Canon 1D why not CMOS?

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that problem.

Frank B

Canon was unable to get 8fps using CMOS. This forced them to go with a CCD to meet the demands of the photojournalists and sports photographers.

John

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than
a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no
noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips
have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that
problem.

Frank B

Click to expand...

the D60 is noisier than the 1D.

John said:

John

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than
a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no
noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips
have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that
problem.

Frank B

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Paul Greenleaf said:

the D60 is noisier than the 1D.

Click to expand...

I don't know if you can compare the noise numbers from Phil's 1D and D60 reviews, but if you can, the D60 actually appears to have less noise at all ISO levels at least up to 800. The 1D report doesn't list a number for 1000 and the D60 lacks 1600 so don't know about above that.

I own a 1D so I'm not tryinig to bash the camera, but given one objective data point, the D60 appears to be a fine performer noise wise.

Linda Thomas said:

Paul Greenleaf said:

the D60 is noisier than the 1D.

Click to expand...

I own a 1D so I'm not tryinig to bash the camera, but given one
objective data point, the D60 appears to be a fine performer noise
wise.

Click to expand...

Especially at 4 minute exposures I love that photo. I showed it to one of my friends that has Nikon D1x and did not tell him it was a night shot, just asked him what he thought. He said it was ok, just some colors... then I told hime this was a night shot a 4 minute exposure. He was in shock

You mean the shutter is noisier :^)

Paul Greenleaf said:

John said:

John

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than
a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no
noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips
have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that
problem.

Frank B

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

the D30 and D60 noise levels very equal. So I guess if you want to say the D30 is cleaner than the 1D, then go ahead. But, it's not.

Chris Fritz said:

Paul Greenleaf said:

John said:

John

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than
a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no
noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips
have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that
problem.

Frank B

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I agree with you that the "measured" noise is better in the 1D, but the nature of the noise (line noise) of the 1D is more objectionable than the D30 / D60 noise pattern, but this is just an opinion.

Paul Greenleaf said:

Chris Fritz said:

Paul Greenleaf said:

John said:

John

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than
a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no
noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips
have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that
problem.

Frank B

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Paul Greenleaf said:

the D30 and D60 noise levels very equal. So I guess if you want to
say the D30 is cleaner than the 1D, then go ahead. But, it's not.

Click to expand...

Hi Paul,

Actually, for low ISO shots, I would have to conclude that the D30 is actually lower in noise than the 1D. At ISO's above 400, then the 1D's noise becomes less of an issue - more like film grain and useable all the way to ISO 3200. The 1D (at least mine) isn't all that great at ISO 100 tending to blow out whites more than my D30, but at ISO 200 is very clean unless you try to sharpen an image which was slightly under-exposed.

Other than a quick few shots at PMA, I haven't used the D60, but from Phil's and other shots, it appears to equal the D30's low ISO performance with very clean images. I think perhaps the fundamental differences between the 1D and D30/D60 are the differences between the CCD and CMOS noise reduction algorithms and their inherent differences in appearance reflect this. If low ISO D60 images can be sharpened to the same degree as D30 images without inducing noise, then they will be able to be enlarged to a much greater extent than 1D images without using noise removal solutions.

I'm still wringing out the 1D, but so far I find the images more akin to my film results than like the D30 (buttery smooth). The other incredible qualities of the 1D are what make it so useful in my experience. It's not without its own share of problems (what is?) but I think for those who's intent runs toward great enlargement (portrait, landscapes, etc.) the D60 might be the better choice. For wildlife or sports or anything where the spot-on autofocus at F8 might be advantageous, the 1D definitely shines brightly.

Best regards,

Lin-- http://204.42.233.244

Frank B said:

Are there advantages
to the CCD when compared to the CMOS.

Click to expand...

Hi Frank

From what I have read, CCD chip is more sensitive than CMOS. It's mainly due to the 'light capturing' surface of CCD is larger than CMOS in which more circuitry occupies the area which could have been used to pick up light.

Lin Evans said:

is?) but I think for those who's intent runs toward great
enlargement (portrait, landscapes, etc.) the D60 might be the
better choice. For wildlife or sports or anything where the spot-on
autofocus at F8 might be advantageous, the 1D definitely shines
brightly.

Click to expand...

Len, perfectly said, and absoultely true. If people would define their needs and realize that both cameras might excel at different things, then the arguing on these forums would probably stop After all, what serious enthusiast or Professional owns only one camera body, or one lens? The right tool for the job. What is it the Brits say? Horses for courses...?

at lower ISO's the difference is not much and as you say might even go to the D30/60. And as you pointed out, the dynamic range of the 1D@200 is greater than@100.

But when you talk about noise, it's generally at higher ISO's, and there the 1D clearly is better. But I agree, the D60 is a better choice for portraits and landscapes.

Thanks for the input, as always.

Lin Evans said:

Paul Greenleaf said:

the D30 and D60 noise levels very equal. So I guess if you want to
say the D30 is cleaner than the 1D, then go ahead. But, it's not.

Click to expand...

Hi Paul,
Actually, for low ISO shots, I would have to conclude that the D30
is actually lower in noise than the 1D. At ISO's above 400, then
the 1D's noise becomes less of an issue - more like film grain and
useable all the way to ISO 3200. The 1D (at least mine) isn't all
that great at ISO 100 tending to blow out whites more than my D30,
but at ISO 200 is very clean unless you try to sharpen an image
which was slightly under-exposed.

Other than a quick few shots at PMA, I haven't used the D60, but
from Phil's and other shots, it appears to equal the D30's low ISO
performance with very clean images. I think perhaps the fundamental
differences between the 1D and D30/D60 are the differences between
the CCD and CMOS noise reduction algorithms and their inherent
differences in appearance reflect this. If low ISO D60 images can
be sharpened to the same degree as D30 images without inducing
noise, then they will be able to be enlarged to a much greater
extent than 1D images without using noise removal solutions.

I'm still wringing out the 1D, but so far I find the images more
akin to my film results than like the D30 (buttery smooth). The
other incredible qualities of the 1D are what make it so useful in
my experience. It's not without its own share of problems (what
is?) but I think for those who's intent runs toward great
enlargement (portrait, landscapes, etc.) the D60 might be the
better choice. For wildlife or sports or anything where the spot-on
autofocus at F8 might be advantageous, the 1D definitely shines
brightly.

Best regards,

Lin
--
http://204.42.233.244

Click to expand...

Canon picked a CCD for the 1D purely because at this stage of development you can read the data out faster.

If they hadn't wanted to go for absolutely the highest frame rate they could get, they would probably have gone for CMOS.

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is cheaper to manufacture than> a CCD and it has more resolution than the 1D and virtually no> noise. Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there advantages> to the CCD when compared to the CMOS. I have read that CMOS chips> have inherently high noise, but Canon seems to have licked that> problem.> > Frank B--Derek

Click to expand...

Frank B said:

The Canon D60 uses a CMOS chip which is
cheaper to manufacture than a CCD

Click to expand...

Yes supposedly so. However... if it is 50$ vs 25$ then does it matter any.

Frank B said:

and it has more resolution than the 1D

Click to expand...

D60 has more (but very soft) "pixels" but the resolution of the 1D seems to be better. It gives more sharp images, you need to scale the D60 images down to something like 50% in order to reach the same apparent sharpness.

Frank B said:

Why does Canon use a CCD in the 1D? Are there
advantages to the CCD when compared to the CMOS.

Click to expand...

Indeed there are several advantages in favor to the CCD, particularly the dynamic range.

Due to the inherent logarithmic sensitivity of all CMOS techologies they suffer from rather small dynamic range, very weak image detail in the dark end and high noise. With D30/D60 Canon has done a great job in reducing the noise (by advanced on-chip processing) but it makes the images to look somewhat like watercolor paintings. And with the CMOS it seems to be impossible to improve the dynamic range as well as to bring the image detail correctly visible in the dark end.

So, all the better quality (very expensive) D-SLRs still have CCD sensor, they have several f/stops more dynamic range (capture range) so underexposed shot can be easily recovered and density masking can be succesfully applied. Basically it is the dynamic range that sets the price tag of D-SLRs.

Sadly the importance of the dynamic range is generally not well understood. Even a perfectly exposed shot of a scene that is severly unevenly illuminated does require density masking in order to bring the weakly illuminated areas visible and for that density masking the camera has to provide enough image data, it has to have good dynamic range, better dynamic range that the scene itself requires. Also with many scenes there are specular reflections or uncovered light sources so accurate metering will be difficult so we tend to underexpose in order to be on the safe side and in order to recover from that the camera must have enough dynamic range so that the image can be scaled up in post-processing and still have good qualty and no clipping in the dark end.

The dynamic range is not very easy to measure in such way that it gives meaningful result but it is rather easy to comparatively evaluate. Just shooting a scene twice, once using perfect exposure (that gives full histogram, 0EV) and the other at say -4EV exposure compensation. Then the -4EV shot is simply scaled up and compared to the 0EV shot. This is a very revealing test that simulates perfectly the real world need... hopefully Phil could include something like this to the reviews. Btw the Canon eos*dcs*3 that I use at work does quite nicely, the -4EV shot is still quite good, indeed usable.

Timo Autiokari http://www.aim-dtp.net

Timo,

I have always felt that the D30 pictures looked a little like "watercolors" to me and wondered whether it was due to Canon's effort to reduce noise on the inherently noisy CMOS chip.

It seemed to me that when you reduce noise you reduce the differentiation among colors and that could be the reason for the "painted" look.

You are the first person to confirm my feeling about the look of these pictures and to explain the cause. Thanks.

Frank b

Timo Autiokari said:

Frank B wrote:
...
Due to the inherent logarithmic sensitivity of all CMOS techologies
they suffer from rather small dynamic range, very weak image detail
in the dark end and high noise. With D30/D60 Canon has done a great
job in reducing the noise (by advanced on-chip processing) but it
makes the images to look somewhat like watercolor paintings. And
with the CMOS it seems to be impossible to improve the dynamic
range as well as to bring the image detail correctly visible in the
dark end.

Timo Autiokari http://www.aim-dtp.net

Click to expand...