|
I investigated this very question some years ago, and in fact gave a presentation at CWAS on a related topic, CMOS vs CCD.
The short answer is: more pixels means you can cover more sky with a single exposure with a Nyquist limit in mind. You should not confuse that with a high dynamic range, as you simply can't get enough photons into tiny pixels to acheive a 16 bit dynamic range.
Also CMOS chips are intrinsically noisier and have less QE than CCD's due their read-up design and gate structures.....
But the (possibly) scary thing is their associated electronics are cheap...as you can have a "camera on a chip" with CMOS, which you can't do with CCD.
In our "bean counter" driven economy, megapixel CCD's might become very expensive..or simply go the way of the dinosaurs due to insufficient demand......
|