CCD, the modern classic (post yours)

[jbielikowski]

please show how good CCDs are. (even if they are bit obsolete) 😉

 

[x-ray]

Nothing obsolete about them. It's the only game in town in medium format.

 

[Taipei-metro]

Los Angeles, 2013
D80, Nikon lens



D80, one last CCd before D90

 

[Taipei-metro]

Los Angeles

Japanese market, Mitsuwa ミツワ


Nikon D80, Nikkor

 

[Taipei-metro]

Pentax ☆istDL, CCd
Tokyo



train from Sapporo to Otaru City, Japan


Shimbashi, Tokyo

 

[Taipei-metro]

Sony CCd A200, Sony lens
Los Angeles

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Question for the OP or subsequent posters: How would you characterize the difference between a CCD-based image and those made with CMOS sensor?

 

[Keith]

Question for the OP or subsequent posters: How would you characterize the difference between a CCD-based image and those made with CMOS sensor?

The one that produces images at 6400 that don't look like alphabet soup probably won't be the CCD. 😀

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Ahh... so CCD is for photographers that are up and about in daylight; CMOS for the nocturnal sort. 🙂

 

[Keith]

Ahh... so CCD is for photographers that are up and about in daylight; CMOS for the nocturnal sort. 🙂

Perfectly put ... and not far wrong! 😛

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Epson R-D1 (35mm f/1.7 Ultron) with Interline Transfer CCD (Sony ICX413AQ)

 

[Murchu]

Question for the OP or subsequent posters: How would you characterize the difference between a CCD-based image and those made with CMOS sensor?

I'm curious too. I should probably fire up lightroom, and take a look for myself, seeing as I have images made from CCD sensors like the D80 & D200, and also CMOS like the D300. Never noticed much of a difference, noise levels aside, but maybe we're talking subtle differences here ? Genuinely curious really..

 

[jbielikowski]

I knew somebody gonna ask this question. The answer is not easy, and differences are indeed very subtle. Keith is quite right, at higher ISOs its obvious. For me its all about a slight difference in colour rendition, plus CMOS is so perfect and clean I dont like it.

 

[nikkor-watching]

I could tell thumbnails from the D70 CCD apart from other CMOS thumbnails like contemporaneous 20D & later nikons. Wherever the difference really lies, D70 ones looked less real as if the tonal range towards the highlights was not correct. It seemed to pop too early. Maybe it was too short and linear. I never used to scientifically expose with it, and at most would use -1/3 compensation.

 

[Robin P]

Sony A100

 

[ianstamatic]

not trying to troll but i prefer images from d200 ccd to those of the d300 cmos

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

not trying to troll but i prefer images from d200 ccd to those of the d300 cmos

It's interesting that you say so. I find it hard to see any significant difference between my D200 shots and those from my D5100. I think that's a consequence of the speed with which the technology has matured. The changes now are quite subtle.

 

[Murchu]

It's interesting that you say so. I find it hard to see any significant difference between my D200 shots and those from my D5100. I think that's a consequence of the speed with which the technology has matured. The changes now are quite subtle.

I was just about to chime in and say the same. The biggest difference between my d200 & d300 images I've always found to be mainly the lens. I shoot almost entirely raw though, and all images are imported to lightroom and have the same colour profile applied, so perhaps the differences are quite small. With regard to Nikon, the biggest difference to my colour images, I found to be from ED glass.