The other day I had the opportunity to take pictures on the Canon PowerShot A2400 IS. I will say on the functional I was not impressed. I threw it in comparison with the Panasonic DMC-TZ25EE-S Silver. The fact is that in terms of parameters they are almost the same, and the cost is 1000 g. more. What is better to take ?? Panasonic DMC-TZ25EE-S Silver or Canon PowerShot A2400 IS. Just do not want to overpay money if they are the same in the quality of photos. Thanks in advance.
Hello!
Finally I found a person who clearly comments on - types of matrices! I have the same problem ! (while the amateur has not yet risen above the level of those characteristics :) - I noticed the same thing - on the nikon D50 with the nikon D7000 sometimes the colors of especially flesh tones are richer, and on the nikon D7000, on the contrary, there are more purple and blue .... settings twisted all possible .. (at 7000) can you tell me something else? how to change the exposure or ISO or something else? Contrast-saturation? Thank you ...
“I shoot in the studio on a Nikon D80 with a CCD sensor at ISO 100, I am very pleased with the result. But for low light conditions, CMOS takes over. ”
From my own experience, I was convinced that the advantages of CCD only at minimum ISO, it is worth raising the ISO to 400 - the picture changes. CCD colors begin to fade, detail deteriorates, and noise appears in the shadows. Perhaps this is the limit for viewing on a monitor and if you need to lay out a photo of 1280 pixels on the long side. ISO 800 is only conditionally working, when, for the sake of a short exposure, not catastrophically, but already noticeably, you sacrifice the quality of the resulting image. ISO 1600 on CCD (in my opinion) is no longer working, i.e. You can use it if by all means you need to take a picture without blurring, but small details will turn into mush and color noise will cover the image with a solid carpet.
Since owning two cameras is an unaffordable luxury for me, I decided to switch to a CMOS sensor. often working ISO 1600 is needed, especially when I shoot on a telephoto camera without a stub from my hands.
Good evening!
And I endlessly love the incomparable picture on the D50, D70, D70s. Especially with fixes! She's kind of a living truth. Volumetric, more halftones, natural shades, good dynamic range, the picture is like “cinematic”. More pleasant than D90, D7000 ... Whatever one may say! I want to find a list of all DSLRs that have a CCD matrix. Or after the mid-2000s, only CMOS is put into DSLRs?
Can you tell me? Thanks!
after d3000 all nikone on CMOS, only some are compact on ssd. Nikon CCD: d1, d1h, D1x, D100, D70, D70s, d50, D40, D40x, D200, D80, D60, D3000, Super CCD with Nikon mount - Fuji S3pro, Fuji S5Pro
I agree with Arkady that CCD matrices are more lively than CMOS. Therefore, photographers, before buying a camera, should ask themselves the question: for what, for what purposes to use? If for portrait, wedding photography, where artistry is most welcomed, then definitely with a CCD matrix and noise, you should not be "afraid" at all, because in most cases, such shooting takes place in well-lit places and studios. And small noises are more like the film we are familiar with. The film is a classic! The film is painting! Perhaps the time will come when engineers will invent a digital camera that can deliver everything on a par with film! The Japanese have advanced in this with their Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, which in terms of color rendering, plasticity, artistry has left behind all manufacturers. It's a pity that this company stopped further development of such cameras. I have such a miracle of technology and this is the best thing that I have ever held. in hand:). And if you are thinking of shooting club evenings, tussocks, concerts, etc., where high ISOs are simply necessary, then a camera with a CMOS matrix is the best choice!
I bark through the camera with the CCD matrix, the device bravo suto through the matrix. CCD is more responsive to colors and stronger. But why is it easy to skip CMOS, everything is simple, CMOS matrix is very easy to do, information is right for the matrix, and there is more to it, more That is why the matrix beat the part of the information. And it’s necessary: you can really marvel at the video, you can remember the matrix, know more about the video on the CCD, we can read more pictures and photos, and CMOS can be used to learn more, you’ll need to know So, as a processor, it’s easier to cope with the task. Visnovki: Cameras collide vikoristovuvlyu exceptionally for photography, but at the same time vikoristovyut and for video, just like a kid you want a DSLR come to the store you need to buy an analog Fujifilm FinePix S5 pro and explain that there is simply not much to do. CMOS to crawl in order to get to know any client, CCD is bad for video + power is stronger, more valuable, more than that, I’m more bad to go, but I’m better not to go anymore. You can tell me if you want to take a picture of a device like Fujifilm FinePix S5, but you shouldn’t be a mother of video, but the mother is SUPER CCD in Fujifilm FinePix S5 you’re a photographer, a photographer and a video operator.
I used to have a Canon G9, and it has a CCD. Under normal shooting conditions and with standard settings, he gave a good, juicy picture, especially if you shoot any greens. Compared to the CMOS matrices of the time, this one clearly won in image quality. The only drawback was the noise, even at the lowest ISO, although this did not spoil the picture much. It was like a film. But, starting with ISO 400, everything became sad :). But, I repeat, I liked the picture. Now I have a Canon EOS M. The picture is good, even excellent, although not as catchy as the old. But a jump in technology and signal processing is very noticeable. And now the image quality of modern CMOS matrices is very difficult to distinguish from CCDs. It is now much more dependent on the lens.
I recently bought myself a Nikon D80 for use at various booze / parties (with the prospect of converting it into an IR camera later). I was pleasantly surprised by the colors, in comparison with my D7000, except that at night the problem ...
When will the article be read? I got acquainted with the information on other sites, but I got used to this site for a year, I already perceive it as a certain starting point. I even regret that I didn’t buy Nikon (just kidding)
Seicha, when you think about the craze of CMOS and what to do to someone who grew up in the village and well remembers what color a tomato or cabbage should be. I understand those who admired the sunset at the sounds of nightingale. At kmop color is dead. I have Panas FZ45, and there’s nothing to replace it at a given moment. Sadly.
I have a question for Arkady. The matrices ssd and kmop are almost identical pixels, whose task is to capture light (photons). The Bayer filter in the matrices is the same, the only difference is in the signal removal. In SSD, analog and kmop digital, in theory, should not affect the result (the number of photons captured by a pixel), it affects only speed. but the processing (mathematics, because color is a number) is different and the result is different. It is especially visible on the same matrices and different companies (Nikon, Sony, Pentax). COLOR is different for everyone, which once again proves that the cameras use a different processing algorithm colors. By the way, I don’t think that kenon has a special matrix with a super correct skinton, just another processing algorithm.
I recently downloaded the program (DxO OpticsPro 10), it’s enough in it, just loading the rav and the photo changes immediately into a more pleasant picture, which is extremely difficult to get in the lightroom by twisting different color settings.
Yes, the question itself: can there really be a difference in ssd and kmop only in processing algorithms ??
Or maybe the article at the behest of Nikon was removed, do not blaspheme supposedly modern products? I also don’t understand the trend towards super megapixel, on the Nikonforum, amateurs write: one has a green-purple border around white, the other has a proven Nikcor 80-200 soap, why is such progress? Maybe Arkady (or Lynx) knows?
I took family photos at 7100 and sold them, now at d80 and d40. I ask my wife: “Do you see the difference between the pictures?” - “Yes! Color.” And whoever does not see, he does not care about ccd or cmos.
precise marking….
Nikon D5100 kit AF-S 18-55
Nikon D3200 Kit 18-55 VR
Reply
and here on this model, what can you tell me !! Thanks !! NIKON
NIKON D5100 18-55VR + 55-200VR SLR Camera
Reply
Thank you for the useful and accessible information for the amateur. It will come in handy when choosing a webcam for a laptop.
Reply
The other day I had the opportunity to take pictures on the Canon PowerShot A2400 IS. I will say on the functional I was not impressed. I threw it in comparison with the Panasonic DMC-TZ25EE-S Silver. The fact is that in terms of parameters they are almost the same, and the cost is 1000 g. more. What is better to take ?? Panasonic DMC-TZ25EE-S Silver or Canon PowerShot A2400 IS. Just do not want to overpay money if they are the same in the quality of photos. Thanks in advance.
Reply
Clearly, on the shelves) Thanks for the article!
Reply
Hello!
Finally I found a person who clearly comments on - types of matrices! I have the same problem ! (while the amateur has not yet risen above the level of those characteristics :) - I noticed the same thing - on the nikon D50 with the nikon D7000 sometimes the colors of especially flesh tones are richer, and on the nikon D7000, on the contrary, there are more purple and blue .... settings twisted all possible .. (at 7000) can you tell me something else? how to change the exposure or ISO or something else? Contrast-saturation? Thank you ...
Reply
“I shoot in the studio on a Nikon D80 with a CCD sensor at ISO 100, I am very pleased with the result. But for low light conditions, CMOS takes over. ”
From my own experience, I was convinced that the advantages of CCD only at minimum ISO, it is worth raising the ISO to 400 - the picture changes. CCD colors begin to fade, detail deteriorates, and noise appears in the shadows. Perhaps this is the limit for viewing on a monitor and if you need to lay out a photo of 1280 pixels on the long side. ISO 800 is only conditionally working, when, for the sake of a short exposure, not catastrophically, but already noticeably, you sacrifice the quality of the resulting image. ISO 1600 on CCD (in my opinion) is no longer working, i.e. You can use it if by all means you need to take a picture without blurring, but small details will turn into mush and color noise will cover the image with a solid carpet.
Since owning two cameras is an unaffordable luxury for me, I decided to switch to a CMOS sensor. often working ISO 1600 is needed, especially when I shoot on a telephoto camera without a stub from my hands.
Reply
Good evening!
And I endlessly love the incomparable picture on the D50, D70, D70s. Especially with fixes! She's kind of a living truth. Volumetric, more halftones, natural shades, good dynamic range, the picture is like “cinematic”. More pleasant than D90, D7000 ... Whatever one may say! I want to find a list of all DSLRs that have a CCD matrix. Or after the mid-2000s, only CMOS is put into DSLRs?
Can you tell me? Thanks!
Reply
after d3000 all nikone on CMOS, only some are compact on ssd. Nikon CCD: d1, d1h, D1x, D100, D70, D70s, d50, D40, D40x, D200, D80, D60, D3000, Super CCD with Nikon mount - Fuji S3pro, Fuji S5Pro
Reply
I agree with Arkady that CCD matrices are more lively than CMOS. Therefore, photographers, before buying a camera, should ask themselves the question: for what, for what purposes to use? If for portrait, wedding photography, where artistry is most welcomed, then definitely with a CCD matrix and noise, you should not be "afraid" at all, because in most cases, such shooting takes place in well-lit places and studios. And small noises are more like the film we are familiar with. The film is a classic! The film is painting! Perhaps the time will come when engineers will invent a digital camera that can deliver everything on a par with film! The Japanese have advanced in this with their Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, which in terms of color rendering, plasticity, artistry has left behind all manufacturers. It's a pity that this company stopped further development of such cameras. I have such a miracle of technology and this is the best thing that I have ever held. in hand:). And if you are thinking of shooting club evenings, tussocks, concerts, etc., where high ISOs are simply necessary, then a camera with a CMOS matrix is the best choice!
Reply
I bark through the camera with the CCD matrix, the device bravo suto through the matrix. CCD is more responsive to colors and stronger. But why is it easy to skip CMOS, everything is simple, CMOS matrix is very easy to do, information is right for the matrix, and there is more to it, more That is why the matrix beat the part of the information. And it’s necessary: you can really marvel at the video, you can remember the matrix, know more about the video on the CCD, we can read more pictures and photos, and CMOS can be used to learn more, you’ll need to know So, as a processor, it’s easier to cope with the task. Visnovki: Cameras collide vikoristovuvlyu exceptionally for photography, but at the same time vikoristovyut and for video, just like a kid you want a DSLR come to the store you need to buy an analog Fujifilm FinePix S5 pro and explain that there is simply not much to do. CMOS to crawl in order to get to know any client, CCD is bad for video + power is stronger, more valuable, more than that, I’m more bad to go, but I’m better not to go anymore. You can tell me if you want to take a picture of a device like Fujifilm FinePix S5, but you shouldn’t be a mother of video, but the mother is SUPER CCD in Fujifilm FinePix S5 you’re a photographer, a photographer and a video operator.
Reply
I used to have a Canon G9, and it has a CCD. Under normal shooting conditions and with standard settings, he gave a good, juicy picture, especially if you shoot any greens. Compared to the CMOS matrices of the time, this one clearly won in image quality. The only drawback was the noise, even at the lowest ISO, although this did not spoil the picture much. It was like a film. But, starting with ISO 400, everything became sad :). But, I repeat, I liked the picture. Now I have a Canon EOS M. The picture is good, even excellent, although not as catchy as the old. But a jump in technology and signal processing is very noticeable. And now the image quality of modern CMOS matrices is very difficult to distinguish from CCDs. It is now much more dependent on the lens.
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB740lEkEkg very simple about complicated
Reply
Where is the article itself?
Reply
NO articles !!!
Reply
Hmm, there is still no article (((
Reply
What does “Under construction” mean?
Reply
I recently bought myself a Nikon D80 for use at various booze / parties (with the prospect of converting it into an IR camera later). I was pleasantly surprised by the colors, in comparison with my D7000, except that at night the problem ...
Reply
but actually when the article will be ??
Reply
Guys, I do not see the text of the article. Where did they hide it?
Reply
When will the article be read? I got acquainted with the information on other sites, but I got used to this site for a year, I already perceive it as a certain starting point. I even regret that I didn’t buy Nikon (just kidding)
Reply
Seicha, when you think about the craze of CMOS and what to do to someone who grew up in the village and well remembers what color a tomato or cabbage should be. I understand those who admired the sunset at the sounds of nightingale. At kmop color is dead. I have Panas FZ45, and there’s nothing to replace it at a given moment. Sadly.
Reply
Do not confuse the camera with your tiny soap dish
Reply
I have a question for Arkady. The matrices ssd and kmop are almost identical pixels, whose task is to capture light (photons). The Bayer filter in the matrices is the same, the only difference is in the signal removal. In SSD, analog and kmop digital, in theory, should not affect the result (the number of photons captured by a pixel), it affects only speed. but the processing (mathematics, because color is a number) is different and the result is different. It is especially visible on the same matrices and different companies (Nikon, Sony, Pentax). COLOR is different for everyone, which once again proves that the cameras use a different processing algorithm colors. By the way, I don’t think that kenon has a special matrix with a super correct skinton, just another processing algorithm.
I recently downloaded the program (DxO OpticsPro 10), it’s enough in it, just loading the rav and the photo changes immediately into a more pleasant picture, which is extremely difficult to get in the lightroom by twisting different color settings.
Yes, the question itself: can there really be a difference in ssd and kmop only in processing algorithms ??
Reply
Is the article updated?
Reply
Or maybe the article at the behest of Nikon was removed, do not blaspheme supposedly modern products? I also don’t understand the trend towards super megapixel, on the Nikonforum, amateurs write: one has a green-purple border around white, the other has a proven Nikcor 80-200 soap, why is such progress? Maybe Arkady (or Lynx) knows?
Reply
I took family photos at 7100 and sold them, now at d80 and d40. I ask my wife: “Do you see the difference between the pictures?” - “Yes! Color.” And whoever does not see, he does not care about ccd or cmos.
Reply