The last of the Kodak CCDs for Olympus
Ok most things here in Australia are either super costly or non-existent. The E-400 is everywhere. I check FB Marketplace a lot during the day and this model is always available. Maybe a glut of this model was sent over at some stage hahaha.
Quote from Just take the shot on July 22, 2022, 12:13 amOk most things here in Australia are either super costly or non-existent. The E-400 is everywhere. I check FB Marketplace a lot during the day and this model is always available. Maybe a glut of this model was sent over at some stage hahaha.
There's a metric ton in the Midwest United States too lol, I see the E-420 & 520 a ton too. That and the Pentax ZX-10. If I Search marketplace for Pentax all them lol!
Quote from SpruceBruce on July 22, 2022, 4:10 amQuote from Just take the shot on July 22, 2022, 12:13 amOk most things here in Australia are either super costly or non-existent. The E-400 is everywhere. I check FB Marketplace a lot during the day and this model is always available. Maybe a glut of this model was sent over at some stage hahaha.
There's a metric ton in the Midwest United States too lol, I see the E-420 & 520 a ton too. That and the Pentax ZX-10. If I Search marketplace for Pentax all them lol!
Warning! The E-420 is not a CCD camera! Only the E-400 is from the 4x0 line. The 520 is also not a CCD (it's a "Live MOS"?? don't know what that is). Only the E-300, E-400, and E-500 are CCDs. The E-400 was never sold in the US.
@just-take-the-shot out of curiosity, what does this glut of E-400s sell for where you live?
Sunset time… and the first real color tests come out.
It's so hard for sensors to really capture the way the sun lights the clouds here, it's so intense, and often super pink, which a lot of CMOS sensors will not pick up and instead read as yellow and orange. Very frustrating to me personally because pink is what makes them special!
I WANT TO BELIEVE… in CCD magic. And it certainly delivers.
This is more like what the sunsets actually look like, grainy as it is (I hand held). The red-pink glow is radioactive.
Quote from ahoyhere on July 22, 2022, 5:00 amQuote from SpruceBruce on July 22, 2022, 4:10 amQuote from Just take the shot on July 22, 2022, 12:13 amOk most things here in Australia are either super costly or non-existent. The E-400 is everywhere. I check FB Marketplace a lot during the day and this model is always available. Maybe a glut of this model was sent over at some stage hahaha.
There's a metric ton in the Midwest United States too lol, I see the E-420 & 520 a ton too. That and the Pentax ZX-10. If I Search marketplace for Pentax all them lol!
Warning! The E-420 is not a CCD camera! Only the E-400 is from the 4x0 line. The 520 is also not a CCD (it's a "Live MOS"?? don't know what that is). Only the E-300, E-400, and E-500 are CCDs. The E-400 was never sold in the US.
@just-take-the-shot out of curiosity, what does this glut of E-400s sell for where you live?
Just found the E-500 for $900 AUD!! It does have a lens though. He is negotiable hahaha. There's a couple of E-400's for around $250 AUD with lens/lenses. There's a handful of E-300's also with lenses.
These are all within 60KMS of me. Which is 321 rotations of the moon in US terms (hehehe).
Quote from ahoyhere on July 22, 2022, 5:14 amSunset time… and the first real color tests come out.
It's so hard for sensors to really capture the way the sun lights the clouds here, it's so intense, and often super pink, which a lot of CMOS sensors will not pick up and instead read as yellow and orange. Very frustrating to me personally because pink is what makes them special!
I WANT TO BELIEVE… in CCD magic. And it certainly delivers.
This is more like what the sunsets actually look like, grainy as it is (I hand held). The red-pink glow is radioactive.
The colors and texture in that image are wonderful!
You are so right about the pink hues and how CMOS sensors seem to handle them. This is why I've often wished I had my computer on hand during a sunset so I could take the shot and immediately post-process and compare the image to what I'm seeing (and then make it a preset if I'm able to get it right). Later I always think "that's not how it looked" and then either I roll with it the way it is and I'm grumpy about it, or I try to fix it to match what I remember it looking like...never get there, doubt my memory anyway, and am grumpy about it. I don't recall feeling this way with my K10D's photos... CCD for the win!
Because I am perverse, I took some shots today with the E-400 and a beat up E Ludwig Meritar 50mm 2.9 — a circa 1950s Cooke triplet lens — which came for "free" (maybe a $10 premium) with an Exakta adapter I bought a while back, because it was in KEH "Ugly" condition. It's dirty and a bit hazy and I LOVE it.
It's maybe not the ideal lens to test out a sharp CCD sensor.
The Olympus is also not the ideal camera to use adapted lenses, since the viewfinder kinda sucks. I'm not sure if all of them are like this, but the center of mine is a bit wavy 🥴
NEVERTHELESS, SHE PERSISTED. Sorry, got a little carried away there.
I started off unable to stop down from 2.9, thinking it was broken, because the mechanism is funky.
All photos are post-processed, some with a bit of real editing to respect the vintage look (the light in my house is quite cold due to the green anti-UV coatings on the windows to save energy).
Outside, this is pure Olympus color, just Auto:
This one I tweaked, it came out very low contrast due to the lens:
Indoors with minor editing only (window light nearby):
The above were probably stopped down to 5.6 or so… below is wide open (hadn't figured it out yet):
A little more creative… the cat was underexposed, of course, but the shadows lifted surprisingly well… also pretty sure I missed focus but it doesn't seem to hurt it any:
Attached are pictures of the pair — using a Fotodiox Exa-43 adapter, as well as a couple shots using the 40-150, which is pretty good!
The close-up portrait of the cat was shot on ISO 800, shockingly. I set Color Noise Reduction set to 100% in LR and it's pretty damn good. I'm shocked by how good it is at higher ISO.
Uploaded files:
Quote from JBP on July 22, 2022, 2:17 pmYou are so right about the pink hues and how CMOS sensors seem to handle them. This is why I've often wished I had my computer on hand during a sunset so I could take the shot and immediately post-process and compare the image to what I'm seeing (and then make it a preset if I'm able to get it right).
OK SO IT'S NOT JUST ME!!
I was wondering.
I also came across a review of the Pentax 645 digital on a forum that said the same thing (that the CCD version did better with sunsets specifically).
Compiling some research on CCD color and why[1] it's better ([1] if…), I keep reading that it's actually due to the color matrix layer on top of the actual sensor called the CFA. So I wonder if Fuji does better, being the only company that designed their own (not counting Sigma's foveon sensors).
Quote from ahoyhere on July 25, 2022, 4:40 amQuote from JBP on July 22, 2022, 2:17 pmYou are so right about the pink hues and how CMOS sensors seem to handle them. This is why I've often wished I had my computer on hand during a sunset so I could take the shot and immediately post-process and compare the image to what I'm seeing (and then make it a preset if I'm able to get it right).
OK SO IT'S NOT JUST ME!!
I was wondering.
I also came across a review of the Pentax 645 digital on a forum that said the same thing (that the CCD version did better with sunsets specifically).
Compiling some research on CCD color and why[1] it's better ([1] if…), I keep reading that it's actually due to the color matrix layer on top of the actual sensor called the CFA. So I wonder if Fuji does better, being the only company that designed their own (not counting Sigma's foveon sensors).
I have been thinking the same thing about Fuji. There are three things that always make me go "wow, the colors!" Those are: Fuji cameras in general, CCD cameras, and 16mp cameras. CCD makes sense, I guess. It's a different technology after all, so it's not surprising to have different results. Fuji also has a different sensor thing going on so that I can understand also. The one that gets me is 16mp CMOS. Why does it seem to have the magic also? Perhaps that is less about color and more about rendering otherwise. I dunno. #rabbithole
Quote from ahoyhere on July 25, 2022, 4:31 amBecause I am perverse, I took some shots today with the E-400 and a beat up E Ludwig Meritar 50mm 2.9 — a circa 1950s Cooke triplet lens — which came for "free" (maybe a $10 premium) with an Exakta adapter I bought a while back, because it was in KEH "Ugly" condition. It's dirty and a bit hazy and I LOVE it.
It's maybe not the ideal lens to test out a sharp CCD sensor.
The Olympus is also not the ideal camera to use adapted lenses, since the viewfinder kinda sucks. I'm not sure if all of them are like this, but the center of mine is a bit wavy
NEVERTHELESS, SHE PERSISTED. Sorry, got a little carried away there.
I started off unable to stop down from 2.9, thinking it was broken, because the mechanism is funky.
All photos are post-processed, some with a bit of real editing to respect the vintage look (the light in my house is quite cold due to the green anti-UV coatings on the windows to save energy).
Outside, this is pure Olympus color, just Auto:
This one I tweaked, it came out very low contrast due to the lens:
Indoors with minor editing only (window light nearby):
The above were probably stopped down to 5.6 or so… below is wide open (hadn't figured it out yet):
A little more creative… the cat was underexposed, of course, but the shadows lifted surprisingly well… also pretty sure I missed focus but it doesn't seem to hurt it any:
Attached are pictures of the pair — using a Fotodiox Exa-43 adapter, as well as a couple shots using the 40-150, which is pretty good!
The close-up portrait of the cat was shot on ISO 800, shockingly. I set Color Noise Reduction set to 100% in LR and it's pretty damn good. I'm shocked by how good it is at higher ISO.
Whoa, I almost missed this post. I love the haze, too! It's so fun to get that kind of stuff straight out of camera, vs using software. Reminds me about some guy on the Pentax forums who got his kit lens all scratched up and loved the way it made the photos look, so he took some sandpaper and scratched it even more. Madness! haha But it did make the photos look cool. 😎 The hazy cactus photo is killer!
