CCD vs CMOS: Can you tell which is which?{merged}

[dfarkas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good idea but your pics are too small David. Would it be possible to get at least 10MB files?

 

You can click on the images for a larger view, but I assume you mean you want to see full-size files. The test isn't to see which is more detailed, or which is sharper. Also, given the resolution difference of the two cameras, the answers would be much more obvious.

 

My real goal was to see if there was some immediately identifiable and recognizable look inherent to CCD files. This has been the assertion from those favoring CCD over CMOS, that it is impossible to produce the same color and tonality. I feel the images are large enough to judge color and tone and not be so big as to bog down the Internet.

[dfarkas]

When evaluating images, if all we have are monitor presentations then it is a waste. Monitor presentations on a web page are already compromised, unless perhaps they contain a color profile and the browser (Safari, for example) considers it.

.

 

Sending prints to everyone didn't seem a very practical option.

 

Most of us using digital cameras and processing our own files are used to correcting and judging images on screen. I'd guess that most have pretty decent monitors.

 

Yes, the files do have a color profile, sRGB, which matches most LCD color gamuts fairly closely. And yes, Safari, Firefox and Chrome are color profile aware.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[dpitt]

My goal was to see if there was a "CCD Look" that was unattainable, even with processing.

 

Good idea.

Not sure if we are only comparing CCD versus CMOS here. IMO we are comparing the complete chain of elctronics in M9 versus M240.

 

 

When I look at the images the camera that took the first image nr 1 looks more 3D and 'warmer' to me. This look is easy to recognize in most of the nr 1 images. I counted 5 images where this look is on image nr 2 in stead of 1.

All in al they are close enough to make it hard to distinguish without direct comparison IMO.

[CheshireCat]

Thanks, interesting test.

 

However:

 

- sRGB conversion castrates the color gamut. This is a real bummer, as color is what most people cite as the biggest plus of CCD sensors.

 

- The difference in dynamic range makes it easier to spot the M9 where color differences are otherwise subtle.

 

- The web resolution hides the differences in shadow noise.

 

In any case, if not the evanescent "CCD look", I am confident I have spotted the "M9 look" in most photos. Especially those with the lovely blue San Francisco sky

[BerndReini]

David, first of all thank you for doing this. The photographs are very close. I wonder how I fared in my results. I do think I can see the difference in most photographs, but on some I have to guess.

 

I did a similar exercise when I played with both cameras. Now the interesting thing to me though was that after opening the photographs in Lightroom, I always spent more time processing the M240 photographs than the M9 pictures. This is what made me pass on the camera possibly until the next model. Would you agree that you feel more need to tweak the M240 files in post at base ISO?

[kdriceman]

 

Not sure if we are only comparing CCD versus CMOS here. IMO we are comparing the complete chain of elctronics in M9 versus M240.

 

 

 

 

For sure. Not only the complete chain of electronics, but also software, firmware, color profiles and on and on. It's a comparison of images produced by the M9 vs the M240 - which might be interesting to many - but there are too many variables to call it a CCD vs CMOS comparison.

[dugby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do I remember climbing Lombard Street..... having just walked all the way from Fisherman's Wharf, so puffed I can't remember which of the CCD/CMOS shots you show represents what i saw...

[otto.f]

Good initiative! I must admit it was very hard to make a choice, which was not what I expected

[NZDavid]

Another question is do people prefer the CCD look (assuming they can recognize it)? I preferred most of those I selected as CCDs, even if only marginally. Of course I may be completely wrong.

[elmars]

Look here for my comparison:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/361314-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-2.html#post2889875

 

Elmar

[elmars]

Look here for my comparison:

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/361314-400-leica-photographers-agree-we-love-2.html#post2889875

 

 

Elmar

[Doc Henry]

Hi David thank you for this test.

The ideal is that there is no correction

With a film like Kodak Portra and M7, I almost do not correct or I do not correct

Erwin Puts had mentioned that the M9 gives a "vivid" color and the M240 a "neutral" color

and I agree with him.

Best

Henry

[jaapv]

I think it is not too early to notice that participants are struggling - the votes are all approximately 50-50. It is time for those who really see a difference to participate!

[lct]

My real goal was to see if there was some immediately identifiable and recognizable look inherent to CCD files. This has been the assertion from those favoring CCD over CMOS, that it is impossible to produce the same color and tonality. I feel the images are large enough to judge color and tone and not be so big as to bog down the Internet.

It is your prerogative of course and i do like your idea but i feel totally unable to draw any conclusion from pictures that small processed differently personally. YMMV.

[jaapv]

Well, the conclusion could be that the images, each processed properly, are hard to tell apart, i.e. perceived differences are caused by processing them identically, thus one set sub-optimally.

[pgk]

Well, the conclusion could be that the images, each processed properly, are hard to tell apart, i.e. perceived differences are caused by processing them identically, thus one set sub-optimally.

It depends too on the workflow. I'm not so sure that the comparison images can tell us much. They are of good, straight subject matter but in my experience processing a file requires an understanding of what your endpoint is intended to be and with such straight images (sorry David, I appreciate your efforts) the endpoint will be to achieve a high degree of similarity. My workflow on some images is very different and my endpoint will be likewise.

 

IMO it is when lenses and sensors are operating under 'stress' (ie with difficult or awkward lighting, contrast and subject matter) that they show their distinctive 'personalities'. As I said in another thread, it is the shift in workflow from one generation of camera to the next which I find frustrating and if a CMOS sensor camera could achieve a very similar workflow under 'stressed' conditions as a CCD sensor camera then I would be happy. As it is I have to learn (and utilise) different workflows for each camera.....

 

And FWIW I have no idea which shot is from which camera.

[jaapv]

It depends on many things. I agree with Leica.The lens gathers the light, the filter array shapes the light, the sensor captures the light, the camera software interpolates and creates the file and the user creates the image.

 

Note that the sensor is the only passive element in the chain.

[Lenshacker]

M9:

Lombard-Street-2 x

Walkway-with-Puple-Flowers-2 x

Apartments-1 x

Gate-2

Modern-Building-2 x

Skyscraper-2 x

Slippers-2 x

Red-Cards-2 x

Scarves-1

Church-Windows-2 x

Pier-39-1 x

Steps-2 x

Magenta-Tulips-1

Sailboats-in-front-of-Alcatraz-1 x

Bay-Boat-Tour-2

Fishing-Boats-Bows-2 x

Life-Preserver-1 x

Fishing-Dock-1 x

Streetcar-1 x

 

Well, we'll see if my algorithm is working. Those with an "x" are with two metrics.

 

I could not see any visual differences that jumped out at me.

 

I would also like to add- CMOS sensors have various acquisition modes that change their responses under firmware control. The CMOSIS 20MPixel full-frame sensor has modes for extending dynamic range to 90dB in a non-linear fashion. This CMOSIS sensor is being used in a student project. CMOS sensors do have salient processing features, both analog and digital, that affect the image. These are under camera firmware control.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Lenshacker

[otto.f]

It's a pity that these are all shots in full daylight mostly sunlit, few shadows or clouded sky, no shots in available light, no tungsten etc. lit situations.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[luigi bertolotti]

Me too tend to attribute almost any #1 to M9... but the fact that the general consensus is impressively around 50% (from a quick evaluation) it seems to me that the only possible conclusion is that the differences are not so significant... expecially on screen images...

If I had to say a quick conclusion the only phrase that comes to my mind is "dynamic range is different"

Edited February 25, 2015 by luigi bertolotti