CCD vs CMOS

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, pedaes said:

Remember this marathon piece of work David Farkus did when the first CMOS M arrived?

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/03/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-3/

But people will still believe what they want to believe.

Matching M9? 

Just let each to get its best then see which one is more preferable,  get as broad audience as possible. 
Of course, the post-processor’s skill and taste matters, but it would be hard to avoid.

Edited October 26, 2024 by Einst_Stein

[Advertisement]

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

[tappan]

14 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

Matching M9? 

Just let each to get its best then see which one is more preferable,  get as broad audience as possible. 
Of course, the post-processor’s skill and taste matters, but it would be hard to avoid.

I want to do the least amount of post processing.
I want the straight out of camera to be so realistically comparable to the scene that I remembered when I captured the photo.
The just a little post processing. Is that too much to ask for Leica?

[Jeff S]

24 minutes ago, tappan said:

Is that too much to ask for Leica?

Yes. Cameras with high DR typically yield flat files out of camera.  This can be adjusted in seconds by altering the tone curve, and can even be saved as an automatic default import. JPEGs are someone else’s file interpretation; I far prefer dealing with malleable RAW/DNG files. People visualize scenes differently. Processing to taste has always been required for optimal results, even in film days. The best photographers and printers understood this well.  It’s never been plug and play, “insta” cameras aside, at least not for superior results.

Jeff

Edited October 26, 2024 by Jeff S

[Einst_Stein]

50 minutes ago, tappan said:

I want to do the least amount of post processing.
I want the straight out of camera to be so realistically comparable to the scene that I remembered when I captured the photo.
The just a little post processing. Is that too much to ask for Leica?

If that suits you normally, then so be it. Most serious photographers don’t do that. 
What I see is you are conducting a self-fulfill comparison. If you really want to find the truth for yourself, try something different. 
You don’t ask a French chef to cook a Chinese dish then asking people to judge how they match. Certainly this is not a way to compare which dish is better. 

Edited October 26, 2024 by Einst_Stein

[pedaes]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

(Farkas)

Ta! I should be more careful!

[250swb]

4 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

If that suits you normally, then so be it. Most serious photographers don’t do that. 
What I see is you are conducting a self-fulfill comparison. If you really want to find the truth for yourself, try something different. 
You don’t ask a French chef to cook a Chinese dish then asking people to judge how they match. Certainly this is not a way to compare which dish is better. 

And I don't see it like that. In a scene with bright clouds and dark shadows your eye can't take in both, but what you see is your reality and you go back and forth seeing detail in shadows and squinting at the bright clouds. It is human reality and you pick what is important when exposing the photograph. But with a vast dynamic range you don't see a human reality you see a cameras version of reality showing things you could never take in at the same time. Hence the bland photographs we see from high dynamic range cameras, and yes the images could be adjusted in post processing but for the fact that if people buy a $9,000 camera they often sit back and assume somebody else will be cooking dinner for them.

Edited October 26, 2024 by 250swb

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, 250swb said:

And I don't see it like that. In a scene with bright clouds and dark shadows your eye can't take in both, but what you see is your reality and you go back and forth seeing detail in shadows and squinting at the bright clouds. It is human reality and you pick what is important when exposing the photograph. But with a vast dynamic range you don't see a human reality you see a cameras version of reality showing things you could never take in at the same time. Hence the bland photographs we see from high dynamic range cameras, and yes the images could be adjusted in post processing but for the fact that if people buy a $9,000 camera they often sit back and assume somebody else will be cooking dinner for them.

I assume we are talking about CCD vs CMOS, may be Leica Dlux 5 vs. Leica Dlux 6, not a $300 Canon G7 vs. a $10000 Canon 1D. 

So your concern is not necesary.

Edited October 26, 2024 by Einst_Stein

[Anthony MD]

On 10/25/2024 at 3:05 PM, Einst_Stein said:

I used to prefer CCD when CMOS sensor is new to me, but now I prefer CMOS. 

CMOS sensor can support wider dynamic range and higher ISO among other advantages.   

CMOS sensors might not look as good as CCD sensors but they have more accurate colors…📷

[Anthony MD]

On 10/25/2024 at 4:43 PM, 250swb said:

A CCD sensor is more closely associated with a film like look, with a bit more character than can be generated by endless dynamic range and ridiculous ISO range of a CMOS. If Leica could come up with a new CCD sensor M they'd sell a ton of cameras absolutely no doubt about it. 

I still believe CMOS sensors tend to render color more accurately than CCD sensors…!

[Anthony MD]

On 10/25/2024 at 9:32 PM, Einst_Stein said:

The basic difference between CMOS and CCD is how the bit-info is passed out. CCD is dumped bit by bit to it he neighbor bit and eventually shifted out, while CMOS is direct sent out throug the guided network. There is nothing makes CMO or  CCD more analog. Any such suggestion is imagination.

At most, CCD has a CCD-like look, while CMOS has a CMOS-like look. Like film has a film0like look while digital has a digital-like look.

Which is subjectively better? Your calll. But objectively, CMOS has much better capability. Period.

You can get your preferred what-ever look, in the inferior sense, if you are wiling to work hard on your post-processing. 

CMOS has more accurate colors whilst CCD has more attractive color…!

[Anthony MD]

On 10/25/2024 at 9:32 PM, Einst_Stein said:

The basic difference between CMOS and CCD is how the bit-info is passed out. CCD is dumped bit by bit to it he neighbor bit and eventually shifted out, while CMOS is direct sent out throug the guided network. There is nothing makes CMO or  CCD more analog. Any such suggestion is imagination.

At most, CCD has a CCD-like look, while CMOS has a CMOS-like look. Like film has a film0like look while digital has a digital-like look.

Which is subjectively better? Your calll. But objectively, CMOS has much better capability. Period.

You can get your preferred what-ever look, in the inferior sense, if you are wiling to work hard on your post-processing. 

 

15 hours ago, tappan said:

I see a lot of how people writing how they like the straight from camera "film" look of a CCD. What I simply WANT from (hopefully) the M12, is NOT necessarily a "film" look straight from camera but a reality look. With my old M9-P (I SOLD IT), I used to be able to count on this closer-to-reality (what I saw when I captured the photo) straight from camera quality.
I don't get that from my M10-R, though it is a little better with my M10-P.

Exactly, CMOS is the more accurate in terms of its color rendering…!

[Anthony MD]

13 hours ago, Luke_Miller said:

I went through the CCD -> CMOS transition with both Nikon and Leica.  Other than the improved CMOS ISO performance I never noticed any other image quality differences. 

I do notice now CMOS sensors get color more realistically and true to life than CCD…!

[Anthony MD]

On 12/14/2023 at 5:47 AM, overexposed said:

i hated the Sony A7RII files, i hated the M240-P files, i hated the Fuji GFX100 files(not really hated but well..) i loved my P45+ files, my IQ180 files and currently my P65+ files.

I wonder why?

even though i dont hate my M10-R files, i dont love them. there is always something different about CCD files.

i always wondered if its the BSI sensors that do something different, but then the M240-P sensor was not BSI

 

no no no, CCD all the way!

CCD colors might look more appealing but are they more accurate…?

[250swb]

3 hours ago, Anthony MD said:

I do notice now CMOS sensors get color more realistically and true to life than CCD…!

Maybe a valid point if you are a scientist but when was colour accuracy ever 'a thing' with photographers? I know there is an industry set up to pander to the paranoia surrounding colour accuracy but this is a relatively recent thing, and even in the digital age you could buy an Olympus for 'Olympus colour' or a Sony for 'Sony colour' etc. and they can't all be right. For the life of me I can't remember if it's ever happened before in the history of photography that true to life colour was important. Let me know.

[costa43]

The m8 produces files that please me more than any other M ‘straight out of camera’ I find the lack of a suitable IR filter in that camera gives you an acutance to the image that other colour models cannot match and the colours with an IR cut filter are really pleasing as a starting point, irrespective of the software used to convert the dng files. I find that the lower resolution and dynamic range give you a natural look to the image that is near impossible to replicate in post in different lighting conditions, especially with people pics. 
I totally get that cmos sensors are technically superior and give you far more creative scope in post to achieve the look you are after but the CCD output at base iso is the best Leica has ever done imo. They are closer to a film experience for me than any other body due to the iso restriction and the consideration one must make when taking these cameras out in lower light. It’s a shame Leica didn’t think of the screen less version during this era, that would have been a cool camera. 

All that said, I could not live with just a ccd camera now but will always keep the m8 alongside my more modern collection. Of all the cameras I’ve bought and sold over the years, I only regret selling the m9m. 
 

 

[LocalHero1953]

Curious why you're running two threads on CCD vs CMOS @Anthony MD? The other one's been running for a year.
Perhaps they could be merged, both to avoid repetition (forlorn hope) and clogging up the 'New Content' streams.

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, costa43 said:

I only regret selling the m9m

I'm glad not selling mine while M246 came.

Sometimes, buying back an M can ( ...not always) cure "regret".

Many times, the "buying back device" upsets because "it's not the same", life is not simple.

[Einst_Stein]

6 hours ago, Anthony MD said:

CMOS has more accurate colors whilst CCD has more attractive color…!

Is this a “word salads”?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Einst_Stein]

3 hours ago, 250swb said:

Maybe a valid point if you are a scientist but when was colour accuracy ever 'a thing' with photographers? I know there is an industry set up to pander to the paranoia surrounding colour accuracy but this is a relatively recent thing, and even in the digital age you could buy an Olympus for 'Olympus colour' or a Sony for 'Sony colour' etc. and they can't all be right. For the life of me I can't remember if it's ever happened before in the history of photography that true to life colour was important. Let me know.

What we see is interpreted color. Quote : “sRGB”, “Adobe RGB”, “Kodak ProRGB”, etc.  or “Monochrome”. Actually it got through at least two olevels of interpretation. The first level is what interpreted by the camera’s firmware. The second level is interpreted by the display, I.r. The monitor or the printer-ink-paper combination. I havent count our eyes and brain. 

CMOS or CCD doesn’t determine the color interpretation. It only provides the raw data. The color interpretation, I.e. the color science is the key.

 

[Anthony MD]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Curious why you're running two threads on CCD vs CMOS @Anthony MD? The other one's been running for a year.
Perhaps they could be merged, both to avoid repetition (forlorn hope) and clogging up the 'New Content' streams.

Yes, at my age they are called senior moments! 
I would appreciate a merge on the two similar threads if I can figure that out…!