Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    14

    Difference between ccd vs. cmos

    I was just wondering if anyone had the difference between CCD and CMOS sensor types? Any advise or concerns, pros and cons?


    Thanks all

    mjhulik

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    They both take pictures. They both work. They are different technologies but to the end user - the camera is a black box that takes pictures. Don't worry about what's inside. Nobody ever worried with film SLRs whether the shutter was vertical or horizontal. This is about the same difference.

    Some will argue that CMOS is better with lower noise. Others will argue that CCDs are better. The plain old fact is that neither argument is correct. The big difference is in the software that processes the data from the CMOS/CCD. If that's good the picture will be good. If it's bad the picture will be bad.
    Last edited by Rhys; 10-20-2006 at 05:52 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    367
    On a more technical note the differences between the sensors have to do with how that particular device collects light data coming through the lens. The ccd stands for charged coupled device and cmos stands for complementary metal oxide semiconductor. Now... one sensor isn't neccesarily better than the other IF produced properly. At this current stage in the game i personally believe the CMOS sensors produced by canon to be superior in quality (based on dynamic range and sensativity:noise ratios etc etc.) Many will argue (mostly nikon advocates.) I'd advise you, however, to go and view the different sample shots from different types of sensors and compare for yourself. I personally find that the canon 20d iso 1600 shots are far superior to the nikon d200 (which is significantly more expensive.) How a sensor handles signal amplification is a testament to it's quality. Any sensor (even point and shoots) can produce an image of awesome quality at an iso of say... 80. It takes a really exceptional sensor to be able to be amplified up to a higher sensativity (say iso 800 or higher) while still retaining the optical image quality a photographer requires. This is the sole reason that digital will/already has surpassed film as the most effective medium.
    The name is pronounced bonn-gee-bee
    Canon 1Ds Mark II
    Canon 20D + BG-E2
    Canon Elan 7e
    Canon 70-200 f/2.8L USM IS
    Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
    Canon 50mm f/1.8
    Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
    Canon 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by BonjiB View Post
    At this current stage in the game i personally believe the CMOS sensors produced by canon to be superior in quality (based on dynamic range and sensativity:noise ratios etc etc.) Many will argue (mostly nikon advocates.) I'd advise you, however, to go and view the different sample shots from different types of sensors and compare for yourself.
    Easiest way to solve that is to look not at JPEGs but at RAW photo comparisons, and for the current crop of 10mp DSLRs there is virtually nothing to pick between them..
    ------
    Joel - Canon 50d, EF16-35/2.8 Mk1, Σ 50/1.4, EF100/2.8 Macro, EF70-200/4 IS, 430EX II
    http://www.eisner.id.au

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •