• Home

Login

  • Register
  • Log in

Handy Links

  • arXiv.org/astro-ph
  • Astrophysics Data System (ADS)
  • The Mars Society (AUS)

Recent Posts

  • Why Supersymmetry May Be The Greatest Failed Prediction In Particle Physics History
  • SOFIA Finds Dust Survives Obliteration in Supernova 1987A
  • We Just Discovered The Milky Way Isn’t Actually a Flat Disc After All
  • Did microbes build stromatolites on Mars?
  • Will SpaceX Really Be Flying People To Mars In 10 Years?

Recent Comments

    Archives

    • February 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • January 2016
    • July 2015
    • February 2015
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • September 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • December 2012
    • October 2012
    • August 2012
    • April 2012
    • June 2002

    Categories

    • Arduino
    • Astronomy
    • Astrophotography
    • Celestron
    • Cosmology
    • Exoplanets
    • Jupiter
    • Linux
    • Mars
    • Meade
    • Programming
    • Raspberry Pi
    • SETI
    • Site news
    • Software
    • Space
    • Telescope Projects
    • Telescopes
    • The Moon
    • Uncategorized

    Current Lunar Phase

    Latest from Hubble

    CCD versus CMOS: Which is Better?

    By Earl on 17 Apr 2018 on No Comments

    Great explanation – make sure you click through the link and read the entire article!

    CCD versus CMOS: Which is Better? – Diffraction Limited

    We’re often asked whether CMOS or CCD sensors are better.  The simple answer is, “it depends.”

    Both types of sensors detect light the exact same way.  An incoming photon hits an atom of silicon, which is a semiconductor.  When this happens one of the electrons in the atom is boosted to a higher energy level (orbital), referred to as the conduction band.  Silicon normally behaves like an insulator, so its electrons can’t move around.  But once an electron is boosted up to the conduction band, it is freed to move around to other adjacent atoms, as if the silicon was a metal.  What was an insulator becomes a conductor – this is why silicon is called a semiconductor.  In optical sensors these now-mobile electrons are referred to as photoelectrons.

    Both types of sensors use pixels.  Pixels are simply a tiny square region of silicon, which collect and hold these photoelectrons.  The usual analogy is an array of rain buckets in a field, each collecting rain water.  If you want to know how much it rained in any part of the field, you just have to measure how full each bucket is.  So far everything is the same for CCD and CMOS; it’s the measuring process where things are very different.

    More diffractionlimited.com/ccd-versus-cmos-better/

    Related posts:

    1. CMOS vs CCD in the field of spectrography
    2. CCD vs CMOS | Teledyne DALSA
    3. Sensor breakthrough: Sony has developed a backlit CMOS sensor with global shutter
    4. What is Sony’s Exmor Technology Anyway?
    Astrophotography, Uncategorized

    Leave your Comment Cancel reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    © 2002-2019 - Earl White / Earl's Astro SiteRSS Feed
    Stuff by by Earl