1 June 2002 Lux transfer: complementary metal oxide semiconductors versus charge-coupled devices
Author Affiliations +
Optical Engineering, 41(6), (2002). doi:10.1117/1.1476692
Abstract
We compare the performance of competing CCD and CMOS imaging sensors including backside-illuminated devices. Comparisons are made through a new performance transfer curve that shows at a glance performance deficiencies for any given pixel architecture analyzed or characterized. Called lux transfer, the curve plots SNR as a function of absolute light intensity for a family of exposure times over the sensor’s dynamic range (i.e., read noise to full well). Critical performance parameters on which the curve is based are reviewed and analytically described [e.g., quantum efficiency (QE), pixel nonuniformity, full well, dark current, read noise, modulation transfer function (MTF), etc.]. Besides SNR, many by-products come from lux transfer including dynamic range, responsivity (e-/lux-s), charge capacity, linearity, and International Organization for Standards (ISO) rating. Experimental data generated by 4 ?m, three transistor (3T) pixel digital video graphics array (DVGA) and a 5.6-?m, 3T pixel digital extended graphics array (DXGA) CMOS sensors are presented that demonstrate lux transfer use.
James R. Janesick, "Lux transfer: complementary metal oxide semiconductors versus charge-coupled devices," Optical Engineering 41(6), (1 June 2002). https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1476692
JOURNAL ARTICLE
13 PAGES


SHARE
RELATED CONTENT

CMOS long linear array for space application
Proceedings of SPIE (February 06 2006)
Predicting the performance of infrared staring arrays
Proceedings of SPIE (January 05 1993)
Lux transfer: CMOS versus CCD
Proceedings of SPIE (April 24 2002)
Readout Mechanisms For Infrared Focal Plane Arrays
Proceedings of SPIE (December 09 1983)
A Reprise Of Performance Prediction Methods
Proceedings of SPIE (April 24 1987)

Back to Top