CCD Size & Pixel Question at DVinfo.net

October 13th, 2002, 10:49 PM

I'm interesting to buy XM2 and here is my question.
Canon GL2(XM2) has 470,000 Pixel ,Sony TRV 950 690,000 and Pansonic MX5000 has 80,000.

Is this mean Panasonic has better CCD than Canon?
I know Panasonic has 1/6", Sony has 1/4.7" and canon has 1/4" CCD.
So what's the difference about the size and the Pixel and how does it affect the quality of Picture?

Frank Granovski · October 14th, 2002, 12:14 AM

Usually, the larger the CCD/s, the lower the lux; usually, the more CCD pixels, the higher the lux. So, the GL2 probably needs the least light whereas the MX5000 needs the most. Picture quality? I think they're all right up there. You just have to pick the one that suits your needs best.

Andre De Clercq · October 14th, 2002, 06:17 AM

Frank's replay is correct. Excluding the optics, slight differences in CCD layout/technology togheter with the signal processing can make some extra difference on "picture quality"
Small pixels (large number and/or small CCD) reduce sensitivity due to the reduced fill factor. In order to avoid optical aliasing (moire, edge business..) an infinite number(at least higher than the lens can resolve) of pixels would be ideal. Optical antialiasing filters, reduced lens resolutions, and pixel shift techniques lower these artifacts.

Don Palomaki · October 15th, 2002, 07:41 PM

Also, in dual mode (still and video) camcorders often pixels used for higher resolution stills are not used for imaging in video modes.

And camcorders with electronic image stabilization 'waste' a substantial number of pixels in the EIS process.

Andre De Clercq · October 16th, 2002, 02:42 AM

Yes Don, and "waisting" is not the only potential resolution drawback with EIS. Even if the reduced pixelcount is still OK for DV resolutions, and the CCD readout is perfectly compensating the (moving) picture on the CCD, resulting in perfectly stable image, the motion blurr effects still reduce resolution. Often, in order to reduce this effect, the exposuretime is reduced when using EIS. This again reduces the low light performance under this condition.

October 13th, 2002, 10:49 PM	#1
limnz0110 Posts: n/a	CCD Size & Pixel Question I'm interesting to buy XM2 and here is my question. Canon GL2(XM2) has 470,000 Pixel ,Sony TRV 950 690,000 and Pansonic MX5000 has 80,000. Is this mean Panasonic has better CCD than Canon? I know Panasonic has 1/6", Sony has 1/4.7" and canon has 1/4" CCD. So what's the difference about the size and the Pixel and how does it affect the quality of Picture?

October 14th, 2002, 12:14 AM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Usually, the larger the CCD/s, the lower the lux; usually, the more CCD pixels, the higher the lux. So, the GL2 probably needs the least light whereas the MX5000 needs the most. Picture quality? I think they're all right up there. You just have to pick the one that suits your needs best.

October 14th, 2002, 06:17 AM	#3
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Frank's replay is correct. Excluding the optics, slight differences in CCD layout/technology togheter with the signal processing can make some extra difference on "picture quality" Small pixels (large number and/or small CCD) reduce sensitivity due to the reduced fill factor. In order to avoid optical aliasing (moire, edge business..) an infinite number(at least higher than the lens can resolve) of pixels would be ideal. Optical antialiasing filters, reduced lens resolutions, and pixel shift techniques lower these artifacts.

October 15th, 2002, 07:41 PM	#4
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Also, in dual mode (still and video) camcorders often pixels used for higher resolution stills are not used for imaging in video modes. And camcorders with electronic image stabilization 'waste' a substantial number of pixels in the EIS process.

October 16th, 2002, 02:42 AM	#5
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Yes Don, and "waisting" is not the only potential resolution drawback with EIS. Even if the reduced pixelcount is still OK for DV resolutions, and the CCD readout is perfectly compensating the (moving) picture on the CCD, resulting in perfectly stable image, the motion blurr effects still reduce resolution. Often, in order to reduce this effect, the exposuretime is reduced when using EIS. This again reduces the low light performance under this condition.