Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
https://optcorp.com/products/fli-kep...minated-camera
It doesn't sound that impressive. Less full well than the CCD (105K for the CCD versus 78K). Slightly less QE at 58%. Lower read noise. Not sure what that means in terms of images as the 16803 is very clean.
Higher price. Appears to only be in the Kepler model. Not sure if that is good or not.
The higher version you linked sounds like a step up. This one seems like a step sideways.
I just read the comparison between 16803 and the 4040. Yes there seems to be some advantages. The backside illuminated sensor is the go though. Big bucks.
Greg.
|
http://www.flicamera.com/spec_sheets/KL4040.pdf
The 4040 has a peak QE of 74% and although it’s well depths aren’t quite as deep it requires 4-6x less exposure time to become read noise limited giving it a significantly higher dynamic range.