Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 95 of 95

Thread: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

  1. #51
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    That is what Chrismuc also said. But, it is (quite) a bit more complex than that.

    The colours from the sensor are not directly usable, but will be converted to normal RGB colours using some math, basically a matrix multiplication.

    On top of that matrix multiplication there will one or more profiles will be applied and those profiles may have significant tuning for pleasantness or "memory colours". The profiles may be matrix- or LUT-based but often a combination of both.

    So, the colour rendition is decided by a series of matrix multiplications, the first one (colour conversion matrix) is actually given by the sensor while the rest is visual adaption and tuning.

    By the way, DxO presents the colour conversion matrices for each sensor. They also calculate something called System Metamerism Index, which essentially measures how well the sensor can reproduce the colour fields of ColorChecker card. That figure is not a part of the DxO rating, however.

    Just to mention, the ColorChecker card is not just a standard used with 16 arbitrary chosen colour fields, but those fields are chosen with great care. The two skin patches, for instance, are said to show very similar spectral response to human skin. So those fields would be a good representation of human skin under almost any illuminant.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Fox View Post
    I think it's a little more complicated, because the dyes used to create the filters in front of each sensel affect rendering. So yes, the basic electronics just measure photon count, but which photon's get through which filter can be quite different between sensors based on the dyes and the density of the dyes.

    (prob not a ccd vs cmos thing though)

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    While it's true that the CMOS image is far lower when it comes to noise, something about the noise structure on the IQ260 image is quite appealing to my eyes. Maybe this is because I'm used to shooting and scanning film at high resolution, so my tolerance for grain is higher? I guess my feeling is that it seems less "plastic" or something? Having said all this, I'm in the market for a CMOS back so it's a moot point for me.
    Anyway,

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    This thread on LuLa discusses a comparison made by Doug Peterson just when the IQ-250 arrived. Doug compared IQ-250 (CMOS) with IQ-260 and IQ-280 (CCD). The best comparison between CMOS and CCD I have seen so far.

    This image tells the story on shadow noise (IQ-260 to the left)


    Best regards
    Erik

  3. #53
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    It is an interesting point. On the other hand I would say that what we see on noise in the shadows is very different from mid tones. Mid tones are dominated by shot noise (which is natural variation of light) so I would expect midtones be better on larger formats (that capture more light). So comparing two ETTR exposures at base ISO I would be pretty sure the larger format backs would have a smoother tone in midtones compared to an 1.3X crop back.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    While it's true that the CMOS image is far lower when it comes to noise, something about the noise structure on the IQ260 image is quite appealing to my eyes. Maybe this is because I'm used to shooting and scanning film at high resolution, so my tolerance for grain is higher? I guess my feeling is that it seems less "plastic" or something? Having said all this, I'm in the market for a CMOS back so it's a moot point for me.
    Anyway,

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Marseille, FRANCE
    Posts
    972
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    While it's true that the CMOS image is far lower when it comes to noise, something about the noise structure on the IQ260 image is quite appealing to my eyes. Maybe this is because I'm used to shooting and scanning film at high resolution, so my tolerance for grain is higher? I guess my feeling is that it seems less "plastic" or something? Having said all this, I'm in the market for a CMOS back so it's a moot point for me.
    Anyway,
    i feel the same, but playing in C1 with structure, grain… you can have a better look at the end from CMOS.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Yeah, I guess that's true. I've never really thought about adding grain, except for gritty black and white work. Does the C1 grain add a film like coloured grain pattern, or is basically just luminance grain?

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Emm View Post
    There's a word missing in this thread. The C-word actually.

    I've never had a CUSTOMER won or lost (to my knowledge) on my use of CCD over CMOS, or vice versa.
    This is 100% true, IF the customer is allowed to be the arbitrator of your work … which is a personal decision we each make.

    I once evoked that argument to my boss regarding some advertising creative, to which he replied, "You wouldn't hire any client as a Junior Art Director, so why would you surrender your taste to them?"

    Never forgot that.

    - Marc
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    325
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    I don't really have much to say regarding directly the question of CCD vs. CMOS, but I find it interesting that someone suggested the difference perceived by some might be due to a different noise pattern. I work in the field of medical imaging myself and am involved in the use of many diagnostic scanners of different brands. The image quality varies quite a lot from one piece of equipment to the next one, often in a way that is hard to explain verbally. One particular CT scanner seems to have much more noise in its images with a comparable radiation dose ("exposure") and equivalent image processing settings than a scanner by another brand. We discussed the IQ aspect with our physicists and according to their physics-magic-super-analysis (which I fail to really understand), the images visually appearing to have more noise actually had less. So the processing from "RAW" data does actually affect the perceived noise pattern quite a bit and can give subjectively quite different results, measurable or not. I guess this applies to visible light imaging as well.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Honestly, I think you're on to something. I don't personally subscribe to one technology being better than the other – there are too many variables in how people apply the technology and how people use it – but I do think that, at least at base ISO, the noise pattern and subtle variation of texture that that noise adds makes, to me at least, CCD seem more natural. DR is kind of a red herring, I reckon. More headroom is always welcome, but the processing each individual applies to their files is what makes the real difference. I shot E6 film for years and 12 stops of DR is more than enough for me, but for other types of work I'm sure more is welcome. Problem is, you've got to have a personal vision to make use of it. Without vision and the practical skills to edit, all your photos will look average.

    (This is all discounting how close the colours and contrast of the RAW file look "out of the box" to how you want your images to look. Some files take far more work to look "good" than others, for sure. And some people actually like (shock horror) the idea of shooting at ISO's higher than 400... CCD is generally not ideal here.)

    Quote Originally Posted by emr View Post
    I don't really have much to say regarding directly the question of CCD vs. CMOS, but I find it interesting that someone suggested the difference perceived by some might be due to a different noise pattern. I work in the field of medical imaging myself and am involved in the use of many diagnostic scanners of different brands. The image quality varies quite a lot from one piece of equipment to the next one, often in a way that is hard to explain verbally. One particular CT scanner seems to have much more noise in its images with a comparable radiation dose ("exposure") and equivalent image processing settings than a scanner by another brand. We discussed the IQ aspect with our physicists and according to their physics-magic-super-analysis (which I fail to really understand), the images visually appearing to have more noise actually had less. So the processing from "RAW" data does actually affect the perceived noise pattern quite a bit and can give subjectively quite different results, measurable or not. I guess this applies to visible light imaging as well.

  9. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    168
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    The noise characteristics of CCD and CMOS are certainly quite different. My CCD files have a more "random" noise structure while the sony CMOS files have a very uniform noise pattern. I guess that uniformity does play a part in how plasticky and artificial those files look out of the box.

    The other thing I have noticed is how CCD highlights "sparkle" in a way CMOS highlights don't. The latter often gives speculars that are spread out like light hitting on a sheet of cellophane.

    You can tighten it up a bit with tone curves, but it's not the same.

    You can see this phenomenon in portraits, especially the catchlights and speculars on the cheek and hair.

    Lastly, most CMOS images, no matter what color profiles you use, tend to bunch similar colors together. You can see this in foliage and on cheeks, where the blush blends into the foundation. Far more shades to make out in CCD files.

    None of this is particularly observable in lab test shots of color passports or charts. Which is why repeatedly trying to break it down to a science fails to give any solid answers.

    IMO.
    My little corner on the internet.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    yeah lets post some examples of something from someone showing something on someone's monitor which is different to every other someone's monitor and then lets all pretend that we see or don't see something ...

    lulz
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #61
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    Comparing CCD with CMOS, are you comparing MFD to MFD or MFD to 135?

    Comparing Phase One CCD with Phase One CMOS or Lead CCD with Leaf CMOS will eliminate a lot of variables.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by synn View Post
    The noise characteristics of CCD and CMOS are certainly quite different. My CCD files have a more "random" noise structure while the sony CMOS files have a very uniform noise pattern. I guess that uniformity does play a part in how plasticky and artificial those files look out of the box.

    The other thing I have noticed is how CCD highlights "sparkle" in a way CMOS highlights don't. The latter often gives speculars that are spread out like light hitting on a sheet of cellophane.

  12. #62
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Hi,

    Comparing CCD with CMOS, are you comparing MFD to MFD or MFD to 135?

    Comparing Phase One CCD with Phase One CMOS or Leaf CCD with Leaf CMOS will eliminate a lot of variables.

    Best regards
    Erik
    I think this hits the nail on the head Erik.

    While my own preference for CCD has been based on 35mm comparisons (Older CCD cameras like a Contax N digital verses older CMOS Cameras of a similar small meg count … up to recently my M9 verses M240 comparisons), I think MFD may be another matter altogether.

    Had I not semi-retired from commercial studio work, I'd seriously be looking at the Hasselblad H5D/50C Multi-shot and comparing it to the H5D/50 CDD Multi-shot … and doing so with an open mind.

    I recently opted for a Leica S(006) CCD over the upcoming S(007) CMOS because the CCD is a known entity while the CMOS version isn't … yet. Plus a new (006) was half the price

    I've become more patient with these expensive items as of late (semi-retirement does that), I'll let others be the real world beta testers for the next few years and then … maybe.

    - Marc

  13. #63
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    232
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by emr View Post
    I don't really have much to say regarding directly the question of CCD vs. CMOS, but I find it interesting that someone suggested the difference perceived by some might be due to a different noise pattern. I work in the field of medical imaging myself and am involved in the use of many diagnostic scanners of different brands. The image quality varies quite a lot from one piece of equipment to the next one, often in a way that is hard to explain verbally. One particular CT scanner seems to have much more noise in its images with a comparable radiation dose ("exposure") and equivalent image processing settings than a scanner by another brand. We discussed the IQ aspect with our physicists and according to their physics-magic-super-analysis (which I fail to really understand), the images visually appearing to have more noise actually had less. So the processing from "RAW" data does actually affect the perceived noise pattern quite a bit and can give subjectively quite different results, measurable or not. I guess this applies to visible light imaging as well.
    That's a good point. i think to certain extend this is a bit like looking at sigma DPxM files. because there is no colour filter, each pixels are capture all details regardless colour. while this is good for most situation, some times looking at more "busy" scene, e.g. a tree, bush, brick wall with rough texture, there are so much details in those area. Almost confusing the mind/brain where to look. i suspect there is certain limitation with the brain processing power as well.
    Keep It Simple.
    XQ2 / A7r / 15mm / 25mm / 28-35-50mm
    EOS M3 / 18-35mm
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #64
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    There are some reasons for asking.

    • There are probably differences in CFA (Color Filtera Array) designs
    • IR and UV-filtering affect reproduction and tonal separation on vegetation
    • Kodak and DALSA sensor are said to differ in colour rendition
    • CCD has tendency to channel leak
    • DSLRs mostly used with a four way beam splitter to reduce colour aliasing
    • MFDBs are often used with makers software, it is feasible that the make would try to make these profiles as close as possible.


    Camera profiles play a major role, but it is possible that they may not overcome CFA limitations.

    One interesting case was the original Leica M8 that head a very thin IR filter, with the result that it had tendency to produce bad colour on dark textiles. It could be handled with additional IR filtering, but a quick remedy was a modified profile that reduced the issue a lot, perhaps giving up on something else.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I think this hits the nail on the head Erik.

    While my own preference for CCD has been based on 35mm comparisons (Older CCD cameras like a Contax N digital verses older CMOS Cameras of a similar small meg count … up to recently my M9 verses M240 comparisons), I think MFD may be another matter altogether.

    Had I not semi-retired from commercial studio work, I'd seriously be looking at the Hasselblad H5D/50C Multi-shot and comparing it to the H5D/50 CDD Multi-shot … and doing so with an open mind.

    I recently opted for a Leica S(006) CCD over the upcoming S(007) CMOS because the CCD is a known entity while the CMOS version isn't … yet. Plus a new (006) was half the price

    I've become more patient with these expensive items as of late (semi-retirement does that), I'll let others be the real world beta testers for the next few years and then … maybe.

    - Marc

  15. #65
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Have to say after reviewing the Credo 50 I still have question marks on differences . Now that can be entirely up to Phase and Leaf in there design and algorithms to look like there CCD counterparts. I put more faith in trying to keep there products as close as possible otherwise its a marketing nightmare to deal with for example this works best with this type of work and that works better with the other type of work but if you do both well than buy this one. That's very complicated for dealers to sell like that. Going through what I shot in the review of the Credo 50 those daylight type files looked very similar to what I got on all 5 CCD sensor backs that I owned. Of course there are differences but I would not be betting on comments like there is a huge difference type stuff. I'm far more comfortable with a comment like this. If you shoot them side by side than sure you will see slight differences, but let's be honest that's not real life we only shoot one back at least most of us do and we are not comparing backs but shooting single images for ourselves than with profiles, raw processing technics and such who really knows. That's a really hard test and or review to do. End of the day does it really matter. If they process nicely and color , tone , DR and look are good than really that's all that matters. All the science really gets thrown out the door when looking at the final image. From me I'm just not that quick to say there are obvious differences . And I always liked CCD medium format images over CMOS but CMOS has always been a format change too to 35mm. Now we have both in medium format and without a really good side by side test and I mean a really well done one, I'm not adept to call a difference worth noting. Outside Higher ISO type looks, I'm just not so dang sure like I once was when it was Medium Format vs CMOS 35mm. It's just not so clear anymore. I'm not discounting any science stuff at all but end of day from my experience its a coin flip.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #66
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Honestly I would leave out the 35mm vs Medium format comments out that's a format size change , it don't count anymore. Now we are dealing with strictly medium format because those differences are not like the former reviews and tests. This is another ball game in a different park to play in. Now if you gain things like live view, higher ISO values and the backs seem very close than that's the real question us end users want to figure out before dropping a lot of money on. For me after that review of the Credo, I'm looking squarely at CMOS backs because you gain much better functionality and files being so close than that's a huge bonus.

    Those are the real questions to be asking. Frankly I think the CCD vs CMOS has become more trivial than real. Now I'm going by shooting CCD for a long time and recently trying the CMOS sensor out but not side by side comparisons, so I'm working on memory and experience which certainly have a question mark but more to the point! I'm really questioning anything worth noticing which I did not see. That's all I can go by for now without really doing a major hard comparison .

    Regardless of all this the end comment is this we asked for higher ISO and we asked for Live view, this is the only way to get it. So now you have the choice which shooting digital only since 1990 those choices don't come around often enough. To me this is something to celebrate.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #67
    Member Jacob CHP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    One interesting case was the original Leica M8 that head a very thin IR filter, with the result that it had tendency to produce bad colour on dark textiles. It could be handled with additional IR filtering, but a quick remedy was a modified profile that reduced the issue a lot, perhaps giving up on something else.
    I'm using a filter on my M8.2!

    Detail of a thing hold by a rig covered with black fabric (no filter)
    M8.2, Visoflex III, Elmar 3.5/65, Auto-WB, JPEG

  18. #68
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Those are the real questions to be asking. Frankly I think the CCD vs CMOS has become more trivial than real. Now I'm going by shooting CCD for a long time and recently trying the CMOS sensor out but not side by side comparisons, so I'm working on memory and experience which certainly have a question mark but more to the point! I'm really questioning anything worth noticing which I did not see. That's all I can go by for now without really doing a major hard comparison .
    I couldn't agree more

    Just this guy you know

  19. #69
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    30
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Are the differences really so much bigger than say between a Canon 18MP CMOS APS-C and a Sony 16MP CMOS APS-C sensor? Getting the same response from different sensors, let alone different manufacturers is something I've yet to see.

  20. #70
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    168
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    From the Leica M9 to the Leica M240

    Saw this the other day and was reminded of this thread.

  21. #71
    Senior Member Malina DZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    S. Florida
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    ...just that those cameras are different.
    Agreed. Luckily for Leica and MDF shooters there's still a choice between CCD and CMOS. Full frame DSLR camera manufacturers haven't offered that luxury of a choice.

  22. #72
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    A reasonable example of CMOS vs CCD is comparing Pentax 645D with 645Z. Imaging Resource tested both of these cameras and both support DNG. The imaging resource web site contains a few images with a ColorChecker, so DNG profiles can be generated for both cameras.

    The steps I took were

    - Generate a DNG Colour Profile for both cameras
    - Apply the DNG Colour Profile to a Still Life shot from each camera
    - White balance on second grey step on the CC in the still life shot
    - Adjust second grey step on colour checker to same exposure

    P645Z (Sony CMOS)

    P645D (Kodak CCD)


    Best regards
    Erik

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    I'm looking at this at work, so a bad monitor, but is it pretty much a wash?

  24. #74
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    to me the 645d Looks more saturated and slightly more contrasty in this example.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #75
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    second shot looks about a stop brighter

  26. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    sorry, but I see no "serious" difference between them. I have a direct comparison going on for studio product and art repro work going on in my studio right now and the only difference we see is that the CMOS chip cameras from Phase/Leaf are more productive for our workflow.
    I am looking at Erik's test above on a calibrated EIZO and don't see a lick of difference either. Maybe a little more DR in the CMOS Pentax and a little more contrast in the CCD (but that could be lens, post-proc..etc...I could match without difficulty)

  27. #77
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Not seeing much of a difference either. The one thing I noticed testing the Credo 50 was my highlight warnings seemed to come up a little faster than what I remember from my CCD. So in effect going to the right of the histo maybe a bad idea to a certain degree. Just need to watch out for it and maybe keep your histo from blowing. Although this happened it was easy to bring things back down. That was the most obvious thing I noticed. In the sample above if the recovery on the CMOS highlight was brought down a touch it would be equal.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  28. #78
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    As a general comment on the Pentax 645D vs 645Z samples that was the closest comparison I could find between CCD and CMOS based sensors.

    I would say that there are subtle differences between the two samples. Some of those differences comes from processing and some from the sensors themselves.

    This example doesn't say much about specific aspects like skin tone either.

    Most of us don't have access to a wide range of equipment. For instance, i have a bunch of Sony cameras and a single sample of the Phase One P45+,
    which I am pretty happy with. But, I cannot say anything about say Phase One P65+ as that camera has a very different sensor coming from DALSA.

    Personally, I shoot mostly landscape, so I have little idea about skin tones. I have been shooting P45+ and Sony SLT99 in parallel, and I feel that both work well. With the P45+ there is a definite 39 to 24 MP advantage. The rest? I don't know, it is very hard to make conclusions once I am outside the lab.

    Best regards
    Erik




    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    sorry, but I see no "serious" difference between them. I have a direct comparison going on for studio product and art repro work going on in my studio right now and the only difference we see is that the CMOS chip cameras from Phase/Leaf are more productive for our workflow.
    I am looking at Erik's test above on a calibrated EIZO and don't see a lick of difference either. Maybe a little more DR in the CMOS Pentax and a little more contrast in the CCD (but that could be lens, post-proc..etc...I could match without difficulty)

  29. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    I own both a Credo 50 and Phase IQ180. I shot a Digital Color Checker SG lit in a Graphlite Executive Work Station. Both backs shot at ISO 100 using a Schneider 150 Digitar at f11. Opened in C1 8.01 and after white balancing both using the same Gray color patch the differences are very subtle as viewed on my Calibrated NEC PA272W. The black levels and white levels differ a little (Credo having brighter white level and darker black level). All in all very similar.

    Victor

  30. #80
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Now, you then have to throw in the lighting variables of place, time of day, season, color influences in the scene (not just in the frame), slight variation in exposure, how someone processes them, and a bunch of other stuff, and the slight perceived difference in those two Pentax cameras will disappear (or be emphasized (but not because of the sensor, but because of variability (hard enough to something right right once, but twice?))). I doubt if I made random image from these two camera (not comparison pairs, but unique images), the only way people could tell the difference is to guess (you may be right 50% of the time, but equally wrong).

  31. #81
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Agree. Things have changed in CMOS vs CCD. Never before was it the same format but now with the same MF I'm afraid all our old well it's just better trust me comments are more like it's basically the same. Our old 35mm versus the world thinking is still there but if within the same format they are just so close it may not matter. Plus we pick up some functionality. I'm still old school thinking in be a expert in post as that's what really counts.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  32. #82
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Well I can see a distinct difference in saturation and brightness. Neither look are offensive to me. I like both. The 645Z clearly has more DR but the 645D has punchier colors.

    My take at least regarding CCD/CMOS when I shot my M9-P next to an A7/A7R were similar to what you see with the 645D/645Z. It actually was a bit shocking to me that these CMOS was closer in the "CCD look" of the M9 than the CMOSIS chip Leica chose.

    Kodak made the sensors for the M9 and the 645D so it makes a little sense that there's a similar closeness with the 645Z to the 645D. The Sony MF sensor are based on the same "family" of sensors as the A7 series. Might just be the curve that the Sony uses that is more appealing to me than the CMOSIS chips.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  33. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    I will crosspost some crude screen grabs and give you a dropbox you can download some raws from:
    I have a couple of screen grabs for now. Sorry folks, long day again

    Raw Files Dropbox

    We found that the IQ250 tends to shoot, right out of the gate at any rate, more accurate color and better detail in highlights and shadows, not as good as the Credo in micro contrast and mid tones...all probably easy to correct;and it looks like a light on the left misfired, so lighting not exactly the same; but I found it interesting...
    Crop sensor difference quite noticeable
    Check out those highlights and fur detail in the IQ250! Also, that chestnut color on the one boot in the middle, the IQ nails it while the Credos have issues with warm colors for some reason. Perhaps that skin tone thing Credo is always talking about is not good for accurate color when warms and yellow/reds are concerned...I really want to use the "standard film" profile from the IQ250 on the Credo 80.....why can't I?

  34. #84
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    I really want to use the "standard film" profile from the IQ250 on the Credo 80.....why can't I?
    The processing pipeline each go through are quite different. One cannot simply carry over profile+curve from one to the other. You'll notice even if you set both to linear scientific, and No Color Correction ICC profile that they will still look different.

    One was meant to honor the legacy and heritage of the Leaf Look and the other was meant to provide continuity of the Phase One look. Different purposes = different methods = different results.

    You can, of course, try to homebrew a profile for either/both backs which will bring them closer together. But such target-generated profiles are usually quite frail - they work well to reproduce the target but in real world use spot colors not present in the target can often become strange, and any change in lighting or post-processing style can exacerbate issues with such in-situ target-generated profiles.

    By the way, I think this is a great example of a file where sharpening-threshold can/should be reduced; the texture of the fur is greatly aided by such a change.

    The difference you're noticing in micro contrast in some areas seems to be because the IQ250 is focused a hair further back in the scene (not for instance the tip of the rear black boot toe) and any remainder is likely due to where each back's respective curves place additional contrast. Adding a slight curve to the midtowns on the phase image, or using the clarity/structure tool at a low setting on the IQ250 file (e.g. 10 structure/5 clarity) does a great job of increasing perceived midtone contrast without misrepresenting the product.

    Regarding focus the use of the IQ250 wireless live view (enabled today via Capture Pilot update that Apple was taking their sweet time to approve for the App Store) should make a nice tool for focus assist. Imagine a iPad mounted to your tripod, for in-situ immediate, low latency, high res live view. You can do that with either back via USB3 of course, but usually (not always) the relevant monitor is a neck-turn away and not easy to move with the tripod as you reposition or change sets, whereas the iPad (or iPad mini or iPhone 6/6plus etc) can come along for the ride.

    Naturally both backs would be providing a bit more bitty detail if shot at something lower than f/22, but I fully understand the practical requirements of such a shoot and getting
    Last edited by dougpeterson; 7th November 2014 at 06:31.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  35. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    OK, then I guess I will have to build a custom profile or adapt an existing Leaf profile to try and match?
    I just thought that Leaf and Phase being same company and all that, same sensor and all that, most same electronics and all that....they might wanna give the option to emulate each other?
    I am aware that some people like vanilla flavored coffee and some like hazelnut flavored coffee; we like coffee flavored coffee here at our studio
    We have a hard time with the Leafs and yellow/reds mostly in art-repro and product like the chestnut boot there. No biggie, we fix

  36. #86
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    I made an edit to my post about the same time as yours about custom profiles - might want to reread. IMO they are a black hole for your time vs having the results you want in the form of a couture hand-adjusted profile. You can read about the profiling for the IQ250 in my article about IQ250 - CMOS Fully Realized.

    There will definitely not be any "emulation" mode provided in the future - the raison d'etre for each back's look is different and requires different approaches. We've done some custom-hand made profiles for Phase backs to look more like Leaf backs for portrait/people shooters, but this is much simpler as the starting point of the Phase [profile+curve] is more neutral to begin with. Even so I can only say, with expertise in such work and with many hours of time invested, that I can only get an IQ to look similar to a Credo - I definitely cannot "match" it. Making a Leaf Credo look like a Phase IQ is even more tricky. It's easier to add spice to a stew than to try to take it out. It would also defeat the purpose for the Leaf Credo which is to provide the famous Leaf Color, especially its handling of skintones.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  37. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Thanks, Doug!
    Yes, I have found that it is easier to make Lab adjustments in C1 to standardize warm product colors that we shoot. Everything else is pretty neutral.
    I guess we came into this MFD world with you and Lance with Leaf Aptus and have tended to stick with Leaf ever since. If I had to do it over again and the significant price difference wasn't a factor (it is) I would go with PhaseOne backs over Leaf because I like to start with neutral and if I want it warm and glowing I know how to do that

    Yes, real world demands compromises like using F22 even though I am fully aware of diffraction. The first thing we learned about MFD was that it had VERY limited DoF and to deliver what my clients wanted, we needed to close down the lens or start using tech-cameras and lenses. We tried both and the production value of tech-cams vs DSLR (DF+) was too great. In other words, much easier/faster/more productive to use DF+ and close down to get DoF than fumble all day with tech cams and then there is the costs....

    The crop sensor format surprised me a little (I don't know why, I knew about it, just didn't consider until we had it in here) I am considering checking out a used 55-110 zoom to see if it will work for us here to emulate the range we need with the crop sensor. 75-150 is probably in our future but the range is slightly too on the telephoto side to be useful for our needs.

    Staying on topic with this thread, does anyone notice any major differences between the CCD (Credo80) and CMOS (Credo50 and IQ250) ?

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    Staying on topic with this thread, does anyone notice any major differences between the CCD (Credo80) and CMOS (Credo50 and IQ250) ?
    I have come to different conclusions than you have. I have always found my IQ180 to be warmish just as I did my P45. I don't attribute this to the sensor but more how C1 renders the file. My Credo 50 is much less warm and, to my eyes, more accurate shooting in daylight. Without any WB the differences are fairly dramatic but even after WB to each the IQ180 renders towards the warmish side for certain colors.

    Victor

  39. #89
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hmm, I don't know if this can ever be resolved, but if so, then through images which speak clearly enough to convince all (or most).

    In the IQ250 vs IQ260 image, I like the tone mapping of the IQ260 better, but the sparkles in the noise are quite objectionable, and I am guessing that the colour is quite a lot less accurate, inaccurate white balance aside.

    In the 645D vs 645Z images, the red tones in the cloth at 3 O'Clock have quite a lot more separation on the 645D, whereas the blue cloth at 10 O'Clock has more separation with the Z.

    Interesting, but not conclusive.
    Carsten - Website

  40. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    Hmm, I don't know if this can ever be resolved, but if so, then through images which speak clearly enough to convince all (or most).

    In the IQ250 vs IQ260 image, I like the tone mapping of the IQ260 better
    Carstenw, do you mean my credo 80 vs iq 250? Or is there another test I didn't see?

  41. #91
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    Some points to keep in mind on the Pentax 645D and the 645Z.

    - That comparison is done using test samples from ImagingResource, taken several years apart.

    - I generated a DNG profile for each using another sample with a good ColorChecker.

    - Exposure in Lightroom was adjusted to match on second brightest field of the small colour checker in the test image.

    Doug Peterson has published raw files from the "library shots". That was a very good test including the IQ 250/260/280, but unfortunately was not really useful for judging colour.

    Lance at Capture Integration posted a ISO comparison between Leaf Credo and IQ-250 and posted raws from that.

    As Doug Peterson indicated, Leaf is intended to have a different colour reproduction from Phase One and he clearly said there will not be a Leaf emulation in C1.

    It is possible that Capture One and Leaf use different CFA (Colour Filter Arrays), Doug Peterson has mentioned in his article on the development of the IQ-250 that Sony offered two different CFA designs.

    What Doug also told in that story is that Capture One's profiles are in part built by the Image Professor using thousands of real world pictures.

    I cannot say anything about that, but I made a test on my P45+ for colour accuracy and I compared the studio flash and portrait profiles. The differences were incredibly small, but flipping the images differences were perceptible, some very fine tuning there.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    In the 645D vs 645Z images, the red tones in the cloth at 3 O'Clock have quite a lot more separation on the 645D, whereas the blue cloth at 10 O'Clock has more separation with the Z.

    Interesting, but not conclusive.

  42. #92
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Hi,

    The ImagingeResource pages also contain one of the popular colour reference images often called musicians. I guess they come from Kodak.

    I processed those files with three color profiles:

    • Adobe Standard
    • DNG Profile editor (which I made from another part of the same image)
    • Embedded - which I guess is the DCP profile coming from Pentax


    The images are here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Ar...45Z/Musicians/

    And a screen dump is below, I would suggest checking them link above, though, as colours are probably more correct.


    Best regards
    Erik

  43. #93
    Member VICTOR BT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    with film, colour or black and white, one can use emulsions that on paper are very similar, like fuji acros 100 and kodak t-max 100, for example, or fuji 160 and kodak portra. conducting the print optically (darkroom), even when the photograph is done in controled light, there is still a significant signature, vibe, character to each of these films. their tactility is distinguishable, the tactility of the object, like metal, skin, or fabric have slightly different feel even when the luminosity (and contrast) is very similar.

    in digital however, the stream from capture to conversion (up to the appearance of the file in the software) are the determinative elements. then, the software (Lightroom, C1, Phocus etc) allow a great measure of further manipulation to achieve the desired "look".
    there is no anti-aliasing filter, like in common dslrs, which is a significant element altering the potential "look" of the photograph even under extensive manipulations in the software.
    i suppose at an extent, the polarity of CCD and CMOS is traced back to that difference and what derived from that.

    but now, with the same lens, with no anti-aliasing filter, with great extent to which the file can be manipulated after the conversion, should there be an issue ? like it is with film, no matter how one manipulates it within the possibilities given in optical printing.

    and most importantly, considering that the main and intended advantage of medium format is for print, how the CCD/CMOS difference comes out eventually ?

    what i mean is not the technical aspects (like live-view, or issues with tech-cameras, iso, battery etc) but the look and the feel, which might be subjective, nevertheless they might be there.

    for example, how hasselbald 40 (33x44), 50c (33x44) and the bigger sensor 50 differ ? same about P1 and leafs etc? does it come out significantly different after the conversion ? is it possible to bring them to desired "look" more fluently with one or the other ?
    i see the hasselbald 40 and 60, and they look slightly different (mainly for the size and resolution), but aesthetically and inherently, not as different in "feel" as tmax100 or acros100 (both equally refined films without the more authentic characteristics of traditional films). same about colour films like fuji/kodak 160.

  44. #94
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    Carstenw, do you mean my credo 80 vs iq 250? Or is there another test I didn't see?
    No, I think it was Doug at CI (at the time?) who did the test, where this image came up. Sorry, I just realised that I followed a link and didn't make a note of that:

    Login
    Carsten - Website

  45. #95
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If CCD rendering can be achieved with CMOS where are the examples?

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    No, I think it was Doug at CI (at the time?) who did the test, where this image came up. Sorry, I just realised that I followed a link and didn't make a note of that:

    Login
    Sensor morgulis (all sensors must die),
    Sensor dohiris (all sensors must serve) !!

    Is it time to exhume this issue?

    I gave myself 90 seconds to make the IQ3 100 shot look like the IQ280 shot.
    This is what I could manage.
    Any opinions on the CCD/CMOS issue in the 100MP era?

    Cheers


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •