Thread: Cooled cameras

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. Collapse Details
    Cooled cameras
    #1
    Default
    I have done a lot of work with a particular thermal imaging company and I'm familiar with the concept of an actively cooled sensor. I never thought that this kind of technology could be applied to consumer cameras, but take a look at this site: http://www.centralds.net/cam/

    Does this kind of tech have the potential to make any camera into an amazing low light camera?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,365
    Default
    On a related note, BM's big URSA was so heavy because it was liquid-cooled (refrigeration cooling) and I thought it was incredibly clean at its native ISO of 400.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member Peter C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    517
    Default
    Neat. Didn't know such a product existed or that the temperature of the sensor effected noise. Practically speaking the product is very expensive, and seems to geared to help long exposures might not be useful for normal video applications.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    4,863
    Default
    Very interesting in theory. However, I do wonder if the benefits of cooling will be superseded first by other breakthroughs (such as organic sensor tech).

    In computing, extreme liquid cooling has always netted performance benefits, but they often pale in comparison to the benefits offered via a die shrink. There's a point of diminishing returns. It may stand to reason that the disadvantages of adding a more robust cooling solution to a sensor may be outweighed by other improvements that push low light performance past where most users practically need them anyway (we are nearing that point already).

    That said, I'm speaking over my pay grade and merely pontificating. Perhaps Mitch with his closer ties to the camera engineering teams could shed more light on this?


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Default
    Yeah, I have no idea if this would be practical for video. I didn't know that BM already did something like this with the original Ursa (which explains its size). This is a new idea to me. By this reasoning, wouldn't high ISO performance generally improve when shooting outdoors in colder climates and suffer in hot climates?


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,365
    Default
    By the general reasoning and purpose of keeping electronics cooler, I think it would since a hotter climate would make that more difficult.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Default


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,469
    Default
    Here's a graph of sensor temperature vs noise from an astrophotography blog: http://www.ianmorison.com/the-use-of...-using-a-dslr/

    D14-768x548.jpg

    It's just the physics of electron excitement or something. I'm sure that sensor temperature will always be a relevant factor even if its importance is reduced.


    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

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