Any advantage of CCD over CMOS?

sqrrl · 12-31-2017, 03:44 PM - **1 Like**

I still keep a K10, mainly because the auto exposure is stuffed and I'd probably not make anything from selling it. It did have quite different colours to my K50 (which I've since replaced with the KP), the images subjectively seemed less clinical on the K10, and it seemed to like a greater range of older lenses for some reason - I felt like it just reacted better to warm colours.

That said, The Kp actually seems to be similar in terms of feel, warmth, and producing nice images from old lenses (with a few tweaks in the settings). I did have the intention of selling the K10 and using the K50 as a backup camera to the Kp, but after a few weeks decided to keep the K10 as a studio camera and sell the K50.

So the main thing I use the K10 for now is copy stand macro work (with strobes, so the colour isn't really a factor so much as I can spare the camera for long periods of time without needing to unbolt it), mainly it just stays bolted to the copy stand, and doesn't really get out of the house.

The colour thing used to be a real thing, but the difference now is more subtle. I do still enjoy the K10 though, Great camera.

Kozlok · 12-31-2017, 07:03 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by BigMackCam

It's possible to more-or-less recreate the CCD cameras' colours and tone curve with pretty much any camera by tweaking the hue, saturation and luminance of individual colours in post-processing. I put a lot of time into developing a preset for Lightroom that does just that, for use with my K-3 and K-3II. It gets very close to re-creating the output of a K10D...

I downloaded your profile, and use it quite often. It's not ALWAYS what I'm looking for, but sometimes it just makes an image POP!

Dartmoor Dave · 01-01-2018, 02:13 AM - **1 Like**

Another whole-hearted thumbs up for BigMackCam's CCD emulation plug-in. I've used it for every CMOS shot I've taken since Mike made it available, and it has saved me hours of processing time. I'll still always use an actual CCD when ISO 100 is an option, but for higher ISO settings Mike's plug-in makes CMOS a very acceptable alternative.

Leumas · 02-04-2019, 04:05 PM - **2 Likes**

There is definitely a difference. I just got an old K10D just out of curiosity. Went and shot this photo with a 10 stop ND, and also took a shot with my K1. My K1 was unable to capture ANY of the color variation in this long exposure, and it was flat and monotone. No amount of saturation boosting worked, as the color data simply wasn't there. With the K10D shot, boosting saturation levels revealed all kinds of color.
From my research it seems CCD tech is inherently more sensitive to subtle variations of light frequency and gets better inter-tonal detail.

Last edited by Leumas; 04-04-2019 at 11:40 AM.

ZombieArmy · 02-04-2019, 08:50 PM

I do think CCDs have the opportunity to be better than CMOS, the big problem I think is no one has advanced them for consumers since the late 2000s so you end up comparing old CCD tech to new CMOS tech.

surfar · 02-04-2019, 09:55 PM

CCD costs more, so CMOS took over...10D/200D images are great.

**UncleVanya** · 02-04-2019, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by surfar

CCD costs more, so CMOS took over...10D/200D images are great.

I think there are many other factors that you are ignoring that drove the adoption of cmos.

CCD vs CMOS | Teledyne DALSA

surfar · 02-04-2019, 10:28 PM

Interesting,

...years ago,after a google search I found a simple advantage V disadvantage between the two...basically it was 6 of 1 and half a dozen of another(much like DSLR/mirror less).

It stated CMOS was cheaper to mass produce, naturally I thought that was the sole reason.

I like images from both

**mikesbike** · 02-04-2019, 10:36 PM

I guess I should get to having my otherwise excellent-condition K200D repaired. I've always liked it, but it developed a battery drain situation. I even have the battery grip for it.

I have no issue with colors from my KP, however.

yucafrita · 02-04-2019, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by Leumas

There is definitely a difference. I just got an old K10D just out of curiosity. Went and shot this photo with a 10 stop ND, and also took a shot with my K1. My K1 was unable to capture ANY of the color variation in this long exposure, and it was flat and monotone. No amount of saturation boosting worked, as the color data simply wasn't there. With the K10D shot, boosting saturation levels revealed all kinds of color.
From my research it seems CCD tech is inherently more sensitive to subtle variations of light frequency and gets better inter-tonal detail.

Maybe you could post the K1 shot as well? To see the side-by-side comparison. The K10D shot is really great.

Jonathan Mac · 02-04-2019, 11:16 PM - **1 Like**

CMOS won out over CCD because the data from it can be read much more quickly, hence CMOS sensors are suitable for video while CCDs are not.

My old K200D has a CCD in it but I haven't used it for a while. Did the images have better colour than those from my K-3? It's hard to say but I've never had any complaints about the K-3 images and overall I think the image quality is higher.

**UncleVanya** · 02-05-2019, 06:28 AM

Things like live view and high ISO shooting and movies all reprieve on cmos sensors. But the higher uniformity of cmos works better with astrophotography and other specialized photography so it hadn't died out.

I suspect some of the cost is due to economy of scale.

**hyyz** · 02-05-2019, 09:06 AM

A few years ago, when I went to National Parks in Utah and Arizona, I brought K10D and K-5. I thought I took better pictures with K10D. Pictures have better color, are more solid and 3D look. Pictures taken with K-5, though also excellent, lack the color, 3D look, and solid feel.

normhead · 02-05-2019, 09:16 AM

I've been going through older files, the older CCD images just don't hold up. The biggest difference being reduced shadow detail and colour accuracy in under-exposed areas. I think CCD is fine as long as the scene's dynamic range does not exceed the camera's. I sold my K20D after realizing I was never again going to be happy with it's images. Looking a back over 8 years of photos, it was the right choice. I came across a number of images worth going back and re-shooting with current gear. Just my opinion.

**UncleVanya** · 02-05-2019, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I've been going through older files, the older CCD images just don't hold up. The biggest difference being reduced shadow detail and colour accuracy in under-exposed areas. I think CCD is fine as long as the scene's dynamic range does not exceed the camera's. I sold my K20D after realizing I was never again going to be happy with it's images. Looking a back over 8 years of photos, it was the right choice. I came across a number of images worth going back and re-shooting with current gear. Just my opinion.

My experience is similar but I was comparing K100D to K50 - not the most fair comparison on my part.

02-04-2019, 10:28 PM	#23
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	Interesting,...years ago,after a google search I found a simple advantage V disadvantage between the two...basically it was 6 of 1 and half a dozen of another(much like DSLR/mirror less). It stated CMOS was cheaper to mass produce, naturally I thought that was the sole reason. I like images from both

02-04-2019, 10:59 PM	#25
yucafrita Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 459	Originally posted by Leumas There is definitely a difference. I just got an old K10D just out of curiosity. Went and shot this photo with a 10 stop ND, and also took a shot with my K1. My K1 was unable to capture ANY of the color variation in this long exposure, and it was flat and monotone. No amount of saturation boosting worked, as the color data simply wasn't there. With the K10D shot, boosting saturation levels revealed all kinds of color. From my research it seems CCD tech is inherently more sensitive to subtle variations of light frequency and gets better inter-tonal detail. Maybe you could post the K1 shot as well? To see the side-by-side comparison. The K10D shot is really great. Last edited by yucafrita; 02-05-2019 at 12:26 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is there any advantage to a regular SD card over a Micro SD in terms of performance?	bladerunner6	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	06-21-2016 12:43 PM
CCD versus CMOS	Jean Basile	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	20	05-14-2015 04:03 AM
K10D CCD vs. CMOS K 20D	kleinstein	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	05-18-2010 12:34 AM
CCD Vs CMOS	MikePerham	Pentax DSLR Discussion	20	08-13-2008 05:39 PM
advantage of CMOS	vanguy	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	01-23-2008 10:27 PM

12-31-2017, 03:44 PM - 1 Like	#16
sqrrl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: Otago, New Zealand Posts: 422	I still keep a K10, mainly because the auto exposure is stuffed and I'd probably not make anything from selling it. It did have quite different colours to my K50 (which I've since replaced with the KP), the images subjectively seemed less clinical on the K10, and it seemed to like a greater range of older lenses for some reason - I felt like it just reacted better to warm colours. That said, The Kp actually seems to be similar in terms of feel, warmth, and producing nice images from old lenses (with a few tweaks in the settings). I did have the intention of selling the K10 and using the K50 as a backup camera to the Kp, but after a few weeks decided to keep the K10 as a studio camera and sell the K50. So the main thing I use the K10 for now is copy stand macro work (with strobes, so the colour isn't really a factor so much as I can spare the camera for long periods of time without needing to unbolt it), mainly it just stays bolted to the copy stand, and doesn't really get out of the house. The colour thing used to be a real thing, but the difference now is more subtle. I do still enjoy the K10 though, Great camera.

12-31-2017, 07:03 PM - 1 Like	#17
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	Originally posted by BigMackCam It's possible to more-or-less recreate the CCD cameras' colours and tone curve with pretty much any camera by tweaking the hue, saturation and luminance of individual colours in post-processing. I put a lot of time into developing a preset for Lightroom that does just that, for use with my K-3 and K-3II. It gets very close to re-creating the output of a K10D... I downloaded your profile, and use it quite often. It's not ALWAYS what I'm looking for, but sometimes it just makes an image POP!

01-01-2018, 02:13 AM - 1 Like	#18
Dartmoor Dave Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Dartmoor, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,882	Another whole-hearted thumbs up for BigMackCam's CCD emulation plug-in. I've used it for every CMOS shot I've taken since Mike made it available, and it has saved me hours of processing time. I'll still always use an actual CCD when ISO 100 is an option, but for higher ISO settings Mike's plug-in makes CMOS a very acceptable alternative.

02-04-2019, 04:05 PM - 2 Likes	#19
Leumas Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 454	There is definitely a difference. I just got an old K10D just out of curiosity. Went and shot this photo with a 10 stop ND, and also took a shot with my K1. My K1 was unable to capture ANY of the color variation in this long exposure, and it was flat and monotone. No amount of saturation boosting worked, as the color data simply wasn't there. With the K10D shot, boosting saturation levels revealed all kinds of color. From my research it seems CCD tech is inherently more sensitive to subtle variations of light frequency and gets better inter-tonal detail. Last edited by Leumas; 04-04-2019 at 11:40 AM.

02-04-2019, 08:50 PM	#20
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210	I do think CCDs have the opportunity to be better than CMOS, the big problem I think is no one has advanced them for consumers since the late 2000s so you end up comparing old CCD tech to new CMOS tech.

02-04-2019, 09:55 PM	#21
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	CCD costs more, so CMOS took over...10D/200D images are great.

02-04-2019, 10:09 PM	#22
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by surfar CCD costs more, so CMOS took over...10D/200D images are great. I think there are many other factors that you are ignoring that drove the adoption of cmos. CCD vs CMOS \| Teledyne DALSA

02-04-2019, 10:36 PM	#24
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	I guess I should get to having my otherwise excellent-condition K200D repaired. I've always liked it, but it developed a battery drain situation. I even have the battery grip for it. I have no issue with colors from my KP, however.

02-04-2019, 11:16 PM - 1 Like	#26
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,894	CMOS won out over CCD because the data from it can be read much more quickly, hence CMOS sensors are suitable for video while CCDs are not. My old K200D has a CCD in it but I haven't used it for a while. Did the images have better colour than those from my K-3? It's hard to say but I've never had any complaints about the K-3 images and overall I think the image quality is higher.

02-05-2019, 06:28 AM	#27
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Things like live view and high ISO shooting and movies all reprieve on cmos sensors. But the higher uniformity of cmos works better with astrophotography and other specialized photography so it hadn't died out. I suspect some of the cost is due to economy of scale.

02-05-2019, 09:06 AM	#28
hyyz Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Michigan Posts: 478	A few years ago, when I went to National Parks in Utah and Arizona, I brought K10D and K-5. I thought I took better pictures with K10D. Pictures have better color, are more solid and 3D look. Pictures taken with K-5, though also excellent, lack the color, 3D look, and solid feel.

02-05-2019, 09:16 AM	#29
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I've been going through older files, the older CCD images just don't hold up. The biggest difference being reduced shadow detail and colour accuracy in under-exposed areas. I think CCD is fine as long as the scene's dynamic range does not exceed the camera's. I sold my K20D after realizing I was never again going to be happy with it's images. Looking a back over 8 years of photos, it was the right choice. I came across a number of images worth going back and re-shooting with current gear. Just my opinion.

02-05-2019, 09:22 AM	#30
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by normhead I've been going through older files, the older CCD images just don't hold up. The biggest difference being reduced shadow detail and colour accuracy in under-exposed areas. I think CCD is fine as long as the scene's dynamic range does not exceed the camera's. I sold my K20D after realizing I was never again going to be happy with it's images. Looking a back over 8 years of photos, it was the right choice. I came across a number of images worth going back and re-shooting with current gear. Just my opinion. My experience is similar but I was comparing K100D to K50 - not the most fair comparison on my part.