CCD vs CMOS
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:14
Link
I know what you mean, I just think it's the fact that the images are smaller and have a bit more sharpening.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:24
Link
I honestly think it's not that simple. But thank you
Pentaxophile wrote:
I know what you mean, I just think it's the fact that the images are smaller and have a bit more sharpening.
I know what you mean, I just think it's the fact that the images are smaller and have a bit more sharpening.
www.flickr.com/photos/simac/
www.500px.com/simac
www.500px.com/simac
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:42 - Helpful Comment
Link
In my experience (not scientific, purely subjective), when I've shot CCD sensor cameras in good light with good lenses, I've felt they can outperform similar spec CMOS sensors.
Get into anything other than perfect light however, and CMOS tends to win hands down.
Get into anything other than perfect light however, and CMOS tends to win hands down.
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:46 - Helpful Comment
Link
"...more bite and a certain something" describes exactly how I used to feel about shots from my K-m vs. shots from the K20d I replaced it with (in good light).
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:51
Link
A lot of people seem to comment on the difference. It would be interesting to see two identical shots taken with sensors of both types for analysis.
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:51 - Helpful Comment
Link
This comes up quite often, I have always said that pictures taken with my K10D seem to have a much better look to them when compared to Pentax cameras since (K20D, K-7, K-5, K-5II). The CCD sensor (to me) gives what I call a glossy look to low ISO pictures while the CMOS gives more of a matt look.
Over ISO 800 (and that's really pushing it) I will take the CMOS sensor every time though
Over ISO 800 (and that's really pushing it) I will take the CMOS sensor every time though
Posted 04/10/2013 - 12:59
Link
Thanks Mike, that describes my experience. I love the Kr but I feel that it doesn't have the same 'oomph' at lower ISOs.
Mac
Mac
Mike-P wrote:
This comes up quite often, I have always said that pictures taken with my K10D seem to have a much better look to them when compared to Pentax cameras since (K20D, K-7, K-5, K-5II). The CCD sensor (to me) gives what I call a glossy look to low ISO pictures while the CMOS gives more of a matt look.
Over ISO 800 (and that's really pushing it) I will take the CMOS sensor every time though
This comes up quite often, I have always said that pictures taken with my K10D seem to have a much better look to them when compared to Pentax cameras since (K20D, K-7, K-5, K-5II). The CCD sensor (to me) gives what I call a glossy look to low ISO pictures while the CMOS gives more of a matt look.
Over ISO 800 (and that's really pushing it) I will take the CMOS sensor every time though
www.flickr.com/photos/simac/
www.500px.com/simac
www.500px.com/simac
Posted 04/10/2013 - 13:00
Link
I assume you're looking at JPEGs from the cameras, is that right? Either camera generated embedded jpegs on the LCD screen or camera created & edited JPEGs on a computer screen?
Well, its difficult to be sure you're making a fair comparison unless you're sure you have equalized and eliminated any processing differences, at any stage of the process.
Pentaxophile's point above may not be the full story, but its very likely to be a significant factor.
In my testing of shots from the K5ii / s models it was clear from an early stage that there were different default sharpening algorithms applied to the embedded previews - so it seems likely that there would be considerably wider discrepancies between your two models with years of development and different technologies between them.
Well, its difficult to be sure you're making a fair comparison unless you're sure you have equalized and eliminated any processing differences, at any stage of the process.
Pentaxophile's point above may not be the full story, but its very likely to be a significant factor.
In my testing of shots from the K5ii / s models it was clear from an early stage that there were different default sharpening algorithms applied to the embedded previews - so it seems likely that there would be considerably wider discrepancies between your two models with years of development and different technologies between them.
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Posted 04/10/2013 - 13:05
Link
THank you! Even more unfair as I am comparing RAW conversions from the Kr to JPEG from the K100d Super. Even JPEG to JPEG comparison favours (in my eyes, and it is surely a matter of taste) the older model.
Mac
Mac
McGregNi wrote:
I assume you're looking at JPEGs from the cameras, is that right? Either camera generated embedded jpegs on the LCD screen or camera created & edited JPEGs on a computer screen?
Well, its difficult to be sure you're making a fair comparison unless you're sure you have equalized and eliminated any processing differences, at any stage of the process.
Pentaxophile's point above may not be the full story, but its very likely to be a significant factor.
In my testing of shots from the K5ii / s models it was clear from an early stage that there were different default sharpening algorithms applied to the embedded previews - so it seems likely that there would be considerably wider discrepancies between your two models with years of development and different technologies between them.
I assume you're looking at JPEGs from the cameras, is that right? Either camera generated embedded jpegs on the LCD screen or camera created & edited JPEGs on a computer screen?
Well, its difficult to be sure you're making a fair comparison unless you're sure you have equalized and eliminated any processing differences, at any stage of the process.
Pentaxophile's point above may not be the full story, but its very likely to be a significant factor.
In my testing of shots from the K5ii / s models it was clear from an early stage that there were different default sharpening algorithms applied to the embedded previews - so it seems likely that there would be considerably wider discrepancies between your two models with years of development and different technologies between them.
www.flickr.com/photos/simac/
www.500px.com/simac
www.500px.com/simac
Posted 04/10/2013 - 13:37
Link
johnriley wrote:
Can we see some examples/comparisons?
Can we see some examples/comparisons?
Yes, please check my Flickr Link- the last three uploads.
Mac
www.flickr.com/photos/simac/
www.500px.com/simac
www.500px.com/simac
Posted 04/10/2013 - 13:52
Link
Do you have the same shots taken with both? Then link to your flickr from here to show the differences. Your flickr pages don't make it obvious what one's seeing as a comparison.
John K
John K
John K
Posted 04/10/2013 - 16:47 - Helpful Comment
Link
A powerful set of images indeed. However, putting some on here with descriptions would be very helpful.
Best regards, John
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
659 posts
12 years
Birmingham
I have a Kr currently which I love- I uploaded to Flickr some K100D shots today and took in air when I witnessed what I considered to be shots with more bite and a certain something.
Am I Mad.
Your input is most welcome!
Mac
www.500px.com/simac