1 big CMOS or 3 lil CCD's?

[BrianMurphy]

Some folks get awfully aggressive in their responses and maybe I am either too old or too sensitive, but I wish that the dialogue we all share could always be civil and in the spirit of helping others to improve their craft. I also think that everyone is entitled to an opinion and should not be scolded for having one, because every one can change their opinion..we call that learning.
I shoot with an HMC 150 and a GH1 (modified like most) and must agree with folks on a couple of points. First: Never use auto focus unless you have no choice, ever. Second: Learning to use your camera CCD or CMOS or both is crucial to great images and client satisfaction. Platitudes? Not really, all of the comments about the lack of this or that on this camera or that camera or chip kinda of remind me of an old bad joke. Patient: "Doctor it hurts when I do this." Doctor replies: "then don't do that."
Like Stuart said above, my clients too always remark how sharp, clear and rich the images are and I think the camera as well as the operator are responsible for that happening.

 

[SPrimeau]

I have a couple of issues with that 'common wisdom' statement. First, according to my reading, CMOS is actually a far more complicated technology than CCD. With CMOS, you have image processing electronics for every single pixel right on the chip, whereas with CCD, you only have the light gathering pixel. All image processing is done off chip. So it seems reasonable to conclude that if you can fit 1920 x 1080 pixels in a 1/6" CMOS (and they currently are doing just that), then you can easily fit 1920 x 1080 on a larger 1/3" CCD.

The second issue is cost. According to one company, the per chip cost is about the same for both CMOS and CCD.

So despite the arguments against thrown out in these forums, it seems that the more I read, the more it seems very much within the realm of technical and cost feasibility to make a full resolution CCD hand held HD camera. All that's needed is for someone to actually do it.

(And for the record, I would love to have several full res 1/2" CCD hand held cameras available to purchase.)

I remember Barry Green and/or Jan talking about the fact that 1/3" CCDs are too small to fit 1920 x 1080 pixels.

 

[Barry_Green]

There are no 1920x1080 1/3" CCDs in existence that I know of. The JVC is the closest, at 1280x720. There aren't even any 1920x1080 1/2" CCDs. You have to go to 2/3" before you find that pixel count.

 

[8string]

It's been my experience, owning both a 7D and an HMC150, that it's really about look and feel. Both of these technologies create fabulous beautiful HD images. One is capable of doing great DOF, the other, not so much (but hey, by using telephoto and shooting wide open if you have the room, you can get dang good DOF). Again, it's a choice of tools. In low light situations I usually now reach for my 7D. In normal run and gun, I really prefer the 150. It has all the tools in the box. Now if I could afford a AF100, I would. That, or others that follow, seems to be the camera of the future.