3 ccd vs. 1 cmos
- Thread starter accelv
- Start date
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
CCD sensors in general traditionally had the edge with image quality until a few years ago. They don't tend to suffer from rolling shutter and all the other strangeness that a CMOS does. But it reminds me somewhat of Plasma TVs versus LCD. In the early days plasma was better but now LCDs are beginning to catch up and over take plasma screens in all their areas they've been traditionally strong in, like colour and contrast. Much the same thing with CMOS versus 3 CCD. As the 3 CCD cameras split light through a prism and handled the R, G and B colour channels separately on different chips, it made for better colour specially in low light compared to a single chip. In fact, due to bandwidth issues when you pointed an older single chip video camera at a colourful scene, the saturation would actually drop.
In 2009 you'll be hard pressed to see the difference between any 3CCD or 1 CMOS chip video camera in the same price bracket. And of course, the HD-SLRs use CMOS for speed reasons and we all know how great they are compared to 3CCDs now, so it's not really a debate worth having any more. It's changed to the debate between sensor versus sensor, camera versus camera.
I remember my Panasonic GS400 3CCD had great colour for it's day... circa 2005. It knocked the single chip stuff out of the water. But times have moved on.
There is also a 3CMOS camera from Panasonic. Can't hold a candle to the large single CMOS sensor DSLRs though.
In 2009 you'll be hard pressed to see the difference between any 3CCD or 1 CMOS chip video camera in the same price bracket. And of course, the HD-SLRs use CMOS for speed reasons and we all know how great they are compared to 3CCDs now, so it's not really a debate worth having any more. It's changed to the debate between sensor versus sensor, camera versus camera.
I remember my Panasonic GS400 3CCD had great colour for it's day... circa 2005. It knocked the single chip stuff out of the water. But times have moved on.
There is also a 3CMOS camera from Panasonic. Can't hold a candle to the large single CMOS sensor DSLRs though.
Eddy Robinson
Well-known member
You would be better searching forums for past discussions or reading up on the technologies on wikipedia (and following the references). CCDs were better for a long time, newer developments in CMOS make the latter more flexible for many modern applications. To a large extent, it depends on the shooting conditions. Here is a good introduction: http://www.dalsa.com/corp/markets/CCD_vs_CMOS.aspx
ydgmdlu
Veteran
Barry Green would beg to differ.
Barry_Green
Moderator
commanderspike said:
I think it's more like "objective science would thoroughly disprove that concept".
There are two 3CMOS cameras from Panasonic Broadcast. Either one will thoroughly outclass ANY of the single-CMOS DSLRs when it comes to sharpness and dynamic range. Neither will have the sensitivity of the DSLRs, nor will they have the aliasing or moire issues.
Although, there is one way that I will agree with CommanderSpike in his assertion that the 3CMOS cameras can't hold a candle to the DSLRs: it's true, because they don't have hands. Nothing to grip the candle with...
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
I was referring to the 3CMOS consumer Panasonic camcorder, not the broadcast versions.