Thread: CCD vs dSLR
View Single Post
  #21  
Old 14-06-2014, 09:10 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,904
I don't. A warm CCD is often quite noisy. Even with good electronics. The 8300 chip cleans up fast and -15C is usually very clean. But a decent mirrorless or DSLR has to be clean at room temps.

Also ISO1600 on a D4 is above unity gain I think so again even more impressive from the Nikon as now the Nikon is being amplified compared to an 8300 chip which is not hardly at all.

The new Sony A7s goes up to ISO409600 like a D4 but even cleaner. 4K video that is clean shot in total darkness except for a smallish fire is what it can do.
Its been designed for low light from the ground up though. Its full frame 35mm. Would it match a good cooled mono CCD? I doubt it.

The main issue with DSLRs in what I have seen is they often have no colour in their stars due to overexposure from small wells (typically the megapixel race has meant smaller and smaller pixels and their associated problems).

As Peter pointed out each pixel has surrounding circuitry in a DSLR that is around 40% of the surface area. That's a huge penalty.

Cooled one shot colour CCD and spectrum modified DSLRs/mirrorless (lets not discriminate against the up and coming mirrorless cameras hehehehe) are much closer in performance.

Greg.
Reply With Quote