Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

yoyoman · May 17, 2005, 10:41 PM

Which is better? According to Sony cmos is better. http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050517/latu056.html?.v=10

"The HDR-HC1 is also unique because it uses a CMOS chip for capturing the image, instead of CCD chips which have been standard in every digital camcorder for the past eight years."

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000117040901/ Is this one better?

barang · May 18, 2005, 06:53 AM

I believe CMOS is better, but I really can't remember. I learned about it once.....

yoyoman · May 18, 2005, 10:08 AM

Any one else?

Ganesha · May 18, 2005, 06:48 PM

As a scientist who has worked in developing such devices (although for a far different application then photon detection) for near room temperature devices the CMOS device will much better noise characteristics. Other factors such as dynamic range and amplification are inherent to the design of the devices and cannot be directly compared.

The only area where CMOS devices are easily inferior to CCD is that they are quite easy to fry (in terms of static discharge). Although I'm sure any commercial device would have proper shielding.

yoyoman · May 19, 2005, 11:41 AM

Nice. Any one else?

loki74 · May 19, 2005, 05:59 PM

im not absolutely sure, but I think that CMOS is primarily used in many still shot cams, like the digital SLRs and stuff, and I've never seen a video camcorder that doesnt use the CCD. So it seems to me that the CMOS is much more capable resolution wise; not even the HDV cams ive seen need the resolution levels that the CMOS is capable of. Because of its superior capabilities, I'd imagine that CMOS would be far more expensive, and not cost-effective unless you planned on using its full capabilities.

yoyoman · May 19, 2005, 10:55 PM

keep the ideas comming. So I CAN NARRORW DOWN MY CHOICE.

ChrisF · May 20, 2005, 08:53 AM

Worry less about the technology- check out each one and verify for yourself which you prefer. Odds are that the image quality is not dramatically better with one camera over the other.
Currently, pretty much all the high end digital cameras use CCDs. Most of the 35mm size digital cameras use CMOS. Personally I prefer the look a CCD (at least amongst current high end digital still imaging equipment) provides but the difference is subtle.

loki74 · May 20, 2005, 08:21 PM

Chris is right. The CMOS chip may be more advanced, but that does not mean that its full capabilities are being, of need to be for that matter, utilized. There are FAR more important factors to consider and the type of chip used. I'd pay more attention to things like the number of chips each cam has, what kind of lens they come with, what aspect ratios can it film in, what framerates can it film in, and most importantly, reviews.

yoyoman · May 21, 2005, 01:05 PM

Well looking at both specs which would you choose.?

loki74 · 04:09 PM

um you mean between the two cams you linked to?

umm just by the looks you can tell which is the superior camera. Oviously, the QUAILA002 is more advanced than the HDR-HC1. If you can afford the QUAILA002, you might also want to look into other high-end cams. The chip really doesnt matter at this stage, I think, just make sure you have 3 of them. HDCams are pretty expensive, and you are very lucky if you can afford them.