Revolution in CCDs ?

I saw these links in astronomydaily.com - looks interesting. Anyone have
more?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1207180612.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05121201new_chips.asp

Cheers
Ian.

"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
I saw these links in astronomydaily.com - looks interesting. Anyone have
more?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1207180612.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05121201new_chips.asp

Cheers
Ian.
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Not really that interesting for astronomy. They are potentially better for
applications which compress the images, but still have a lot of the light
gathering area, being lost to the circuitry. I can see them being very
interesting for some things like specific medical imaging applications
(massive increase in the battery life for things like 'swallowed' imaging
systems). The low power, may make them some of the lowest noise CMOS
imagers (which will then make them interesting to astronomers), but 'wait
ands see', to see if this happens, and what the Qe figures are. They'll
probably use a microlens structure to obviate the losses from the light
gathering area, and if a version does become available without the
compression hardware, then it might become interesting, but remember that
you are not going to build an 'embedded' AD converter like this, with
repeatable accuracy, and the sort of signal range that is normally
involved in an astronomical CCD. Expect 8bit, and possibly ten bits if
lucky...

Best Wishes

Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Yes, CMOS - I tend to just think about CCDs and CMOS in the same 'digital'
boat.

I would think they would open the door for faster frame rates, and thus be
very useful for Planetary imagers. The Luminera provides greater frame rates
than the Toucam for example, and is one reason why the best imagers are
using them. 8-bits is not too much of a problem either.

Cheers
Ian.
"Roger Hamlett" wrote in message
...

"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
I saw these links in astronomydaily.com - looks interesting. Anyone have
more?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1207180612.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05121201new_chips.asp

Cheers
Ian.
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Not really that interesting for astronomy. They are potentially better for
applications which compress the images, but still have a lot of the light
gathering area, being lost to the circuitry. I can see them being very
interesting for some things like specific medical imaging applications
(massive increase in the battery life for things like 'swallowed' imaging
systems). The low power, may make them some of the lowest noise CMOS
imagers (which will then make them interesting to astronomers), but 'wait
ands see', to see if this happens, and what the Qe figures are. They'll
probably use a microlens structure to obviate the losses from the light
gathering area, and if a version does become available without the
compression hardware, then it might become interesting, but remember that
you are not going to build an 'embedded' AD converter like this, with
repeatable accuracy, and the sort of signal range that is normally
involved in an astronomical CCD. Expect 8bit, and possibly ten bits if
lucky...

Best Wishes

"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Yes, CMOS - I tend to just think about CCDs and CMOS in the same
'digital'
boat.

I would think they would open the door for faster frame rates, and thus be
very useful for Planetary imagers. The Luminera provides greater frame
rates
than the Toucam for example, and is one reason why the best imagers are
using them. 8-bits is not too much of a problem either.


Hi Ian,

On chip digitisation and focal plane compression sounds like a disaster to
me for astro work. No sooner have we managed to hack webcam firmware to get
at the raw frames, they go and build this into the chip :-(

Fast frame rates need lots of light, high sensitivity and low signal/noise.
The Luminera cameras already need largish apertures to do them justice. Are
these going to be sensitive enough I wonder?

Robin

Robin Leadbeater wrote:
"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Yes, CMOS - I tend to just think about CCDs and CMOS in the same
'digital'
boat.

I would think they would open the door for faster frame rates, and thus be
very useful for Planetary imagers. The Luminera provides greater frame
rates
than the Toucam for example, and is one reason why the best imagers are
using them. 8-bits is not too much of a problem either.


Hi Ian,

On chip digitisation and focal plane compression sounds like a disaster to
me for astro work. No sooner have we managed to hack webcam firmware to get
at the raw frames, they go and build this into the chip :-(

Fast frame rates need lots of light, high sensitivity and low signal/noise.
The Luminera cameras already need largish apertures to do them justice. Are
these going to be sensitive enough I wonder?

Note necessarily largish apertures but rather faster systems. Yet they
(lumenera) are (slightly) more sensitive than same chip modded b&w
webcams and have a far cleaner raw frames.

Andrea T.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Robin Leadbeater wrote:
"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Yes, CMOS - I tend to just think about CCDs and CMOS in the same
'digital'
boat.

I would think they would open the door for faster frame rates, and
thus be
very useful for Planetary imagers. The Luminera provides greater frame
rates
than the Toucam for example, and is one reason why the best imagers
are
using them. 8-bits is not too much of a problem either.


Hi Ian,

On chip digitisation and focal plane compression sounds like a disaster
to
me for astro work. No sooner have we managed to hack webcam firmware to
get
at the raw frames, they go and build this into the chip :-(

Fast frame rates need lots of light, high sensitivity and low
signal/noise.
The Luminera cameras already need largish apertures to do them justice.
Are
these going to be sensitive enough I wonder?

Note necessarily largish apertures but rather faster systems. Yet they
(lumenera) are (slightly) more sensitive than same chip modded b&w
webcams and have a far cleaner raw frames.


A faster system means larger apertures for the same image scale doesn't it?
If you are using the camera for planetary work you are unlikely to want to
trade image size for frame speed, so to use the potential of the Luminera
frame rate you need to use a larger aperture - Hair splitting I know but you
started it ;-)

I am not arguing that the Luminera isn't a better camera than a webcam (I
would hope so at the price!). Just pointing out that there is more to using
fast frame rates than readout speeds and wondering whether these new chips
would deliver in these areas as well.

Robin

Robin Leadbeater wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Robin Leadbeater wrote:
"Ian Sharp" wrote in message
...
Not CCD's, but CMOS imagers.
Yes, CMOS - I tend to just think about CCDs and CMOS in the same
'digital'
boat.

I would think they would open the door for faster frame rates, and
thus be
very useful for Planetary imagers. The Luminera provides greater frame
rates
than the Toucam for example, and is one reason why the best imagers
are
using them. 8-bits is not too much of a problem either.


Hi Ian,

On chip digitisation and focal plane compression sounds like a disaster
to
me for astro work. No sooner have we managed to hack webcam firmware to
get
at the raw frames, they go and build this into the chip :-(

Fast frame rates need lots of light, high sensitivity and low
signal/noise.
The Luminera cameras already need largish apertures to do them justice.
Are
these going to be sensitive enough I wonder?

Note necessarily largish apertures but rather faster systems. Yet they
(lumenera) are (slightly) more sensitive than same chip modded b&w
webcams and have a far cleaner raw frames.


A faster system means larger apertures for the same image scale doesn't it?
If you are using the camera for planetary work you are unlikely to want to
trade image size for frame speed, so to use the potential of the Luminera
frame rate you need to use a larger aperture - Hair splitting I know but you
started it ;-)

Not necessarily. Image size shall reflect the attainable resolution
which in its turn is affected by the noise threshold. I'd rather shoot
at lower image scale if I can gain a significant improvement in
signal/noise ratio.


I am not arguing that the Luminera isn't a better camera than a webcam (I
would hope so at the price!). Just pointing out that there is more to using
fast frame rates than readout speeds and wondering whether these new chips
would deliver in these areas as well.

The Lumenera is a better camera because it delivers faster frame rate
with high signal/noise ratio.

BTW, I have a Lumenera M and didn't have to get a larger scope to see
improvements in the quality of my planetary imaging (wiz. ATIK
1HS/Toucam Pro), contrary to what you suggested.

Andrea T.

wrote in message
oups.com...

BTW, I have a Lumenera M and didn't have to get a larger scope to see
improvements in the quality of my planetary imaging (wiz. ATIK
1HS/Toucam Pro), contrary to what you suggested.


I actually said you need a largish aperture to do the Luminera justice,
where largish 8inch. What aperture do you use?

6" to 10". I've never considered 6" to be "largish" by any means.

Andrea T.