[Erikka]

Although I personally can't notice a difference due to horrible eyesight ( I blame the eye surgery at 18months old) I know a lot of ppl seems to like/love/prefer CCD sensors such my old K200D but is there an actual explainable difference in how it captures images and what the characteristics are?

[bertwert]

CCD is a type of sensor.
The other common one is CMOS.
What is the difference between CCD and CMOS image sensors in a digital camera? | HowStuffWorks

APS-C is the size of the sensor.

[Erikka]

CCD is a type of sensor.
The other common one is CMOS.
What is the difference between CCD and CMOS image sensors in a digital camera? | HowStuffWorks

APS-C is the size of the sensor.

ahhh ok, thanks for that.

[kiwi_jono]

I'm not sure if the arguments in that article are that valid anymore with the advances that CMOS sensor technology has made.

In most regards CMOS sensors have surpassed CCD sensors.

That said some swear by CCD and would be interested to see a real life comparison of a scene.

[Adam]

The sensor type seems to be a case of personal preference combined with perhaps a bit of pixie dust and an appreciation of older camera models. Most cameras use CMOS sensors these days because they consume a lot less power, and are thus suitable for live view and video use.

In the early days of CMOS sensors, CCD chips were actually superior because CCD technology was both more mature and inherently more sensitive to light (i.e. better colors and less noise in images). CMOS emerged as a lower-cost alternative with a different technical implementation that also allowed for much lower power consumption. CMOS has for the most part caught up in terms of fidelity and that's why today's best sensors are mostly CMOS. These sensors also helped reduce camera prices over time, since they are comparatively easy to manufacture.

[Erikka]

The sensor type seems to be a case of personal preference combined with perhaps a bit of pixie dust and an appreciation of older camera models. Most cameras use CMOS sensors these days because they consume a lot less power, and are thus suitable for live view and video use.

In the early days of CMOS sensors, CCD chips were actually superior because CCD technology was both more mature and inherently more sensitive to light (i.e. better colors and less noise in images). CMOS emerged as a lower-cost alternative with a different technical implementation that also allowed for much lower power consumption. CMOS has for the most part caught up in terms of fidelity and that's why today's best sensors are mostly CMOS. These sensors also helped reduce camera prices over time, since they are comparatively easy to manufacture.

thanks Adam, yeah I was always wondering if there was something my faulty eyesight was missing that others simply could see, so maybe is just part nostalgia and part perception then heh

[MadMathMind]

In the early days of CMOS sensors, CCD chips were actually superior because CCD technology was both more mature and inherently more sensitive to light (i.e. better colors and less noise in images). CMOS emerged as a lower-cost alternative with a different technical implementation that also allowed for much lower power consumption. CMOS has for the most part caught up in terms of fidelity and that's why today's best sensors are mostly CMOS. These sensors also helped reduce camera prices over time, since they are comparatively easy to manufacture.

In the medical imaging field, CCD sensors are still largely used. In those applications, cost and the higher power consumption are not terribly important.

[yucatanPentax]

There is a difference in the "look" from the different sensor types.
Technically, CMOS are better these days and absolutely have better high ISO performance with higher resolutions, but there are still some who love the older style "look," particularly from images taken in good light.

Still an active thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/129204-anyone-else-miss-k200d.html

[Nickrs]

As an astro-imager I can confirm that CMOS sensors are replacing CCD in most specialist astronomy cameras, I noticed this trend four or five years ago and now most amateur cameras are CMOS and easy outperform the older CCD versions, they are cheaper too. :-)

[audiobomber]

There is a different in the "look" from the different sensor types.

The difference is due to a warmer white balance in the old Sony CCD sensors, IMO. Here's my proof:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/301944-keep-my-c...ml#post3345413

[Dartmoor Dave]

In most regards CMOS sensors have surpassed CCD sensors. That said some swear by CCD and would be interested to see a real life comparison of a scene.

A couple of months ago I did a quick, hand-held, completely non-scientific comparison between the 20MP CMOS in the K-S1 and the 10MP CCD in the Samsung GX-10 version of the K10D. Both shots are with the Super Takumar 20mm/4.5 at f/8 at 1/250 and ISO100. Straight raw to jpeg conversions with no post-processing trickery.

K-S1



GX-10 (identical to K10D)



A few caveats:

The K10D sensor in the GX-10 is particularly well suited to shooting with my beloved Takumars, while the K-S1 sensor seems extremely badly suited to them. The K-S1 gives much more vibrant results with modern lenses, and I never use it with my Takumars anymore.

The K-S1 sensor is not exactly at the bleeding edge of CMOS design. I'd love to see how the K-1's rendering compares with the K10D, but it's out of my price range.

The CMOS shot could be made to match the CCD shot with some work on vibrance and saturation in post-processing, while CCD shots tend to look much better straight out of the camera. My personal impression is that CMOS shots in general need more processing.

So please don't take this as in any way conclusive as a comparison between CMOS and CCD. It's simply my own personal test with the equipment I happened to have to hand

[Auzzie-Phoenix]

I don't see much of a difference if any outside of the vibrance of the blue in the sky. Changing color mode to vibrant would put the K-S1 closer to the 2nd image. The one thing I've noticed with CCD vs. CMOS is that the old CCD sensors capture more natural colors with less need for tweaking.

[ChristianRock]

I don't see much of a difference if any outside of the vibrance of the blue in the sky. Changing color mode to vibrant would put the K-S1 closer to the 2nd image. The one thing I've noticed with CCD vs. CMOS is that the old CCD sensors capture more natural colors with less need for tweaking.

I see quite a difference in the grass and ground color...

We went over these pictures before, in the K10D Club thread. The interesting thing is that both pictures were taken with the exact same white balance (set manually), so the differences you see are the different renderings from the sensors.

I enjoy my K-S1 and K-r but I'm not going to let that K10D go To me, if the light is good or if my lens is fast, it is a joy to use. My next purchase will probably be a Sigma 30 1.4 just so I can use my K10D more often indoors.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

There is something magical about those older CCD sensors that CMOS sensors can't seem to replicate. I've compared similar low ISO shots from my old 10MP CCD Sony A200 DSLR to my 16MP CMOS Pentax K-50 & the shots from the A200 have something that the K-50 can't seem to equal.

Yeah. The A200 was practically useless after ISO 800, but when shot at ISO 100, it was like magic! However, my K-50 can be shot up to ISO 6400 for really good pictures or up to ISO 12800 for decent looking pictures. That's something my old A200 couldn't even dream of doing. Like usual, you give up something for something else.

I'm going to look for an older K10D to play with......

[Nickrs]

30 seconds with Lightroom or Aftershot Pro could adjust the image to your preference. I wonder which image is most colour accurate to life? Actually I wonder which eye is most colour accurate? I had cataract surgery a couple of years following a number of retinal detachments and now there are subtle differences in colour perception between my eyes, blues seen through my "bionic" eye seem to be slightly paler. :-)