Sony Ericsson / Sony : General : how much more expensive is a CCD sensor in a cell phone ?
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> how much more expensive is a CCD sensor in a cell phone ?
Bookmark topic
Modern CMOS sensors are supposed to be nearly as good as CCD now. CMOS is cheaper and also uses less power than CCD.
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 17:44:27
Edit :
Quote
On 2007-08-28 13:21:13, QVGA wrote:
There is no such thing as K950
you dont understand what i mean !
of course
planing a new 5 M.P. Cybershoot phone, (why shouldnt they, they planing new phones all time). and like i said i just "called" it k950i (because thats maybe what
gonna call it, the name IS NOT IMPORTANT), im talking about, WHEN and IF
coming with a CCD phone.
let say (for fun) that this pictures is true, maybe it also have a CCD sensor.
_________________
k810i
w810i
T28
k850i booked
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2007-08-28 17:02 ]
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 17:55:41
Edit :
Quote
@ Plank Why is it CCD so important to you in a camera phone??? You can see there's good CCD(as in AbuBasim's A990's CCD sensor?) and bad CCD(as in AbuBasim's Z710's CCD camera module) so we can also say there's good CMOS and bad CMOS sensor too.
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 18:20:46
Edit :
Quote
Because if you pick the right one, it will take very
good photos.
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 18:38:38
Edit :
Quote
Why would you want a CCD when all the new DSLRs are switching over to CMOS?
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 18:46:11
Edit :
Quote
If thats the case I can also say that for CMOS sensor!!! If I pick a good CMOS sensor and embed it into the phone it can also produce good images! Only problem is whether the price of the phone will shoot to respectable prices for general users! There's a debate on CCD vs CMOS quality. Professional DSLR cameras also had CMOS sensors in it too.
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 18:51:59
Edit :
Quote
From
this article:
. . . CMOS is rapidly catching up to CCD in many areas.
However, high quality, lowlight images still give CCD's an advantage, but at higher costs.
It seems we're discussing something that has been covered in the K850 thread already, so I'll just quote my own post with comparison shots:
On 2007-08-22 10:46:43, AbuBasim wrote:
The second and final comparison of CMOS vs CCD. Here follows 640x480 crops from 2MP photos, shown at 100 percent scale:
CMOS:
CCD:
_________________
The Tree of Life is Self-Pruning. -- DarwinAwards.com
[ This Message was edited by: AbuBasim on 2007-08-28 18:00 ]
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 18:54:59
Edit :
Quote
On 2007-08-28 18:54:59, AbuBasim wrote:
From
this article:
. . . CMOS is rapidly catching up to CCD in many areas.
However, high quality, lowlight images still give CCD's an advantage, but at higher costs.
Thats why I'm questioning Plank why the need for CCDs in phones.
From your site it states:
POWER CONSUMPTION
CCD's consume several times more power then CMOS.
And from the site you referred it clearly states CMOS can do nearly all the job CCD does at a lower cost!
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 19:12:27
Edit :
Quote
On 2007-08-28 19:12:27, tai020381 wrote:
On 2007-08-28 18:54:59, AbuBasim wrote:
From
this article:
. . . CMOS is rapidly catching up to CCD in many areas.
However, high quality, lowlight images still give CCD's an advantage, but at higher costs.
Thats why I'm questioning Plank why the need for CCDs in phones.
From your site it states:
POWER CONSUMPTION
CCD's consume several times more power then CMOS.
And from the site you referred it clearly states CMOS can do nearly all the job CCD does at a lower cost!
Yes, if you're prepared to compromise on quality. Look at my samples above on this page comparing CMOS and CCD shots.
_________________
The Tree of Life is Self-Pruning. -- DarwinAwards.com
[ This Message was edited by: AbuBasim on 2007-08-28 18:22 ]
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 19:21:27
Edit :
Quote
There is no point of CCD in a phone. If there was, we would have phones with CCD already. CMOS is good enough.
--
Posted: 2007-08-28 19:26:34
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
