The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Suggestions for Medium Format Camera with CCD Sensor. DISREGARD This Thread


Well-known member
For my personal use I want to try using a CCD sensor and NOT CMOS. I know there are lots of Options BUT I would like to hear from others for suggestions.
The Pentax 645D is good, Hassy H Body with Phase one back( Not sure which Back to get) The Max Mpx is 40 and ISO 400 with no Noticeable Noise. I will be using it for some Portraits and Group shots with and without Strobes. Thank you in advance.


Well-known member
Is autofocus a necessary? If not, you could also consider a Hasselblad V body.

Concerning the back, I use currently an IQ1 60 and used before a P45+ and P20+. The image quality and colours are nice in each of them, but shooting them at ISO400 is not a good idea. They all will have visible noise. I personally do not go beyond ISO100.
  • Like
Reactions: med


Well-known member
The IQ 1 series backs don't do really long exposure very well. I think you'd have to consider the 2 or the 3 series backs if you're going to do that.

Out of curiosity, why CCD specifically?


Active member
I’ve used an IQ 260 extensively. I used to shoot mostly at iso 100 and sometimes at 200.
it does have a sensor+ mode that uses pixel binning to reduce the noise. That works quite well to about iso 800, but you get only a quarter of the resolution.
The noise from my IQ 260 wasn’t too bad - it had a film grain like feel to it. I had it converted to full spectrum and I use it now for infra red photography.


Well-known member
Abstraction...........I looked back at the Images I took several years with the 645D and loved the colors and film like look to them. I sold it as it was taking toooooooo long to process and review the images. Otherwise I liked the 645D and the lenses were reasonable( some better than others ) I even went back to the Fuji Pro S5 and they were amazing.
The D allowed me to shoot with ISO 400 with no problem. I Never owned a MF system like Phase one that I could try different Digital backs.
I dont need anything more than 25mpx. I am still thinking about the 645D as a possibility and then I would have to have more patience, It was an excellent camera.
Thank you all for your suggestions. I am open to any more suggestions. Thank you


If you want to explore CCD image quality the most interesting sensors are the larger ones. Perhaps a Phase P25, P45 or P65. If you found an H fit one you could use it with an H4X or H5X body which would give more modern performance if the older MF cameras are too slow for you, while still allowing you to the option to use the back on a tech camera.


Well-known member
I forgot to mention the other Option. Hassy H3 series . That might be a better option for the money.
The Hasselblad H5D-40 is considerably newer and uses the same Kodak 40 megapixel CCD sensor used in the the Pentax 645D. It has a good LCD screen and True Focus II for better autofocus accuracy when recomposing. It doesn't have the touchscreen interface of current models, but when tethered to Phocus there is a camera configuration tool in the software which makes setting up various camera and back options very easy.

They appear to be readily available used with a wide variety of prices. You can also find plenty of information on this model with a Google search. You can download the manual from Hasselblad's website, but the video below will give a walk-through of how the H5D functions. H5D Official Instructional Video
Last edited:


Well-known member
A Rollei Hy6 Mod2 (or Sinar/Leaf AFi-II) with an Aptus II 10 back, if you can find one. Or a Leica S type 006.
I support this, but it is certainly not the least expensive option or most common ;)

For me with older CCD backs, the first choice of course is your budget, then system, then ease of use. For example, the Sinar 54m is a great digital back, but needs to be tethered to a computer running at best MacOS 10.12 or so.
Compared to say a P25, which works standalone, but has a terrible useless screen.
Stepping up to say an IQ series or as other have suggested one of the newer Hasselblad DBs gets you a much better and very useable screen.
There is also of course the digital back/SLR choice, on one hand you have the 645 series, then the other the Leica S series, and my personal favorite, the dark horse that is the Mamiya Zd DSLR (only one with a nearly film sized sensor).


Would highly recommend a Phaseone IQ260/360. Great (and big) sensor, good user interface in terms of screen etc.. You could pair it with Hasst, Phaseone, Contax or whatever you want. Should be available used especially in Hassy H, V and P1/Mamiya mount. Contax might be more difficult o get. I love the files, as mentioned film like grain...


Well-known member
Staff member
i made this image with my c645 and p65+ back at iso200, to my surprise the image had a really nice feel due to the noise, but it wasn't distracting at all.
well lit iso200 images can look really good on ccd sensors.



Well-known member
Let me thank you all for sharing this info. I have to see my Budget. I did say its for my Personal use so $$$$ is a concern. I will get back to you once I decide . Thanks again


Well-known member
Is there any rational reason to want a CCD sensor instead of CMOS? In terms of color differences, it can not be because of the sensor technology. Charges in the pixels and/or electronics don't change behaviour depending on how they were created, so the difference must be because of different CFA's or processing. Which has nothing with CCD or CMOS to do.

My guess is that most of what we (think we) see, is due to the manufacturers changing approach to priorities. The noise from an old CCD would not be accepted by many today, and hence CFA's now have more overlap between R-G-B, which means lesser "color resolution" (not neccessarily accuracy) but lower noise. Or that the signal processing of some of the old sensors were just very inaccurate in an aesthetically pleasing way. But I highly doubt that it has anything with CCD vs. CMOS to do.

So, if it is a particular "look" you want, you can't just choose any CCD. And you should probably not rule out all CMOS sensors.

Pieter 12

Active member
Is it possible that in order to deliver features such as high resolution and ISO, video and live view that the CMOS sensor has to compromise whatever gives the fat-pixel CCD its wonderful look?


Active member
In my experience, the CCD sensors, being older, have lower dynamic range compared to more modern CMOS sensors. The CMOS sensor image looks flatter.
The reality is that the fundamental image forming technology is pretty much the same. Photodiodes covered with a colour filter.


Well-known member
I still have my Leica S2 which I bought used in 2017 for 2k. It needs an (sort of expensive) adapter for HC and Contax lenses, but works actually pretty well despite its age. I keep it because it is not worth selling it and from time to time it is fun to use the S2. Not sure though I understand you want a CCD based camera.