right)

Fully-functioning TTL
a sh

Flash plays a pivotal role in the life of a digital camera image. DCS3 users know that the 540EZ has to be
turned down -3 stops typically to make TTL sort of work, and even then its only reliable on Tuesdays
when theres a full moon. The DCS 520/D2000 solves this problem. Using a Canon E-TTL series Speedlite,
ash exposures are excellent at different distances and different apertures with my pre-production unit.
The downside is that only the mid-range Canon 380EX ash supports E-TTL. It is not particularly powerful,
does not connect to a Dynalite Jackrabbit battery pack (I havent checked into Quantum compatibility),
and is really not intended for pro use, as it was originally built to work with the Canon Elan II lm camera.
Rumour has it that Canon will introduce a replacement for the 540EZ (the 540EX, perhaps?), Canons top-
of-the-line Speedlite, with an E-TTL-capable model later this year. Kodak has also indicated that the
shipping version of the DCS 520/D2000 will support A-TTL series ashes like the 540EZ and 430EZ,
though Ill have to wait and see that before believing it. E-TTL ashes, which dont depend on bouncing
light off the CCD to determine exposure, may still have an exposure reliability edge over A-TTL series
ashes, but it would be great if the camera supported both TTL variants.

1 . 8 inch colour TV

Okay, I the heading for this section is a bit of an exaggeration. On long stakeouts, during lulls in slow-
moving hockey games, or whenever The Larry Sanders show is on, I wish the LCD monitor integrated into
the back of the DCS 520/D2000 incorporated a TV tuner. Alas, it does not. It does, however, include a long
list of features, the best of which will help take the fear out of digital photography for novice digitogra-
phers and long-time colour neg shooters.
Immediately after ring the shutter, a 1.8 inch wide rendition of the image just snapped appears on the
LCD monitor (assuming youre in the correct mode of course). The screens tiny size means you wont be
able to tell, for example, if all 10 people in a group shot have their eyes open, but you will be able to see if
you got the moment you were after. In other words, on its own the screen is only somewhat useful. What
really brings this feature to life is this: pressing the Select button unveils the images histogram. If you
know how to read a histogram you can kiss many routine exposure mistakes goodbye forever. A
histogram is a graph representing the brightness values in the image from shadow to highlight. Kodak
calls it an image blueprint, and I like that wording, as it conveys the idea of a histograms precise
rendering of image tones in a two-dimensional form. Ive hardly used the meter so far, depending on the
histogram to show me the way to exposure nirvana. Figure 13 shows the LCD monitor and histogram
function in action. The hockey photo should look familiar.

1.8 inch colour TV

1 4

Figure 13: Just-snapped hockey photo (left) and its accompanying histogram(right)

The histogram function works well, and is one of the best features of the camera. It does appear to have
one aw, however. Im most familiar with the histogram that appears in Photoshops Levels, and expected
the cameras histogram to function the same way. In high-contrast or noticeably over or underexposed
images, the cameras histogram tends to atten out, at times appearing like short blades of grass from
shadow to highlight. Photoshops histogram shifts its scale from image to image, making it easier to
interpret when the exposure or contrast is out of range. Expect that this will take some getting used to.
The screen can also be set to have the highlights blink when theyre blown out, but the threshold seems
to shift with different color settings. Some photographers will dig the blinking highlights feature; I
quickly switched it off.
Other LCD monitor features include the ability to display 4-up and 9-up image views, select a folder on
the disk to place images about to be shot, adjust screen brightness in different lighting conditions with a
handy gray scale, and access a host of camera and disk handling features. These include both disk erasing
and formatting, deleting images, setting EOS1n-specic and DCS 520/D2000 -specic custom functions,
performing a custom white balance, setting the camera date and time, reloading or updating rmware
from disk and, most importantly, playing a game of Pong against the easiest-to -beat computer opponent
ever. Figure 14 shows the early goings of what turned out to be humiliating loss for the computer (left)
and, on a more serious note, the last-chance screen thats presented before formatting a disk in the
camera (right).

Figure 14: Pong in action

Accessing the functions described will keep you itting back and forth from the DISP/MENU and SELECT
buttons on the left of the screen and Canons Quick Control Dial (QCD) on the right. The QCD was uncere-
moniously stripped from the DCS3, but is back with a vengeance on the DCS 520/D2000. It not only
enables quick adjustment of the aperture (unless you set a custom function to have it do something else),
it is used to move through and select different menu items, and of course it controls the Pong paddle as
you run up the score against the hapless computer. Depending on the QCD for so many different
functions has one drawback - its possible to change the aperture by mistake while intending to access a
camera function. At controlled lighting events like hockey its probably better to lock the aperture in

3.5 fps burst rate

1 5

place by switching the QCD off (it will still control functions on the LCD monitor). Several Superbowl
photographers expressed concerns about the LCD screens ability to withstand the rigours of daily news
photography, and theyre right, its a concern. Only time will tell if the clear plastic panel over the screen is
made of tough enough stuff to withstand a photojournalists thrashing. The same goes for the buttons to
the left of the screen, which could serve as water intake spouts for the camera in a rainstorm. Having said
that, not one of my newspapers NC2000e cameras has malfunctioned in the rain, and its back buttons are
poorly sealed. Again, only time will tell if all the whiz-bang stuff incorporated into the DCS 520/D2000 is
going to result in reliability problems. Based on how well the digital components in the NC2000e have
fared, Im optimistic.
While comparing the reliability of old and new, I should also point out how much better the t and nish
of the DCS 520/D2000 is. There was never any doubt that the DCS3 was an EOS1n with digital stuff
grafted on. Not so now: the blending of the EOS1n with the newly-crafted digital components is near-
seamless. So much so that Im scared to take it apart, something that I considered mandatory when I was
issued my own NC2000e.

3 . 5 fps burst ra te

The combination of a 3.5 fps motor drive and a noticeably more responsive shutter button makes the
DCS 520/D2000 seems a lot zippier. As an NC2000e shooter for the past two and a half years, Ive never
been too bothered by the 2.25 fps so-called motor drive; if anything, it forced me to become a better
peak action sports photographer. What has been troublesome, though, is the shutter delay. An EOS1n
has a shutter delay of 65 milliseconds; a DCS3 is 90 milliseconds. The DCS 520/D2000 is clearly a lot closer
to the lag time of the stock EOS1n, as Ive had to adjust my shooting so as to not continually trip the
shutter early, something Ive never encountered with an NC2000e. Photographers who shoot both lm
and digital at a sports event will nd it easier to switch back and forth between the two mediums as a
result. The DCS 520/D2000 data sheets indicates that 12 frames in burst is the maximum possible, but my
unit consistently churns out 13 or 14 in sequence. Expect that production models will deliver at least 12.

Figure 15: Sequence shooting is almost a reality at 3.5 fps

W YSIW YG View nder

Ive received more messages about the DCS 520/D2000 viewnder than any other camera attribute. So
heres the deal, for the record. While the cameras CCD is smaller than a 35mm frame, resulting in effective
lens magnication of 1.6x, the viewnder in the DCS 520/D2000 has been modied so that all you see is
the image captured by the CCD. The viewnder is truly what-you-see-is-what-you-get, or WYSIWYG in
computer-speak. DCS3 users will be happy to hear that the viewnder image is much larger, theres no
longer a rectangle on the focusing screen that roughly and only somewhat accurately delineates the
edges of the frame, and that the eyepiece is set away from the body so that photographers with big and
small noses alike can get their eye comfortably into place. WYSIWYG viewing is achieved through a
combination of viewnder image magnication and masking of the eld of view. By boosting the image
up about 15%, then installing a mask for the viewnder, Canon solved one of the major irritants of the
DCS3 for some photographers, particularly those switching back and forth from an EOS1n to DCS3. The
image looks large, sharp and clear, so it would appear that Canons solution has done the trick. Canon

User-changeable battery

1 6

chose not to shift the ve autofocus points from their position in the EOS1n, which puts the outer two
points quite close to the edge of the smaller DCS 520/D2000 frame. Too close, probably, for most
shooting situations.

User-cha ngea ble
ba tter y

NC2000e battery life is a daily concern at my newspaper, particularly during the cold winter months, a
problem thats effectively solved with the DCS 520/D2000. In fact, Ive never been happier to see six AA
NiCads in all my life. Those cells form the battery pack that slips into the side of the camera, just above the
disk. Kodak indicates that each battery pack is good for about 300 frames, but really, generic battery life
estimates are not accurate at the best of times. There are simply too many factors that affect how quickly
a battery is drained. I will offer this, however: On a single day Ive shot several assignments, then an entire
hockey game on autofocus with a Canon 300mm f2.8, and had battery capacity to spare. Not much, but
some. Ive also shot for two and a half hours in sub zero weather without battery failure (the camera is
rated for 17 to 95 degrees Fahrenheit). Kodak is bundling batteries in a six pack (the camera actually ships
without batteries - you must purchase them separately), which should be more than enough for one unit.
Batteries are no longer charged in the camera; instead, they use a custom 2-slot charger that will top up
one battery at a time. Charging takes about 90 minutes per battery if the cells are really spent; because
theyre NiCads, theyre more susceptible to memory effect than the NiMh battery in the DCS3, so its
probably good form to run the battery down before charging it. Having lots of batteries and more than
one charger around will make this easier. The charger also has a mode to condition the batteries so that
the onset of memory loss is lessened. In the batteries that is; the charger cant deal with photographer
memory loss. The charger will apparently ship with an automobile adapter, which I have not tested.

Figure 16: Battery inserted into slot in camera, above empty disk slot (left); battery itself (right)

So far I havent experienced any of the general akiness that DCS3 users have come to expect from their
cameras battery and charging system. The battery indicator seems to provide an accurate gauge of
battery life, unlike the DCS3, whose gauge tends to be full of surprises. Ive had some difculties acquiring
images from the camera via its FireWire interface when running off battery. Plugging in the supplied
AC adapter made the problems go away (the adapter does not charge the batteries).

Ver tica l shutter relea se

The DCS 520/D2000 is about 1.5 inches shorter than the DCS3, even though the camera has more
electronic gizmos inside. The drop in height was made possible in part by turning the cameras disk
reader on its side. That formed the basis for the cameras vertical grip, which incorporates a shutter
release and AE (autoexposure) lock button. The vertical release is a welcome addition, though several
photographers have complained that its too small for even average-sized hands. This is a minor point, as
its still eminently usable.

Sound recording

The DCS3s basic sound annotation function persists in the DCS520/D2000. Early reports indicated that a
sound bite can be associated with a photo simply by scrolling to the photo on the LCD display and
pressing the record button, by this feature will not be available at the time of the cameras release, if ever.

FireWire

1 7

Sound les have approximately the same sound quality as before, with about 4 minutes of sound taking
the equivalent disk space of one image.

FireW ire

FireWire is Apples monicker for the IEEE 1394 specication for high-speed serial data transfer that it
invented years ago. When Canon and Kodak drew up plans for the DCS 520/D2000, they expected that
FireWire would be a whole lot further into the marketplace by now. It promises to be more stable, reliable
and eventually faster than SCSI (speed is limited to a Kodak-estimated 1.5 mb per second because of
limitations in early implementations of FireWire hardware and software). And because its been designed
from the ground up to allow hot-swapping,its also possible to connect and disconnect FireWire devices
from the computer without rst shutting down, an irritant of SCSI. FireWire is really cool, and Im glad to
see it in the DCS 520, but for now FireWire support is through an expansion card only.

Note:

Why not stick with the DCS3s SCSI interface? You wouldnt ask if youve ever been struck by SCSI
Voodoo. You know youre a victim of SCSI Voodoo when you connect up youre DCS3 to a Mac, as you have
1000 times before, start up the computer, then struggle for the next six hours through random system freezes
or the plug-ins inability to nd or communicate with the camera. When the SCSI Gods get really angry they fry
your hard drive in the process. Ive been there, as have all the photographers at my newspaper at one time or
another. As far as Im concerned, SCSI is dead, long live FireWire.

PCI cards for both Mac and Windows desktop machines are relatively inexpensive and easy to install; the
one Im testing dropped into place in a PowerMac 8500 with ease, and provides an easy push in/pull out
connector for up to three FireWire devices at a time, making it theoretically possible to have three
cameras connected simultaneously, though this capability will probably not be supported at launch. At
the moment no Mac Powerbook supports an easy FireWire connection, though rumour has it that future
models, and perhaps the one expected to be released in the March-May timeframe, will support a
technology called CardBus, which should enable the use of a special FireWire PC Card. A big asterisk
should be put next to this information though, since it could turn out to be total rubbish too (such is the
reality of rumours). If you decide that you have be able to connect your DCS 520/D2000 to your
Powerbook no matter what, Magma (http://www.magma.com) intends to release the $995 Powerbook
PCI Expansion System for the 3400 and G3 sometime this month, enabling PCI FireWire cards to be
connected via an external box.
Fortunately, most photographers will be able to forego FireWire altogether, relying instead on an
accessory PC Card read or the card slot built into most late model laptops. Updating camera rmware, as
well as erasing and formatting disks, can be done without connecting the camera to a computer. In short,
FireWire can be safely ignored by most users.

Softw a re

The cameras modied le format, FireWire, and new features like image tagging have meant lots of work
for Kodaks software engineers. Version 5 of the digital camera plug-in, the only software that currently
supports the DCS 520/D2000, sports the same look as version 4.05, with a smattering of extra buttons
and controls. The plug-in is still very much in development, and will be right up to the release of the
camera I expect, so for that reason Ill reserve judgement on it while Kodak continue to polish up its
complicated code.

Conclusion

1 8

Figure 17: Version 5 of Kodaks digital camera acquire plug-in (images being accessed by FireWire connection to camera)

I will say this, however: If youre planning new computer purchases to accompany your new DCS 520/
D2000, dont spend any time in the clearance section. Only the fastest processors attached to RAM-lled
motherboards are going to be adequate. G3 Macs and 300mhz Pentium IIs are what you want.

Conclusion

Kodak and Canon sought the advice of photojournalists as they drew up the specications for the DCS
520/D2000, and it appears they were listening. From improved colour quality to a user-changeable
battery, this camera addresses almost all of the concerns expressed about the current cameras. If the
NC2000e and DCS3 were about testing the digital waters, the new offering is about trying to get it right.
Even with its pre-production quirks, my DCS 520 tester is a joy to use. It isnt revolutionary, as one photog-
rapher described it recently, because the digital revolution has been under way since the NC2000 was
introduced four years ago. But the DCS 520/D2000 is the logical next step in the evolution of tools for
digital photojournalism, tools that make it easier to leverage digitals speed advantages while ensuring
great image quality.
The cameras failings appear to be few. Still, several photographers who have used the DCS 520/D2000
have suggested the following:

At 3.5 fps, the cameras 12 frame buffer lls fast. Too fast. Photographers must tread lightly on the
shutter button when photographing sequences.

The cameras 5.7 mb le size is still too small to meet all the needs of a newspaper, including full
broadsheet page blowups, tiny crops, etc.

Photographers who love shooting with a 20mm lens on their 35mm camera will not be happy with
the effective lens magnication.

At a street price of $11,500 to $13,000 U.S., the camera is still too expensive for individual photogra-
phers to purchase.

Theres no Nikon version at present.

Conclusion

1 9

Of these, perhaps the only real impediment to widespread acceptance of the camera is the fact that its
Canon only. Nikon has hinted that they have a pro digital camera coming soon, but really, what else
would you expect them to say on the eve of a new Canon-based digitals introduction? At the very least,
the DCS 520/D2000 is a great camera for the signicant portion of the photojournalism market that uses
Canon. Whether it will sway Nikon newspaper and wire photographers over to Canon remains to be seen.
For the rst 2-3 months I doubt that either Canon or Kodak care, since its clear that the rst several
hundred cameras are already sold to big newspapers, wire services, and smaller papers waiting for this
camera to make the jump to digital. Initially, customers probably wont have an opportunity to decide
whether to purchase a Kodak or Canon-branded version, since vendors will be clamouring for whatever
stock they can get. Once the initial frenzy is over, keep in mind that Canon and Kodak are going to be
competing to sell their version of the camera. And since the camera is the same, be sure to weigh each
offering based on after sales service, warranty, the goodies shipping with the camera, and so on.
Price of course should be a factor too. An informal survey of several U.S. vendors of the new camera
suggests the price range will be as outlined above - $11,500 to $13,000 each, depending on how many
cameras, disks, batteries, chargers and other accessories are purchased. Expect that price for the Canon
and Kodak version to be about the same.
Additional information is available on both Kodaks and Canons website. Follow the links on my sites
DigiNews page at <http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews>.

Rob Galbraith

Pixelcount Feb March 98

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pixelcount Feb March 98

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.penncamera.

You might also like