Celcius wrote:
>
> "Paul Furman" <paul-@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:LETpj.10699$hI1.2936@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> SteveB wrote:
>>> I'm hearing a lot about CMOS sizes. Any short explanation as it
refers
>>> to photography would be appreciated, especially why a camera with CMOS
is
>>> better than one without. And is bigger better?
>>>
>>> I Googled it, and understand that it is a low power use applied to
>>> cameras and electronic equipment, but it didn't go into photography
much.
>>
>> CMOS vs CCD sensor; the CMOS has more stuff between the pixels for
>> processing, doing tricks on the sensor... something like that... maybe
>> gives you a clue what to look for at least. CMOS is generally
considered
>> better for low noise because of the extra tricks. Apologies for being
>> wishy washy but I think that's the gist.
>
> Paul,
> I was just about to write when I read your message (CMOS is generally
> considered
> better for low noise because of the extra tricks).
> I read the explanation on
> http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question362.htm
and was dumbfounded
> because it says quite the opposite to what you and I understood of the
> process. Let me explain. The article says: "Based on these differences,
you
> can see that CCDs tend to be used in cameras that focus on high-quality
> images with lots of pixels and excellent light sensitivity. CMOS sensors
> traditionally have lower quality, lower resolution and lower
sensitivity."
> However, I always thought the opposite. In effect, Canon cameras had
much
> less noise and greater sensitivity because it had a CMOS sensor. Nikons
had
> CCD's and had more noise. The last Nikon top of the line to come out (I
> don't recall the model) s****ts a new CMOS! Perhaps, this article IS
wishy
> washy ;-)))
There's a full-on, industrial-strength geek-out on the page I will link
in a moment, that discusses both type of sensor and has lots of graphs and
tables and data on specific cameras and sensors. But bring your lunch.
:)
Here's a tiny excerpt: "Older CCDs tend to have read noise levels in the
15 to 20 or more electrons. Newer CCDs in better cameras tend to run in
the 6 to 8 electron range, and some are as low as 3 to 4 electrons. The
best CMOS sensors currently have read noise in the 3 to 4 electron range.
Figure 3 shows read noise for various cameras and commercially available
sensors." But that probably shouldn't be taken out of context.
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/
--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net
|
