-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
CMOS Vs CCD
- Thread starter codec
- Start date
more power-consumption? sounds not a good thing to me? pure cost judgement does make lot sense...imo
how? why?...detail..detail..
true...trade-offs are everywhere if you simply compare any products..BUT, people'd like to what the UPS and what teh downs are
and its just how good the manufcaturer makes
logic: simply coz canon keeps its ball rolling on CMos doesn't necessarily mean that its better right?....there could be lot of reasons out there, but all boils down to one simple reason: performance vs COST
It's well known that the size of the sensor is very much related to the signal/noise ratio of the sensor and that has a huge impact on quality: dynamic range, noise and color rendition
300d CMOS is very large compared to 717 ccd
may be you can compare 717 to d100 since both are ccd and you will find also a huge diference
regards
Gerard
300d CMOS is very large compared to 717 ccd
may be you can compare 717 to d100 since both are ccd and you will find also a huge diference
regards
Gerard
Well you could compare the 1Ds CCD and 300D CMOS then say your leaving CMOS behind after seeing those images.
But you wouldn't do that as the CCD used in that camera and hte CMOS used in the 300D are 2 different classes of sensors just as the CCD in the 717 is a different class to the 300D.
But you wouldn't do that as the CCD used in that camera and hte CMOS used in the 300D are 2 different classes of sensors just as the CCD in the 717 is a different class to the 300D.
Well obviosuly the more power consumption isn't good lol but thankfully they don't use that but its possible some could.
Anyway as for the higher noise on a CMOS, well when the lights hits a pixel it accumulates a charge and it's this charge that says how bright the light is ofcourse. For a CCD once the charge has accumulated in the photosite (pixel) because of the design of a CCD the charge is transfered across the actual CCD and read in one of the corner then the A/D convertor changes each pixels value into a digital one.
CMOS sensors however are made just like processors are and use transistors at each pixel to amplify the signal and transfer it using regular wires. This is the reason it was said before that noise reduction can be done on each individual pixel and this is also a reason why a CMOS can be more susceptible to noise as you then have varying factors that can interfeir with the signal along the wire like having the singals being amplified which can increase noise, dark or residual current long each wire which could add to noise and it's possible a signal could get interfiered by the neighbouring wires also adding to noise.
So all in all with an equivilent CCD and CMOS sensor the CMOS is more susceptible to noise then the CCD. Ofcourse that doesn't mean the CMOS has to have more noise, you just have to look at the canon DSLRs to see that
)
Anyway as for the higher noise on a CMOS, well when the lights hits a pixel it accumulates a charge and it's this charge that says how bright the light is ofcourse. For a CCD once the charge has accumulated in the photosite (pixel) because of the design of a CCD the charge is transfered across the actual CCD and read in one of the corner then the A/D convertor changes each pixels value into a digital one.
CMOS sensors however are made just like processors are and use transistors at each pixel to amplify the signal and transfer it using regular wires. This is the reason it was said before that noise reduction can be done on each individual pixel and this is also a reason why a CMOS can be more susceptible to noise as you then have varying factors that can interfeir with the signal along the wire like having the singals being amplified which can increase noise, dark or residual current long each wire which could add to noise and it's possible a signal could get interfiered by the neighbouring wires also adding to noise.
So all in all with an equivilent CCD and CMOS sensor the CMOS is more susceptible to noise then the CCD. Ofcourse that doesn't mean the CMOS has to have more noise, you just have to look at the canon DSLRs to see that
)i am familiar with the technology on the designs of the two different sensor type....also my intention of this post...trying to get some insight inputs on these...appreciate
Well obviosuly the more power consumption isn't good lol but
thankfully they don't use that but its possible some could.
Anyway as for the higher noise on a CMOS, well when the lights hits
a pixel it accumulates a charge and it's this charge that says how
bright the light is ofcourse. For a CCD once the charge has
accumulated in the photosite (pixel) because of the design of a CCD
the charge is transfered across the actual CCD and read in one of
the corner then the A/D convertor changes each pixels value into a
digital one.
CMOS sensors however are made just like processors are and use
transistors at each pixel to amplify the signal and transfer it
using regular wires. This is the reason it was said before that
noise reduction can be done on each individual pixel and this is
also a reason why a CMOS can be more susceptible to noise as you
then have varying factors that can interfeir with the signal along
the wire like having the singals being amplified which can increase
noise, dark or residual current long each wire which could add to
noise and it's possible a signal could get interfiered by the
neighbouring wires also adding to noise.
So all in all with an equivilent CCD and CMOS sensor the CMOS is
more susceptible to noise then the CCD. Ofcourse that doesn't mean
the CMOS has to have more noise, you just have to look at the canon
DSLRs to see that
Well obviosuly the more power consumption isn't good lol but
thankfully they don't use that but its possible some could.
Anyway as for the higher noise on a CMOS, well when the lights hits
a pixel it accumulates a charge and it's this charge that says how
bright the light is ofcourse. For a CCD once the charge has
accumulated in the photosite (pixel) because of the design of a CCD
the charge is transfered across the actual CCD and read in one of
the corner then the A/D convertor changes each pixels value into a
digital one.
CMOS sensors however are made just like processors are and use
transistors at each pixel to amplify the signal and transfer it
using regular wires. This is the reason it was said before that
noise reduction can be done on each individual pixel and this is
also a reason why a CMOS can be more susceptible to noise as you
then have varying factors that can interfeir with the signal along
the wire like having the singals being amplified which can increase
noise, dark or residual current long each wire which could add to
noise and it's possible a signal could get interfiered by the
neighbouring wires also adding to noise.
So all in all with an equivilent CCD and CMOS sensor the CMOS is
more susceptible to noise then the CCD. Ofcourse that doesn't mean
the CMOS has to have more noise, you just have to look at the canon
DSLRs to see that
It may or it may not, theres 2 reaons CCD's are more sensitive to light the CMOS.
First because of how they read the data, as I said above the design of a CCD lets it transfer the charge from the pixel across the CCD without distortion ofcourse to be read and that leads to the CCD's providing good fidelity and light sensitivity.
Second because the CMOS are made traditonally and have transistors around the photosites alot of light htat hits the CMOS sensor ends up hitting a transistor instead of the photosite (since it takes up area as well) so ofcourse that leads to it's light sensitivity being lower.
CCD's being 2 - 4 tmies more sensitive I dunno as I havn't seen any numerical data on this but because of the above 2 things they are (well i shold say can be) definately more sensitive to light then CMOS.
But if theres a poor job done making the D70's CCD and say the transitors in the 300D are really small then the 300D could easily be more sensitive to light then the D70, all depends how the manufactur of the CCD goes.
First because of how they read the data, as I said above the design of a CCD lets it transfer the charge from the pixel across the CCD without distortion ofcourse to be read and that leads to the CCD's providing good fidelity and light sensitivity.
Second because the CMOS are made traditonally and have transistors around the photosites alot of light htat hits the CMOS sensor ends up hitting a transistor instead of the photosite (since it takes up area as well) so ofcourse that leads to it's light sensitivity being lower.
CCD's being 2 - 4 tmies more sensitive I dunno as I havn't seen any numerical data on this but because of the above 2 things they are (well i shold say can be) definately more sensitive to light then CMOS.
But if theres a poor job done making the D70's CCD and say the transitors in the 300D are really small then the 300D could easily be more sensitive to light then the D70, all depends how the manufactur of the CCD goes.
hmm... that could account for the light sensitivity
D100 EV -1 to 19
D70 EV -1 to 19
DReb EV 0.5 to 18
I wonder if that translates to low light sensitvity for the D70..
--
http://gallery29564.fotopic.net/
good or bad?...does this mean it's more susceptible to noise?
Brian Wadie
Forum Pro
Whilst the CCD / CMOS collects the incident light and converts it to electrical charge it is the programmers skill that converts that charge distribution into a digitised image. I guess you already knew that but I think it is important to realise that the production of the final image we examine is end product up of many processing steps and they ALL need to be right to get an acceptable image.
Having said that, I prefer the CMOS image because it looks better to my eyes - totally subjective, but what the heck - I purchased the camera for me - no ine else - :0)
Brian
No because being more sensitive to light would mean the sensor would produce a higher signal-to-noise ratio.
Another birder
Veteran Member
Pete Perry wrote:
[snip]
I agree with you Pete, but the image you linked is a resize - not really a fair comparison to the other one.
Personally having seen both full size samples from both, the difference is noticable enough for me to stick with Canon's sensor for the moment.
--
http://www.pbase.com/timothyo
[snip]
I agree with you Pete, but the image you linked is a resize - not really a fair comparison to the other one.
Personally having seen both full size samples from both, the difference is noticable enough for me to stick with Canon's sensor for the moment.
--
http://www.pbase.com/timothyo
N
Negative287
Guest
Yes but I can get 2 - 3 times as many pictures from my D100 then I can get from my 10D.
'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe
--
'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe
Well I said can not do ) also depends on how good the CCD and CMOS are actually designed and made and how good the battery is but if both batteries were equivilent and both sensors were equivilent (inclduing how good/bad they were made) then the CMOS "should" use alot less power then the CCD.
One reason AA's don't last long with cheap digital cameras cos the CCD's arn't made that well and use alot more power
I remember my old sony p-30, i'd use energizers in it and get 4 photos before it wouldn't works but with the lith-ion rechargable sony bat I could do 150 and leave a movie running 20 minutes lol.
) also depends on how good the CCD and CMOS are actually designed and made and how good the battery is but if both batteries were equivilent and both sensors were equivilent (inclduing how good/bad they were made) then the CMOS "should" use alot less power then the CCD.One reason AA's don't last long with cheap digital cameras cos the CCD's arn't made that well and use alot more power
I remember my old sony p-30, i'd use energizers in it and get 4 photos before it wouldn't work
s but with the lith-ion rechargable sony bat I could do 150 and leave a movie running 20 minutes lol.Far as I know dynamic range is either way, how you can say CCD's are typcially more sensitive to light or CMOS are cheaper to make I've never seen anything about one having better dynamic range so i'd just say it depends on how well the CCD or CMOS is designed and made.
Similar threads
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum