Why Canon have not used CCD sensor on their DSLR yet?
- Thread starter leody1
- Start date
The answer is $$$
CCDs are cheaper to manufacture.
Also CMOS offers some advantages like random access (zooming in live view without sampling the whole sensor, hosts of other uses) and also the process of manufacturing CMOS allows for more integrated circuitry as well.
CCDs are cheaper to manufacture.
Also CMOS offers some advantages like random access (zooming in live view without sampling the whole sensor, hosts of other uses) and also the process of manufacturing CMOS allows for more integrated circuitry as well.
Last edited:
CCD been used in 1D (mark 1).
CMOS = lower cost in manufacturing + consume less power?
go google "ccd vs cmos" and you'll get a lot of technical comparison.
the real reason however, only Canon Inc can ans you.
CMOS = lower cost in manufacturing + consume less power?
go google "ccd vs cmos" and you'll get a lot of technical comparison.
the real reason however, only Canon Inc can ans you.
Conventional theory suggest that CCD (Charge-coupled device) has better imaging quality than CMOS (Complementary metal–oxide–semiconductor). I still remember back in those days (prior to 2002), all entry-level digital camera / webcam / HP camera uses CMOS sensor as it is low in power consumption and cheap to produce. Canon's first version of DSLR, EOS 1D uses CCD sensor if I'm not mistaken. However, in later stages, due to its advancement in CMOS technology, Canon is the first company to launch DSLR with CMOS sensor back in 2003. Nikon on the other hand uses CCD for a long time till 2008 (D90 release in 2008 using CMOS, D80 uses a CCD sensor).
That's just my rough idea of how CMOS vs CCD is about. So conclusion:
CMOS is proven to be a better choice of sensor since Canon(in 2003 onwards) & Nikon(in 2008 onwards) are using it.
Last edited:
CCD supposed to have better colours but the noise and battery life is terrible.
Back in the old days when I still use the old 1D MKI (CCD sensor), the color is fantastic but the noise and battery life is bad. If you compare the CMOS based canon DSLR with other CCD based DSLR, you will realised that CMOS sensors produce smoother, noise-free images with good battery life.
I also remember reading an interview with Canon and they also mentioned that speed is another reason why they choose CCD for the 8fps 1DMKI. (last time CCD can pull out data from the sensor faster than CMOS)
I remember those days...other brands like to laugh at Canon for using CMOS. They call Canon DSLR as toy camera/web cam as these cameras uses CMOS too.
However, CMOS technology has improved so much that some brands already adopted CMOS for their top range DSLR. They got no choice as the physical limitation of CCD already reached. Only CMOS can produce such noise-free, high resolution and silky smooth images.
I think Canon has finally do it right by pushing for CMOS + Full Frame....it is the way to go as we can see other brands alraedy started adopting it.
Anyone can help to translate the interview? http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/1d/interview/interview02.html
Back in the old days when I still use the old 1D MKI (CCD sensor), the color is fantastic but the noise and battery life is bad. If you compare the CMOS based canon DSLR with other CCD based DSLR, you will realised that CMOS sensors produce smoother, noise-free images with good battery life.
I also remember reading an interview with Canon and they also mentioned that speed is another reason why they choose CCD for the 8fps 1DMKI. (last time CCD can pull out data from the sensor faster than CMOS)
I remember those days...other brands like to laugh at Canon for using CMOS. They call Canon DSLR as toy camera/web cam as these cameras uses CMOS too.
However, CMOS technology has improved so much that some brands already adopted CMOS for their top range DSLR. They got no choice as the physical limitation of CCD already reached. Only CMOS can produce such noise-free, high resolution and silky smooth images.
I think Canon has finally do it right by pushing for CMOS + Full Frame....it is the way to go as we can see other brands alraedy started adopting it.
Anyone can help to translate the interview? http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/1d/interview/interview02.html
Last edited:
there is no ccd sensor sure have better IQ, or cmos sensor sure have better IQ.
there are more factors to good IQ than just the type of sensor used in the camera.
well, noise & dynamic range are factors of IQ. which CCD is a bit better than CMOS...
really
so the first CCD placed on any dslr is equivalent to the CMOS of today?
if you say so..
all i know is that k100d used ccd, k20d uses cmos. my k20d trumps the k100d in terms of NOISE and DR any day. wonder why.....
diff era men...really
so the first CCD placed on any dslr is equivalent to the CMOS of today?
if you say so..
all i know is that k100d used ccd, k20d uses cmos. my k20d trumps the k100d in terms of NOISE and DR any day. wonder why.....
you can do a "CCD vs CMOS" search to prove my statement/s...:thumbsup:
diff era men...
you can do a "CCD vs CMOS" search to prove my statement/s...:thumbsup:
well, precisely my point, there are other factors other than sensor type to determine the IQ!
things like imaging processing in-camera, how the noise is handled, all these also play a part in the output of the sensor, not just the sensor type alone..don't need to do search. :thumbsup:
btw, here's one good read >> http://gadgetophilia.com/a-guide-to-ccd-and-cmos-sensor-technology/#more-4222
last sentence:
As more and more research is done on these technologies, it is now possible to create cheap CCDs and high quality CMOS Sensors.
Hi,
Actually, CCD had less noise than CMOS... just that when every components is so close to each other in a consumer camera, the higher power requirement of CCD and it's sub-components will generate more heat and as a result noise performance become worst than a CMOS.
Anyway, both had their advantage and disadvantage, but when come to conumser camera, CMOS had more advantage than CCD.
Have a nice day.
Actually, CCD had less noise than CMOS... just that when every components is so close to each other in a consumer camera, the higher power requirement of CCD and it's sub-components will generate more heat and as a result noise performance become worst than a CMOS.
Anyway, both had their advantage and disadvantage, but when come to conumser camera, CMOS had more advantage than CCD.
Have a nice day.
Last edited:
Leica M9 (released very recently) has a 18mp full frame kodak ccd sensor. Its beautiful at low iso but push it to high iso and it loses out to canon and nikon cmos. And don't forget, m9 is using the very latest ccd technology. So, it proves one thing: ccd cannot compete with cmos in terms of noise. Cmos is superior in this aspect which is a reason why most, if not all major dslr manufacterers use them.
Yes what Tongki say is in line.
I'm not a technician or engineer but I remember I read somewhere that explain CCD's photo diode are smack together and CMOS photo diode has "gap" and hence the engineers can built "transistor" in between to process the signal before output. Canon is producing so called "gapless microlens" to close the gap so that it captures all the light when it hits the sensor instead of hitting the "transistor".
Where do you think Nikon's D3s clean high ISO comes from? It's the processing circuit that clean up the noise.
HI,
I used to go for video before DSLR. CCD sensors are very good for lower noise and they produce sharp details. I tried CMOS sensors for video earlier on and found that there are lag in capture using CMOS camcorders. But if you have tried those 3CMOS type, they are really quite impressive as well. But most of the camcorders and DSLR that uses CMOS generally are much smaller than those of the same specification using CCD.
It is the power consumption, size and manufacturing cost which prompted the production to look into CMOS.
I would not say either or is good. Just that CMOS has yet to achieve today's CCD technology as in the past their race is into CCD. It should be soon that CMOS is on par with that used; my opinion.
I used to go for video before DSLR. CCD sensors are very good for lower noise and they produce sharp details. I tried CMOS sensors for video earlier on and found that there are lag in capture using CMOS camcorders. But if you have tried those 3CMOS type, they are really quite impressive as well. But most of the camcorders and DSLR that uses CMOS generally are much smaller than those of the same specification using CCD.
It is the power consumption, size and manufacturing cost which prompted the production to look into CMOS.
I would not say either or is good. Just that CMOS has yet to achieve today's CCD technology as in the past their race is into CCD. It should be soon that CMOS is on par with that used; my opinion.
