The Kodak 14N was followed by the DCS Pro SLR/n and SLR/c cameras. The "n" camera is a Nikon mount and the "c" is a Canon mount. Both have full-frame, 14 megapixel sensors. These cameras were more reliable than the 14N, but still had their own quirks.

I own an SLR/c and used it as my primary camera with the Canon TS-E lenses for about a year. It produced reasonably good images, but was in for repair three times within that first year.

Kodak discontinued these cameras and no longer supports them, but they can still be found used. I still keep my SLR/c around as a backup camera.

Now, as for Nikon's marketing rational, it's my personal opinion that they don't view a full-frame sensor and the architectural market as being important factors in their overall sales. Nikon banks heavily on customer loyalty and brand identity.

I realize this thread is kind of old, but for what it's worth to anyone else checking out old posts as I am -

I have a Nikon 24MM PC lens. I haven't really used it on interiors yet but I have been satisfied using it on exteriors.

I agree with the early post - this is much more effective than simply stretching those pixels!

Now more than ever--that is if you're after the look of a master architectural photographer. Re-read my previous post.

Alan

I'm a little late to this thread as well, but I can say that I purchased a 24mm Canon TS/E lens about a year ago and it has transformed my architecture business. Before, I was just doing everything through PS and it looked ok, but I was cropping out important parts of my photos. With my TS, not only do I get everything in the frame, but the quality is much more noticable. I believe that any architectural photographer who doesn't use some form of a tilt-shift lens is really missing out. There are certian pieces of gear needed for this type of photography, and a TS lens is at the top of the list.

Regards,
David Massengill Architectural Photography

I agree that the tilt/shift lens is a must for architecture and interior photography but the Canon 24mm lens is nearly useless on cameras with a crop factor of 1.3 and over if working in tight areas.
With full frame this lens is really the only saviour for interior and tight exterior architectural images.
The corrections that can be made from shooting an ultra wide in Photoshop are extra work that many photographers just do net get paid for so the camera images need to be as close as one can get.
I am doing most interior shots on a D300 and I shoot with a 12-24 mm lens which allows me a marginally wider shot than what the 24 would do on a full frame canon. The high angle I shoot from has never been a problem for me when using Photoshop. The extra work I do to get a final image cost me time but there simply is not a wide enough tilt/shift lens available from Nikon.
I am considering to add a D5 to my arsenal just so I can use the 24 which previously was used on film bodies only. Maybe I will just sell the lens as my architectural photography is slowly becoming a very small part of my business.
Rinus

Rinus,
Do you find your photographs work at 12mm? I have tried using super wide lenses, but the widest I can go and make an interior/exterior look natural is 24. Anything past that, and everything seems too compressed in the frame to make things look good. I can see some applications for it, and that's just my style, but just wondered if 12mm works/doesnt work for you?

Regards,
Dave
Architectural Photographer, Knoxville Tennessee