High res CCD camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Thomas Gutzler, Sep 14, 2005.

  1. Hi everyone,

    I'm looking for a CCD camera with the following specs (or better)
    11 Mpixel (4008 x 2672)
    dynamic range: 12 bit (66dB) monochrome
    Firewire interface
    price: about 18k $US (or less)

    Redlake is offering a camera with similar parameters:

    Does anyone know a company offering a "better" camera?
    The price is the limiting factor here, so I'm mainly interested in higher
    resolution and/or wider dynamic range.

    Thomas Gutzler, Sep 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Thomas Gutzler

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    Have a look at canon EOS 1D mark 11 N
    Neil Ellwood, Sep 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Thomas Gutzler

    Darrell Guest

    The EOS 1D/1Ds mk.II are not CCD cameras. They may well do the job but are a
    different device.
    Darrell, Sep 14, 2005
  4. See:

    the Research STL-11000M/CM camera is 4008 x 2672:
    and is only $9,000 for class 1 research grade cooled system.
    Output is, I believe, 16-bit, but I could not find
    that on the page. It is a top performer in the
    astrophotography world. It only has a USB interface.

    Roger Clark
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Sep 14, 2005
  5. Thomas Gutzler

    SimonLW Guest

    Canon has acheived getting nearly artifact free images from their sensors
    (CMOS). I've not seen better from Nikon or the others using CCD sensors. I
    think it's the on board processing more than anything. I'm not sure they
    could do any better given what has to be processed with the Bayer color
    array. So, I'm not sure of the OP CCD requirement.
    SimonLW, Sep 14, 2005
  6. snipped
    Nikon use a CMOS sensor in the D2X


    Looks like they think they need CMOS for their flagship camera to.


    "The booksellers are generous liberal-minded men."

    Samuel Johnson
    "Life of Johnson" (J. Boswell), Vol. I, 1756
    John A. Stovall, Sep 14, 2005
  7. Thomas Gutzler

    Rich Guest

    Fingerlake Instruments. Maybe.
    Rich, Sep 15, 2005
  8. Hi,

    thanks for all the replies, I found some interesting new products.
    Unfortunately they all seem to have just a USB interface, which makes
    image readout a really long procedure. Even with USB 2.0 is seems to take
    25s for an 11MPixel image to download
    (http://www.fli-cam.com/downloads/Downloadtimes.PDF), which I don't
    understand. We need real time acquisition (10fps) in low res (binning) for
    alignment and we need to take at least 2 images per secound in high
    resolution which obviously requires firewire or CameraLink. This is
    probably the part where another large amount of money goes to.
    We also need a large (and linear) dynamic range. CMOS can't do that as
    good as CCD.
    Seems Redlake is still ahead.

    Thomas Gutzler, Sep 15, 2005
  9. Thomas Gutzler

    GTO Guest

    Now that's a good one. The SBIG cameras are the bread and butter for serious
    amateur (and some professional) astronomers. (I use the SBIG ST-2000XMI for
    extreme low-light industrial applications. Applications, for which one
    cannot (yet) use a CMOS based image device.)

    But I think, the original poster does not yet know what he's looking for. He
    did not specify whether he intends to use a C-mount device, Peltier cooled
    CCD, and/or high frame rate. I only whish that people could be more specific
    what they are actually have in mind. Maybe they should explain their
    application rather than tell us that they are looking for a 66db camera at
    12-bit. Especially for 18k, he should be able to get the right device if he
    were asking the right questions ;-)

    GTO, Sep 15, 2005
  10. Thomas Gutzler

    Ken Weitzel Guest

    Hi Tom...

    Now you have me really confused... course that's not hard to do, old,
    long retired, and stroke damaged, so I have a valid excuse :)

    Confused about 25 seconds to move 11 megs via usb 2 is out of the
    question. I move 40 meg pictures (virtually) instantly!

    Is it possible that you're not really talking about usb speed, but
    rather the card reading/writing time? Because it so, then your quoted
    time is still really slow, but within the realm of an honest mistake. :)

    And if that's the case, then if your application uses the
    camera/computer together then why write/read any flash memory at all?

    Just move it from the camera to the computer and it will surely be
    fast enough to satisfy anyone :)

    Apologies if I've misunderstood your situation.

    Ken Weitzel, Sep 15, 2005
  11. Hi Gregor,

    We don't care about the mount, because we're not going to have lenses
    attached to the camera at the moment - it's still an experimental setup.
    Cooling is less important, because we intend to have short integration
    (and thus high frame rates). As I wrote in my other email, we want to use
    binning to achieve a higher frame rate to adjust the setup and then take
    high resolution images as fast as possible with exposure times of, say,
    10-100 ms.
    You are right. Maybe he should have done that.
    We want to record holograms of tissue - visible laser light scattered by a
    then colimated and interfered with a reference beam. Looking at the
    pattern, it's possible to draw conclusions about the composition of the
    Enough reason for a high dynamic range, I guess - and of course, the
    bigger the
    resolution, the bigger the field of view. -> Less images for a certain

    Thomas Gutzler, Sep 15, 2005
  12. Ken,

    I couldn't find any information about the amount of RAM integrated to the
    camera but I assume that it's just enough to store one or two images. I
    assume there is no such thing as a memory card in cameras like that.
    Looking at the datasheet of the Kodak KAI-11000 CCD sensor, it is possible
    to get framerates of 2.5fps (Single output) or 4.6fps (Dual output), since
    the chip is using a pixel clock of 28 MHz. I would instantly fire the
    that makes the memory of such a camera to its bottleneck.
    I know that USB 2.0 should be able to transfer 480 Mbit/s. That's why I
    really understand the 25 secounds. Anyway, USB transfer rate drops, if
    other USB
    devices are used at the same time (mouse, keyboard etc). That's why I'd
    Apologies if I didn't get your point :)

    Thomas Gutzler, Sep 15, 2005
  13. Thomas Gutzler

    ASAAR Guest

    Are you sure that all of your USB 2.0 equipment is actually USB
    2.0 High Speed? USB 2.0 Full Speed is much slower, about the same
    speed as USB 1.x, and could account for the slow transfer rate
    you're getting. I don't know enough about card readers to know if
    that might be your bottleneck (if you're using them) but I've
    noticed that B&H sells card readers or adapters from the same
    manufacturer (Sandisk, I think) with different speed ratings.
    ASAAR, Sep 15, 2005
  14. Now I'm confused. Are you saying there is
    - USB 2.0 Full Speed which is 'the same' as USB 1.x
    - USB 2.0 High Speed which is much faster than USB 2.0 Full Speed?

    Anyways, I don't have equipment right now. It's all theory. The camera
    manufacturer company sais that it takes 25 secounds. I didn't prove that.
    And I don't want to :)

    Thomas Gutzler, Sep 15, 2005
  15. Thomas Gutzler wrote:
    Unfortunately, that is the case. Very misleading! To get the maximum
    speed you need hi-speed versions of everything. But it's worth it (at
    least for downloading from SD or CF memory cards to your PC). For more
    information, please see:


    David J Taylor, Sep 15, 2005
  16. Thomas Gutzler

    ASAAR Guest

    Yes, at least as far as trasnsfer speed is concerned. That has
    caused much confusion, and it probably was intentional, as the USB 2
    logos usually don't distinguish between the two types. USB 2 Full
    Speed and USB 2 High Speed may have some advantages over USB 1.x,
    but for most people the primary advantage would be speed, and there,
    USB Full Speed doesn't help in any meaningful way.
    Then that camera is insufficient for your purposes. But you knew
    that all along from the camera's spec's. Whether it had a USB 1,
    USB 2 Full Speed, USB 2 High Speed, Fire Wire or a SCSI port, 25
    seconds to transfer one image is far too slow for what you need.
    ASAAR, Sep 15, 2005
  17. http://www.betterlight.com/






    I had looked into this technology last month and in fact have since tossed
    all my references to these cameras and camera backs. However, worldwide I
    did immediately find about 10 different manufacturers of high resolution
    backs and systems to upwards of 100 Megapixels in various configurations.

    I have included three different manufacturers referenced products above and
    I suggest you go the manufacturers sites for viewing of the various options
    that they have an the software they have. I suspect that with a little bit
    of Googling, for about 4 or 5 hours, you'll be able to come up with a list
    of units and then you just need to contact their representatives for access
    to evaluation units.
    Richard Tomkins, Sep 15, 2005
  18. Thomas Gutzler

    GTO Guest

    We don't care about the mount, because we're not going to have lenses
    You need to consider your optical setup before you buy your imaging device.
    The resolution of the lens, working distance and required magnification will
    determine whether your choice of CCD size and the amount of square pixels
    makes sense. If it is an experimental setup you should consider C-mount
    since you can get a huge amount of different adapters and lenses for a
    C-mount setup.
    There are many CCD imaging devices you could use. 10 to 100 ms per exposure
    is not a problem. The problem is fps. Since you were asking for an IEEE 1394
    interface, I assume that you would like to have around 20 fps at full
    resolution. (For holography, you will need a high frame rate!) That's not
    too easily accomplished at very high resolution. But you may also consider
    1Gbit LAN, which seems to compete with Firewire cameras these days.
    With visible light, you mean monochromatic light in the visible spectrum.
    Right? What wavelength? Some CCD's have a better response at certain
    wavelengths than others. Look at the spectral response curves and the
    quantum efficiencies
    Again, the application narrows down the selection. And don't forget about
    the optics (see above).

    Another link of interest could be

    GTO, Sep 16, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.