Logo

/// 
CMOS vs. 3MOS -- 1/2.6 vs. 1/4.1 -- 24 MBit/s vs. 17 MBit/s

CMOS vs. 3MOS - vs. 1/2.6. 1/4.1 - 24 Mbit / s vs.. 17 Mbps



Frage von tonymontanax:
Dezember 2009

SDR-S11 vs Canon HF. Panasonic HDC-TM350

Is everything in the title. The question is:

How strong the 3-fold chip count is reflected in the image quality?

Would really not an issue where the Panasonic would not still be a little more manual setting refinements ...

Camcorder of the year? Mh .. Well ... Why??



Antwort von tommyb:

At the 1-chip CMOS "loses" one of the few s.Qualität debayering. With 3-chip CMOS is the Color performancetreuer s.Original.

The question is however: they recognize how much of it with his naked eye after it is compressed with AVCHD (4:2:0) was born?

Benefit should be, however, that the material which the AVCHD compression to 4:2:0 including reduction of higher quality than the material that makes available a 1-Chipper (provided the signal processing in the camera is the 3-chip device really better ) and is thus too theoretical (and practically synonymous metrologically) less color distortion occurs when walking.


The Lichstärke the lens tells you how good the lowlight properties. Depending on the next aperture is open (lower figure), the more light is going to come. A camera with an initial aperture of 2.6 is Lichstärker than one with 4.1. The camera has the faintest must gain so much more dazuschalten rustles the Picture synonymous sooner.

In a 3-chip device can however be that the internal signal amplification due to the supposed better ink absorption (through the three chips) works just as well as for a 1-chip camera, or maybe even better.


24 Mbps gives you more flexibility in complex images. Suppose it is water with waves filmed, that the sun is shining, the picture is actually very complex in its structure. At 24 Mbps, the picture will contain more detail than at 17 Mbps, since more memory per second is available. Compression artifacts occur at 24 Mbps are also not as fast as at 17 Mbps, with AVCHD less artifacts (by contrast versa) tends to be rather the Picture weichwäscht.

In normal shooting situations, the difference should not necessarily be visible.



Antwort von tonymontanax:

Yes, perhaps ambiguity ... the 1/2.6 and 1/4.1 was referring to the chip size.





Antwort von tommyb:

But nothing will change s.der statement;)

The value always refers to one inch, ie 2.54 cm. 1/2.6el of an inch is about 9.8 mm, at 1/4.1, it is 6.2 mm.

A larger chip must not lead to better quality (here it depends on the number that may be on s.draufgequetschten pixels - especially for camcorders with photo function), but in a theoretical nature is a greater light-sensitive chip synonymous.



Antwort von Bernd E.:

"TommyB" wrote:
... The value is always related to one inch, ie 2.54 cm. 1/2.6el of an inch is about 9.8 mm, at 1/4.1, it is 6.2 mm ...

The tariff data come originally from the time when the cameras based sensors used instead of tubes (and on the same diameter) of the tubes so that the actual sensor size is much smaller: a 1 / 2 ,6-sensor is likely a diagonal of approximately have seven millimeters, a 1 / 4 ,1-sensor according to one of about four millimeters. As a rule of thumb, one comes with "1 inch = 16mm, in this context quite well. Does nothing but synonymous s.der statement ;-)



Antwort von tonymontanax:

Well, it is synonymous 6mio at least 2 million pixels ...

What tips the balance? Size or number?



Antwort von tommyb:

It all depends on how much space each occupied pixel.

If I have a sensor with 2x4 cm, and that are exactly eight pixels, then each pixel is 1x1 inches.

Do I have the same sensor with 32 instead of eight pixels, the pixels are correspondingly smaller, then the size is 0.5 x 0.5 cm.

This in turn means that each pixel on the second chip abbekommt LESS light than it is at first the case. Thus, the first camera would indeed be grossly Resolutionher of their life but still synonymous brighter.



Antwort von tonymontanax:

Jaha, but CHIP is indeed synonymous greater.

The Panasonic has doch nich 3x 1/4.1 inch chip right??



Antwort von tommyb:

The HDC-TM350 has 3x 1/4.1 chips - yes.





Antwort von Freddi:

This question is m. E. universally valid and do not answer the question is similar: more horsepower synonymous equal signifying a higher top speed with the car? Or play as synonymous nor factors such as vehicle weight, drag or drive a role?

From the subject to "finished" picture there are several stations ... And all can be influenced on the final result - starting Ojektiv, the sensor size, pixel count, bit rate, compression etc.
I think it is idle, on "laboratory values debate" - if the cam has a cheap plastic lens, use your 6 MP or a 1 / 2 Sensor no response - 3 chips are not necessarily a guarantee for better pictures than 1 chip -- in theory very well ... In practice, this may look different but synonymous. The images of a Aiptek with 12 MP sensor is not even remotely compare with those of HV 30 to - and has the "just" 2 MP.

As for me honestly a bit "annoying saying" this perpetual discussion about "theoretical" performance - and the only thing that counts is only the result - and this will not automatically better when you use the "best" camera.

You choose the Cam that suits you, which you can use s.besten and their (own) test to look at pictures s.besten your target format ... And finally, listen to, pixel numbers, sensor sizes, bit rates, Zommfaktoren or something to weigh ... go off and make films!




Antworten zu ähnlichen Fragen:
**!!! Panasonic AVCHD GH-1 with 32 Mbps! **
Durchbruch: gehackte GH2 mit 1080p24 mit 42 Mbps
Canon focuses on MPEG-2 4:2:2 HD with 50 Mbps
Offizielles Panasonic GH2 Update bringt 1080p25 mit 24 Mbps
Panasonic GH1 Hack allows more than 100 Mbps in MJPEG
Sony PMW-150 mit 50 Mbit/s 4:2:2
hc-v707 nur 24 Mbit/s bei 1080/50p
Wie viel MBit/s braucht man?
Premiere Pro und Datenrate 50 Mbit/sec
Panasonic GH4 mit 4K, 200 Mbit/s, 4:2:2 10 Bit via HDMI und opt. 3G SDI-Out
Gutes 4K Bild mit 20 Mbit/s?
133 Mbit Mpeg / GH2 Firmware hack
Panasonic GH3 mit I-Frame 72 Mbit/s, 1080/50p uvm.
IBC 2010: Sonystellt PMW-500 with 4:2:2 / 50 Mbit / s before
Sony EX3 Nachfolger? PMW-300 mit 4:2:2 / 50 Mbit/s und AVC Option
Panasonic GH3 mit WLAN, neuem Sensor und All-I 72 Mbit/s?
Panasonic GH1: MJPEG with 70 Mbit / s better than AVCHD?
Sony PXW-X180: günstiger Einstieg in 50 Mbit/s 4:2:2 HD
GH2-Hack: Neues PTool 3.61d mit 42 MBit AVCHD da!
Sony: 2/3" PMW 400 Schultercam mit MPEG HD422 / 50 Mbit/s
Canon EOS 5D Mark II with H.264 intra-frame recording with 91.3 Mbit / s!
Neuer Panasonic GH2 Hack - 176 Mbit Intraframe Aufzeichnung
A further 50 Mbit 4:2:2 camcorder of Canon - XF100 and XF105
nur niedrige Mbit Raten bei H264/Avc und Co, geht da noch was?
Officially confirmed: Canon EOS 550D filming synonymous with 44 Mbit
CHDK hack enables 95 Mbps full-HD recording with IXUS 220 HS































weitere Themen:
Spezialthemen


16:9
AVCHD
AVI
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
After effects
Apple Final Cut Pro
Audio
Avid
Cam
Camcorder
Camera
Canon
Capture
Capturing
Clip
EOS
Editing
Effect
Error
Export
File
Files
Film
Final Cut
Format
Formate
HDR
Import
JVC
Layer
Light
MAGIX video deLuxe
Microphone
Monitor
Movie
PC
Panasonic
Pinnacle
Player
Premiere
RAM
RED
Recording
Red
Software
Sony
Sound
Studio
TV
Tape
Video
Videos

Featuresschraeg
slashCAM
slashCAM
News
HD Camcorder database
One-on-One Cam comparison
About our tests
About us


update am 15.April 2014 - 18:00
slashCAM ist ein Projekt der channelunit GmbH
*Datenschutzhinweis*