The CCD vs. CMOS debate has been a heated one in the photography world for a long time as well, often linked to the Nikon vs. Canon debate as Nikon has long been a CCD proponent... yet that too, is changing now, with more than half of Nikon's lineup using CMOS.
Actually, I have a slightly different question for the collective mind here: does anyone actually base their camera choices on the type of sensor, or even pay attention to it? This seems like an even more esoteric factor than Relationship Between Sensor Size And Megapixel?
John- we (Hikvision) have them available in 2MP and 5MP versions, but they are large format CCD sensors (2/3" or 1") and are targeted to specific markets like traffic so we have them available for these special projects. They are not mass market.
HI John, here an interesting statistic from iSupply website. Somehow I feel on the Surveillance sphere the shift to CMOS is even more pronounced. I think a key reason might be that there is just no need for the CCD as the CMOS quality and variety has really improved over the last 5 years.
Maybe when doing extremely slow motion videos (such as capturing the motion of a water drop, etc) we might find the CCD to still be suitable given that you will find global shutter, high sensitivity (wihtout need of sense up or further image manipulation), etc.
I believe the average cost of CCD vs CMOS on a high megapixel situation is about 4 times more expensive. Also the programing of a CCD is quite more complex.
CMOS sensors have image processing functions within the sensor and also built in functionally like signal amplification, noise reduction, and analog to digital conversion.
With a CCD you have to setup a separate read time, shutter times, and excess charge dump time. And there are many cloks running that needs to be synchronized.
Thus the overall solution might be unnecesary more expensive with a CCD than a CMOS from serveral points of view that you see it.
Does 'CMOS damage' have any bearing on the subject?
Security Reps | 10/28/13 04:23pm
I realize the question is who is buying CCD's? Since Bob from HIK piped up - Who is manufacturing them still besides HIK? > Panasonic is still manufacturing their IP model WV-NW502S and the WV-NP502 as a CCD offering.
There are certain advantages to CCDs that will make them never go away. CCDs are a natively better technology for low-light applications, and we at Pixon Imaging are about to introduce a new technology that I think will forever make them the winner in this area. It is based on the CCD's ability to bin charge before reaching the readout amplifier. So here's my question to the community. What if you had a wonderful megapixel camera during the day, but at night you simply changed the readout clocks and had a sensor that provided simultaneous multiple images (let's say two to make it simple) which had different effective pixel sizes, single pixels for a high resolution image and a second image with highly binned pixels for a very high sensitivity image? The effect would be that now you could have a high dynamic range image by combining the two images, and you would be able to see into those deep shadows with a low-light sensitivity that was 10x or more than your high megapixel camera could yield under normal operation. Yes, the spatial resolution would be decreased at night, and perhaps you couldn't identify the face of someone in the shadows, but at least you'd know someone was there rather than not detecting them at all. And your would retain higher spatial resolution in the portions of the image that were better lit. Further the tradeoff between sensitivity and spatial resolution would be completely under your control by simply adjusting the clocks. This is not an entirely new idea. WDR binning is already done with CMOS cameras by binning after the sensor is read out. However, with this after-the-fact approach, sensitivity increase as the square root of the number of pixels binned, whereas with CCD binning before reaching the output amplifier the sensitivity increases linearly with the number of pixels binned. So for example, after-readout binning of a group of 4x4 pixels increases sensitivity by a factor of 4, while pre-readout binning of charge in a CCD increases sensitivity by a factor of 16. So how many of you would like to have a megapixel sensor during the day, but a lower resolution, WDR camera at night with 16x the low-light sensitivity at night time? This is what we are offering in a single sensor. If you are interested, please contact me at Pixon Imaging, firstname.lastname@example.org.
IPVMU Certified | 10/29/13 04:23pm
Rick, that sounds like some pretty good imformation, but who are you offering to contact you too? Manufacturers? Integrators?