CMOS vs, CCD

Started Jul 23, 2011 | Discussions
S Staley
Junior MemberPosts: 31Gear list
Like?
CMOS vs, CCD
Jul 23, 2011

Which is better and why is it better?

 S Staley's gear list:S Staley's gear list
Nikon D40 Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
S Staley
Junior MemberPosts: 31Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Sante Patate, Jul 23, 2011

Thank you for the info

 S Staley's gear list:S Staley's gear list
Nikon D40 Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rhlpetrus
Forum ProPosts: 22,874Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to S Staley, Jul 23, 2011

What are the points you have interest in?

S Staley wrote:

Thank you for the info

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
S Staley
Junior MemberPosts: 31Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to rhlpetrus, Jul 23, 2011

I am considering the purchase of a new camera and I am beginning to develop a list of what I need for the following conditions , Portraits
still lifes
wild life
general shooting

the list of features I have so far includes Body type, connectivity effective pixels, simplicity and compatibility with my other Nikon equipment

 S Staley's gear list:S Staley's gear list
Nikon D40 Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to S Staley, Jul 23, 2011

S Staley wrote:

I am considering the purchase of a new camera and I am beginning to develop a list of what I need for the following conditions , Portraits
still lifes
wild life
general shooting

the list of features I have so far includes Body type, connectivity effective pixels, simplicity and compatibility with my other Nikon equipment

I note that you mention portrait. If you want good skin tones, you'll find that none of the Nikon bodies that came after the D80 can match it.

AlbieSky, a poster on this forum, has just gone retro and re-bought a used D80 because he/she regretting selling his/hers and couldn't get good skin tones from her newer, more advanced body he/she bought.

Sure there will be people here who won't like hearing what I'm saying, but it's true.

The first shot here was my very first shutter actuation with a DSLR and it's a straight out of the camera JPEG

The above picture was shot in the summer (June), so there is a slight sun-tan.

This second one was shot in the winter (November). I thought I'd point this out so that you can see why the skin tones are different, spot on, but different...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kolexndr
Regular MemberPosts: 182Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Peter Pans, Jul 23, 2011

great shots using D80 (CCD) but can you post here wrong skin colors that you made using CMOS (D90 D300 D7000 and so on) ?

-- hide signature --

Photocamera is too simple and imperfect tool for indefinite photographer's imagination
----
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kolexndr

 kolexndr's gear list:kolexndr's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to kolexndr, Jul 23, 2011

kolexndr wrote:

great shots using D80 (CCD) but can you post here wrong skin colors that you made using CMOS (D90 D300 D7000 and so on) ?

Here's a link to a thread about skin tones. You can find many more by using the search forum facility. Before you read the thrrad, I've noticed that every time I give examples of the D80 skin tones, there is never a mad dash for D7000 owners to put the D7000 skin tones next to them to show that they are better, or at least as good. Wouldn't that be the case if they were confident about how their camera renders skin?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=38789107

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kolexndr
Regular MemberPosts: 182Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Peter Pans, Jul 23, 2011

thanks for the link.

I've took a look at the picture on the first post there and right away got a conclusion what

photographer did a mistake using his new camera, because that result can be acheived

when subject is overexposed and with modified picture control "neutral" by bumping up saturation extremely. All those settings were wrong for portrait kind work.

Many times i find similar photos over the internet and complains about bad skin tones. I'm sure it is the human errors in most cases. Not the camera itself.

The issue is in nikon that makes improvements to their cameras and usually each next camera has a certain differences compared to previous one.

There was so when D80 came up after D70 (everyone complained about unnatural and punchy oversaturated colors, but in a year they forget about this and started to make great photographs)

Then newly launched D90 got too yellowish images compared to D80 (did you see how much there are excellent and colorful photographs over the internet?)
Now D7000 is under fire on most forums.

This will end up when people will get their manuals read completely and get some new experience and follow specific learning curve for certain model of the Camera.

Do you want me to show you bad skin tone from my D7000? i can do it right now because i know how to do it. If i will do the same trick with canon (450d-60D) i'll get completely blown out face. But no canonians are complaining about bad skin tones when their are overexposed. They do understand what they did something wrong using their camera.

Am i genius? No! i did get similar crappy colors from my d7000 right out of the box when upgraded from my fuji S9000, also i did get overexposed photos very often. I was worried too much and disappointed, but i didn't started to argue the Nikon on forums. I did open the manual and read it from first to last page. And like a magic my photos started to became wonderful.

-- hide signature --

Photocamera is too simple and imperfect tool for indefinite photographer's imagination
----
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kolexndr

 kolexndr's gear list:kolexndr's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to kolexndr, Jul 23, 2011

kolexndr wrote:

thanks for the link.

I've took a look at the picture on the first post there and right away got a conclusion what

photographer did a mistake using his new camera, because that result can be acheived

when subject is overexposed and with modified picture control "neutral" by bumping up saturation extremely. All those settings were wrong for portrait kind work.

Many times i find similar photos over the internet and complains about bad skin tones. I'm sure it is the human errors in most cases. Not the camera itself.

The issue is in nikon that makes improvements to their cameras and usually each next camera has a certain differences compared to previous one.

There was so when D80 came up after D70 (everyone complained about unnatural and punchy oversaturated colors, but in a year they forget about this and started to make great photographs)

Then newly launched D90 got too yellowish images compared to D80 (did you see how much there are excellent and colorful photographs over the internet?)
Now D7000 is under fire on most forums.

This will end up when people will get their manuals read completely and get some new experience and follow specific learning curve for certain model of the Camera.

Do you want me to show you bad skin tone from my D7000? i can do it right now because i know how to do it. If i will do the same trick with canon (450d-60D) i'll get completely blown out face. But no canonians are complaining about bad skin tones when their are overexposed. They do understand what they did something wrong using their camera.

Am i genius? No! i did get similar crappy colors from my d7000 right out of the box when upgraded from my fuji S9000, also i did get overexposed photos very often. I was worried too much and disappointed, but i didn't started to argue the Nikon on forums. I did open the manual and read it from first to last page. And like a magic my photos started to became wonderful.

Right, so that's why you're breaking your neck to show how great your D7000 skin tones are? Talk is cheap.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to kolexndr, Jul 23, 2011

kolexndr wrote:

thanks for the link.

I've took a look at the picture on the first post there and right away got a conclusion what photographer did a mistake using his new camera, because that result can be acheived when subject is overexposed

Look again at the picture. The subjects blouse and neck tie are pure white (and black in the case of the tie) and they're not overexposed. There are other images on that thread too.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sante Patate
Senior MemberPosts: 3,375
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Peter Pans, Jul 23, 2011

Peter Pans wrote:

Here's a link to a thread about skin tones.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=38789107

This was not "a thread about skin tones" - at least, not until you said the skin tones were poor. The OP thought they were fine (and since he was the only one who had seen the subject, his opinion is worth paying attention to). Cameras do not create skin tones, software does.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Sante Patate, Jul 23, 2011

Sante Patate wrote:

Peter Pans wrote:

Here's a link to a thread about skin tones.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=38789107

This was not "a thread about skin tones" - at least, not until you said the skin tones were poor. The OP thought they were fine (and since he was the only one who had seen the subject, his opinion is worth paying attention to). Cameras do not create skin tones, software does.

Without a camera? Wow. Btw, the OP said he wanted a camera for portraits. Isn't skin tone on-topic for portraiture? Perhaps you should keep your neb out.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kolexndr
Regular MemberPosts: 182Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Peter Pans, Jul 23, 2011

Peter Pans wrote:

kolexndr wrote:

thanks for the link.

I've took a look at the picture on the first post there and right away got a conclusion what photographer did a mistake using his new camera, because that result can be acheived when subject is overexposed

Look again at the picture. The subjects blouse and neck tie are pure white (and black in the case of the tie) and they're not overexposed. There are other images on that thread too.

i've not said about incorrect WB. WB on that photo is correct. White blouse will stay white for any level of saturation. The same true for black.

But face should not be black or white or gray. I that case we have blown out red channel on face due to its overexposure.
Why camera decided to overexposure it?
Thanks to the necktie! It is ideal for catching focus points to itself.
I think camera chose focus point not somewhere on model face but on necktie.

D7000's Matrix Metering mode is linked to focusing system. It allows to bring more priority to metering for area where camera is focused on.

Also there was used flash. So second case: it is possible to get more light on subject even at minimal available flash power, especially if shooting at aperture 2.8 and so close to subject.

Will look at the other photos there and will get back with my thoughts back.

-- hide signature --

Photocamera is too simple and imperfect tool for indefinite photographer's imagination
----
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kolexndr

 kolexndr's gear list:kolexndr's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kolexndr
Regular MemberPosts: 182Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Sante Patate, Jul 23, 2011

Sante Patate wrote:

Cameras do not create skin tones, software does.

i agree with you completely in this term.

-- hide signature --

Photocamera is too simple and imperfect tool for indefinite photographer's imagination
----
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kolexndr

 kolexndr's gear list:kolexndr's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sante Patate
Senior MemberPosts: 3,375
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Peter Pans, Jul 23, 2011

Peter Pans wrote:

Without a camera? Wow. Btw, the OP said he wanted a camera for portraits. Isn't skin tone on-topic for portraiture? Perhaps you should keep your neb out.

Digital cameras record RGB in Bayer patterns. Color gamuts are created by software. You can't comment helpfully on skin tones if you don't know what color gamut was used in RAW processing (whether in-camera to generate a JPEG or in the computer) and what color gamut is being used by the output device. It makes a difference, eg, if an image is created in Adobe RGB then output in sRGB or created in sRGB then output as Adobe RGB, and what choices are made about how one gamut is to be mapped on to another ("perceptual intent" vs "saturation intent" vs "media-relative colorimetric" etc). Portrait skin tones are a matter of lighting and color management, not one camera or another.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kolexndr
Regular MemberPosts: 182Gear list
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Sante Patate, Jul 23, 2011

Sante Patate wrote:

Peter Pans wrote:

Without a camera? Wow. Btw, the OP said he wanted a camera for portraits. Isn't skin tone on-topic for portraiture? Perhaps you should keep your neb out.

Digital cameras record RGB in Bayer patterns. Color gamuts are created by software. You can't comment helpfully on skin tones if you don't know what color gamut was used in RAW processing (whether in-camera to generate a JPEG or in the computer) and what color gamut is being used by the output device. It makes a difference, eg, if an image is created in Adobe RGB then output in sRGB or created in sRGB then output as Adobe RGB, and what choices are made about how one gamut is to be mapped on to another ("perceptual intent" vs "saturation intent" vs "media-relative colorimetric" etc). Portrait skin tones are a matter of lighting and color management, not one camera or another.

Sante, you are right completelly. I agree with you.

I've acheived good results from d7000 after number of experiments with its Picture Control (the incamera processing RAW to JPG)
I do not know why, but nikon default settings a bit strange.

That my custom settings changed coloring completely. Of course someone can dislike my results BUT my LCD (S-IPS) and printings looks great for me and my friends like them very much too.

Of course for some important photograph i'm using RAW and then converting it on PC.

-- hide signature --

Photocamera is too simple and imperfect tool for indefinite photographer's imagination
----
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kolexndr

 kolexndr's gear list:kolexndr's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to Sante Patate, Jul 23, 2011

Sante Patate wrote:

Peter Pans wrote:

Without a camera? Wow. Btw, the OP said he wanted a camera for portraits. Isn't skin tone on-topic for portraiture? Perhaps you should keep your neb out.

Digital cameras record RGB in Bayer patterns. Color gamuts are created by software. You can't comment helpfully on skin tones if you don't know what color gamut was used in RAW processing (whether in-camera to generate a JPEG or in the computer) and what color gamut is being used by the output device. It makes a difference, eg, if an image is created in Adobe RGB then output in sRGB or created in sRGB then output as Adobe RGB, and what choices are made about how one gamut is to be mapped on to another ("perceptual intent" vs "saturation intent" vs "media-relative colorimetric" etc). Portrait skin tones are a matter of lighting and color management, not one camera or another.

Right, so if 10 different cameras are set up exactly the same in the same lighting conditions, they will all produce files with identical skin tones?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to kolexndr, Jul 23, 2011

kolexndr wrote:

Sante Patate wrote:

Peter Pans wrote:

Without a camera? Wow. Btw, the OP said he wanted a camera for portraits. Isn't skin tone on-topic for portraiture? Perhaps you should keep your neb out.

Digital cameras record RGB in Bayer patterns. Color gamuts are created by software. You can't comment helpfully on skin tones if you don't know what color gamut was used in RAW processing (whether in-camera to generate a JPEG or in the computer) and what color gamut is being used by the output device. It makes a difference, eg, if an image is created in Adobe RGB then output in sRGB or created in sRGB then output as Adobe RGB, and what choices are made about how one gamut is to be mapped on to another ("perceptual intent" vs "saturation intent" vs "media-relative colorimetric" etc). Portrait skin tones are a matter of lighting and color management, not one camera or another.

Sante, you are right completelly. I agree with you.

I've acheived good results from d7000 after number of experiments with its Picture Control (the incamera processing RAW to JPG)

But are reluctant to back it up with actual evidence it seems.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Pans
Contributing MemberPosts: 980
Like?
Re: CMOS vs, CCD
In reply to kolexndr, Jul 23, 2011

kolexndr wrote:

Peter Pans wrote:

kolexndr wrote:

thanks for the link.

I've took a look at the picture on the first post there and right away got a conclusion what photographer did a mistake using his new camera, because that result can be acheived when subject is overexposed

Look again at the picture. The subjects blouse and neck tie are pure white (and black in the case of the tie) and they're not overexposed. There are other images on that thread too.

i've not said about incorrect WB. WB on that photo is correct. White blouse will stay white for any level of saturation.

It's white, not blown out.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads