CCD worse than CMOS in ISO performance?

It can't be done. The photobucket does not accept raw format btw, so it ends here.

I view the raw 3200 and they are at the equivalent slightly less than A4 paper on my monitor. The noise is there but only for pixel peepers. And it maintained in that form upto 30% magnification. By the time it reach 50% the grain start noticable, but still very good. At 75% magnification the grain start condensing to 100%.

With 1600 it is different, there is no visible noise increase at 50%. It become noticable at 100%. Yet it is quite acceptable when it passed the 300% magnification. The way I see it here the 300% plus percent magnification of 1600 ISO seems better than 100% magnification of 3200.

Anyway, this CCD and CMOS jargons to me is just way to distract what our eyes see things. The pictures are there to see regardless where they came from and how the camera processed them. We are getting too technical here for no good reason really.

Shutter Speed and Image Quality are two things that concern photographers all the time. Over the years the camera manufacturers succeed in constantly increasing the SS. But that achievement came with the price tag. So when the D40 managed to double the SS to achieve ISO 3200 with the minimal loss of quality and low price tag - than that is quite achievement. The JPEG fine in D40 is so good that firing at ISO 800 seem no different with ISO 200. ISO 1600 is only look noisy for the people who look at photos to find noise.

Well said...

btw... do you feed your kitty a can of coke after each meal??
 
Nikon was generally considered pretty lousy at high ISO performance as they used CCD sensors in most of their cameras. They've been using CMOS now and are on par with Canon for the most part with high ISO performance.

Most CCD's (all?) are used with electronic shutters and have the added plus of being able to not have cutoff while using a flash over the manufacture's stated x sync. In fact, the OP could fire his D40 with a remotely triggered flash at 1/4000 a second and pretty much over power the sun at 12 noon on a sunny day as long as he was using a powerful enough flash.

Nikon was generally considered lousy at highISO full stop, and their long time use of Sony CCD sensors is what really created this CMOS > CCD opinion in the first place. Take the counter point. The Canon 350D for instance is a CMOS camera. The pixels are larger too at >41squm compared to the 30 something squm or so of the D200. So it has double advantage yet still is beaten in performance at high ISO.

Also I wish all CCD's did the electronic shutter thing. But unfortunately it's mainly the point and shoot cameras, and some entry level SLRs (e.g. D40). I hit the 1/250th sync limit of the D200 constantly :grumpy:
 
Last edited:
Nikon was generally considered lousy at highISO full stop, and their long time use of Sony CCD sensors is what really created this CMOS > CCD opinion in the first place. Take the counter point. The Canon 350D for instance is a CMOS camera. The pixels are larger too at >41squm compared to the 30 something squm or so of the D200. So it has double advantage yet still is beaten in performance at high ISO.

Also I wish all CCD's did the electronic shutter thing. But unfortunately it's mainly the point and shoot cameras, and some entry level SLRs (e.g. D40). I hit the 1/250th sync limit of the D200 constantly :grumpy:

I know the d40, d50, d70, and Canon 1D do it.
 
Last edited:
btw... do you feed your kitty a can of coke after each meal??
:lol: No ofcourse not. But your question triggers me to give it a try, and I did. I poured half a can into their plate but they just stare at it. So I push them down to force drink it, but they refused my raping method. Anyway I mixed their dry food with a bit of coke, they ate it, albeit look funny though :lol:.

Oh btw, I put that can in there deliberately as colour check since I believe the coke cans are everywhere with the same colours.
 
I know the d40, d50, d70, and Canon 1D do it.

I think we've been here before. The cheap and the early. The Nikon D1 and D1X did this too, but the D2H (notCMOS) D2X, D100, and every reasonably expensive camera since hasn't :grumpy: On an interesting note the D60 is a CCD, is cheap, and syncs at 1/200th. There my perfect pattern is ruined. I guess manufacturers just flip a 1000 sided DND die to determine the sync speed.
 
Only for the chips designed in the UK. In Japan they use omikuji. Notice the signboard in the BG translates to "Shutter Design Specification - Stage 100." which is the stage at which they select shutter sync limitations.

If the chip is designed in the USA I think they just use the LMS* method.


* LMS is the acronym for "Last Man Standing".
 

Most reactions

Back
Top