1 June 2002 Lux transfer: complementary metal oxide semiconductors versus charge-coupled devices
Author Affiliations +
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.
© (2002) Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)
James R. Janesick, 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 . Submission:
JOURNAL ARTICLE
13 PAGES


SHARE
RELATED CONTENT

Lux transfer: CMOS versus CCD
Proceedings of SPIE (April 24 2002)
Beating the 1/f noise limit on charge coupled devices
Proceedings of SPIE (September 25 2012)
A Reprise Of Performance Prediction Methods
Proceedings of SPIE (April 24 1987)
The 123 mm 8kX3k e2v Ohio State CCD231 68 for...
Proceedings of SPIE (July 24 2008)

Back to Top