Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.photo.digital,aus.photo,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (
More info?)
In article <MPG.1b4c7d5a15cbd6b598a6d9@news.supernews.com>,
Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
>PTRAVEL <ptravel88-usenet@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Actually, it wouldn't -- it's primary advantage would be size and weight.
>>3-chip video cameras offer exceptional color reproduction because dichroic
>>prisms split the light into primary colors, each of which is directed to a
>>monochrome sensor. The result is high color accuracy without interpolation
>>or approximation, as well as excellent low-light performance, as there is no
>>light loss involved, except that small amount attributable to the prism.
>
>As a side question: if full colour information in each pixel is not so
>important (as has been repeated again and again here), why do higher end
>camcorders use three CCDs and a prism to achieve it ?
It is all about trade-offs. If you can get full color information without
any loss in resolution, with same sensitivity and signal to noise ratio,
and in a convenient package, it is a better deal than a sensor that provides
a lower color resolution.
For video cameras, the resolution is more or less fixed, and compared to
the overall size of a (professional) video camera, using three sensors
is no big deal. I don't know about sensitivity issues. With analog video
cameras, you don't really want to do any complicated bayer pattern
image reconstruction. Maybe bayer pattern sensors make sense for HDTV
video cameras.
For photo cameras, bayer pattern sensors provide (at the moment) the best
trade-off in most cases.
--
The Electronic Monk was a labor-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video
recorder. [...] Video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving
you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electronic Monks believed things for
you, [...] -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram