Are All CMOS Sensors Equal?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: The Tabernacle of Lima
Next: Some new stuff
From: Ray Fischer on 18 Apr 2010 18:59 Bubba <digitalrube(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Apr 18, 2:27�pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 06:14:32 -0700 (PDT), Bubba >> >> <digitalr...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >On another and not totally unrelated subject, to my shock, I see that >> >several DSLRs don't come with CMOS sensors. Aside from the single >> >lens, I thought *all* DSLRs "had to have" a CMOS sensor. >> >> No, that's not the case at all. �Nearly all the early DSLRs had CCD >> sensors. �CMOS sensors tended to be more noisy and therefore needed >> more effective noise reduction in the camera's firmware. �But CMOS >> sensors and noise reduction have both been improved since then. >> >> CMOS sensors can be cheaper to make, and they also make it easy to >> offer the Live View feature that is now considered almost essential on >> DSLRs. �It's probably a combination of those and other factors that >> led to CMOS being the most popular choice for DSLR sensors. > >My response didn't "take." I asked for a general date when CMOS >replaced CCD, because in 2006 I bought and returned a huge Digital >Rebel 8MP. Also, no one has told me why the Nikon model just released >is two hundred dollars cheaper than the Canon. Haven't you noticed that electronic devices in general tend to fall in price? Do you really not know why? -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Bubba on 18 Apr 2010 19:38 On Apr 18, 6:59 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > > Haven't you noticed that electronic devices in general tend to fall > in price? Do you really not know why? My phrasing was very unclear. I wanted to know why the *new* Nikon Coolpix P100 with the CMOS sensor was two hundred dollars cheaper than the (very recent) Canon SX1. I postulated the swivel screen cost $200.
From: Allen on 18 Apr 2010 20:08 Ray Fischer wrote: > Bubba <digitalrube(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Apr 18, 2:27 pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 06:14:32 -0700 (PDT), Bubba >>> >>> <digitalr...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On another and not totally unrelated subject, to my shock, I see that >>>> several DSLRs don't come with CMOS sensors. Aside from the single >>>> lens, I thought *all* DSLRs "had to have" a CMOS sensor. >>> No, that's not the case at all. Nearly all the early DSLRs had CCD >>> sensors. CMOS sensors tended to be more noisy and therefore needed >>> more effective noise reduction in the camera's firmware. But CMOS >>> sensors and noise reduction have both been improved since then. >>> >>> CMOS sensors can be cheaper to make, and they also make it easy to >>> offer the Live View feature that is now considered almost essential on >>> DSLRs. It's probably a combination of those and other factors that >>> led to CMOS being the most popular choice for DSLR sensors. >> My response didn't "take." I asked for a general date when CMOS >> replaced CCD, because in 2006 I bought and returned a huge Digital >> Rebel 8MP. Also, no one has told me why the Nikon model just released >> is two hundred dollars cheaper than the Canon. > > Haven't you noticed that electronic devices in general tend to fall > in price? Do you really not know why? > I remember when my employer was paying $7000 for IBM PCs (the first model--no hard drive, 64 K memory) complete with green monitor and slow dot matrix printer. Oh, and the first box of 10 360K floppies that we bought was $80 (US$, not Zimbabwe$). This was in 1984, as I recall. Talk about falling prices! Allen
From: Bubba on 18 Apr 2010 20:43 On Apr 18, 8:08 pm, Allen <all...(a)austin.rr.com> wrote: > > I remember when my employer was paying $7000 for IBM PCs (the first > model--no hard drive, 64 K memory) complete with green monitor and slow > dot matrix printer. Oh, and the first box of 10 360K floppies that we > bought was $80 (US$, not Zimbabwe$). This was in 1984, as I recall. Talk > about falling prices! I can do you one better. I paid $450 for a Brother electric typewriter...with "memory." Someone who worked for AT&T got a "deal" on a better typewriter, with "programmable memory." That was only chump change at $1,700+. A lot of people made money in the 80's on office equipment, probably the same people who are making money on digital cameras today.
From: David J Taylor on 19 Apr 2010 02:41
> My phrasing was very unclear. I wanted to know why the *new* Nikon > Coolpix P100 with the CMOS sensor was two hundred dollars cheaper than > the (very recent) Canon SX1. I postulated the swivel screen cost $200. If I were comparing those two cameras, I would consider: - image quality - is one significantly better? - handling - is one easier to use? - zoom range - is the 26mm of the Nikon a significant advantage? - swivel finder - will that be useful to you? - optical rather than sensor shift stabilisation - optical may be preferred. Compare here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_sx1is%2Cnikon_cpp100&show=all BTW: that says the Canon is from Sep 2008, so hardly "very recent". Is that the right model? Cheers, David |