View Single Post
Old Aug 31, 2007, 9:24 AM   #7
Senior Member
adric22's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359

I think CMOS sensors also may suffer from dead pixels more often than CCDs. This is probably because each pixel contains quite a lot of extra circuitry so more chance for it to go bad. I have a bad pixel or two on several of my low-end cameras. However, it may be that the manufacturers know about the bad pixels and purposefully sold lots of them to cheap camera makers at a reduced price. The cheap camera makers know that most people won't notice or care about the dead pixels.

This was an issue with laptop LCDs for a long time during the 1990's. That is why the screens were so expensive. They had to produce 10 to 20 TFT LCD screens in order to get one that had an acceptable number of bad pixels. Getting one with no bad pixels was quite a trick. I don't see that much anymore with newer LCDs and the cost is also lower. I guess they perfected the manufacturing techniques to make sure more screens were working perfectly per batch.

But to be honest.. when my brother called me yesterday and told me he'd bought that new high-def Sony camcorder and that he paid $4,000 for it, and then mentioned it had 3 CMOS sensors (just like having 3 CCDs)I was kind of surprised. I was mostly surprised because I figured if the unit costs that much they could afford to put CCDs in there, and I figured they'd have a hard time selling it to high-end users if they knew it was a CMOS just because of the bad reputation. But I guess Sony has decided that high-end CMOS chips can actually be better than CCD.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote