[ChristianRock]

Great article that gives a good clear explanation of two key differences in the CCD: the bigger light gathering area per pixel and the consistency given by the single set of readout electronics.

A thing that's really struck me from the other recent thread where a member asked about getting a K10D was the assumptions made in some of the replies. There was a clear assumption that the only reason we could still be using the K10D/GX-10 is that we're ignorant newbies who are unaware of all the features found in newer cameras. So that all they had to do was inform of us what we're missing, and we'd see the error of our ways and all start using CMOS cameras.

I think by the end we'd managed between us to get the point across that actually we know exactly what we're doing and why, and that it's a personal aesthetic choice that we're free to make.

Ah don't get me started now

It's like saying, if you are a painter and someone says to you: this new type of canvas is much superior to the older kind of canvas (when in truth it's just cheaper to make, so we stopped trying to improve the old one) and now all painters who know what they are doing must use the new canvas, otherwise they are luddites and their paintings are no good. Nevermind the "old" canvas is already much "better" technically than the one the most famous painters in history used.

It seems like for some people, photography is nothing but a technical exercise. In art there have always been, and there always will be, aesthetic choices, and also personal preference choices. Otherwise, all painters would have to use the same kind of paint on the same kind of canvas, but every one finds what kind expresses their artistic vision better (I wonder if artistic vision even means anything to those people whose favorite exercise seems to be performing sharpness tests in their basement or backyard).

Ah you had to get me started

Another thing that surprised me from the article is that a lot of things that we thought were advances brought by CMOS, like backlit sensors - were actually innovations that were invented for CCDs first. They haven't stopped developing CCDs - and the article is part of the blog of a company that actually manufactures scientific imaging devices, and they use CCDs because they are still more advanced for that use. In fact they bought the assets of another company in 2014 so they would be able to have CCDs available for their uses, and they still make them. They do expect that at some point CMOS will be the only game in town though. And it makes sense since cell phones made the development of CMOS just take off in the last few years.

Long live the CCDs

[subsea]

Monument to the Discoveries and the Empire Square fountain in Belém - Lisbon in 2010.

[dbs]

Looks like I'll have to upgrade my K100D for a 10 then.


Dave

[rayallen]

Ah don't get me started now

It's like saying, if you are a painter and someone says to you: this new type of canvas is much superior to the older kind of canvas (when in truth it's just cheaper to make, so we stopped trying to improve the old one) and now all painters who know what they are doing must use the new canvas, otherwise they are luddites and their paintings are no good. Nevermind the "old" canvas is already much "better" technically than the one the most famous painters in history used.

It seems like for some people, photography is nothing but a technical exercise. In art there have always been, and there always will be, aesthetic choices, and also personal preference choices. Otherwise, all painters would have to use the same kind of paint on the same kind of canvas, but every one finds what kind expresses their artistic vision better (I wonder if artistic vision even means anything to those people whose favorite exercise seems to be performing sharpness tests in their basement or backyard).

Ah you had to get me started

Another thing that surprised me from the article is that a lot of things that we thought were advances brought by CMOS, like backlit sensors - were actually innovations that were invented for CCDs first. They haven't stopped developing CCDs - and the article is part of the blog of a company that actually manufactures scientific imaging devices, and they use CCDs because they are still more advanced for that use. In fact they bought the assets of another company in 2014 so they would be able to have CCDs available for their uses, and they still make them. They do expect that at some point CMOS will be the only game in town though. And it makes sense since cell phones made the development of CMOS just take off in the last few years.

Long live the CCDs

I have been meaning to thank you, CR, for the link to that article. I had no idea of the technical differences between CCD and CMOS sensors. I happily admit that I didn't understand everything that was explained in the article but I did get a warm feeling about why the images from my CCD-equipped K10D are so aesthetically pleasing to me and those who participate here. The difference is real and not just something we imagine.

Both you and Dave have summed it up so well. May our Pentax K10Ds and Samsung GX-10s live on forever and continue to give us much joy.

[subsea]

Detail on the Monument to the Discoveries in Belém - Lisbon in 2010.

[subsea]

The opposite side of the Monument to the Discoveries.

[paulh]

A June sunset - DA18-135 on K10D:

[subsea]

Portuguese wall tile in Lisbon, 2010.

[WorksAsIntended]

In terms of ergonomics I think of the k10d as the very best.
If they'd put a new af module, 100% viewfinder, second sd card slot, a new display on the back (same size, just better dpi and colour) and a modern sensor inside, I would be willing to pay quite a lot for the camera. The k10d just had the perfect body to me.

[Dartmoor Dave]

. . . and a modern sensor inside. . .

!!!!!

But the sensor is the whole reason why we love it!

[WorksAsIntended]

I love ir as an art toy, but with a modern sensor I would think of it as a CaNikon-killer

[Dartmoor Dave]

How NOT to win friends and influence people:

I love ir as an art toy

And please don't give us the usual spiel about megapixels, dynamic range, high ISO, etc. . .

Clearly my personal aesthetic choices about what I want my photos to look like are different than yours. I'm comfortable with that, and I promise you that I'll never try to convince you that your choices are wrong. Please do me the same courtesy.

[WorksAsIntended]

I never tried to convince anybody the k10d is a bad camera. I used it for more than 100k pictures, I think I am confident knowing its pros an cons.
For me personal it is not number one anymore, which does not mean it has to be the same for you.
The modern sensor was for a hypothetical new camera (k-new in k10d body).
What I tried to say is only that I miss the ergonomics of the k10d on the current cameras.

[cartesio]

---------- Post added 18-01-20 at 21:15 ----------



---------- Post added 18-01-20 at 21:16 ----------

[paulh]

wilted and wet...Super Tak 35/3.5 on K10D: