Most scientific cameras are 16 bit. Consumer cams, 14 max?

[RichA]

I wonder what the difference is for? By scientific, I include consumer astronomy cameras which can cost as little as $200.00. Seems like it might
tie-in to processor power as consumer astronomy cameras are tied to laptops or tablets.

[geoff]

On 18/04/2022 11:38 am, RichA wrote:
> I wonder what the difference is for? By scientific, I include consumer astronomy cameras which can cost as little as $200.00. Seems like it might
> tie-in to processor power as consumer astronomy cameras are tied to laptops or tablets.

???? Do you mean that 'they' use 16-bit processors ?

geoff

[nospam]

In article <j9ydnehwAuO2fMH_...@giganews.com>, geoff

16 bit a/d converter.

[Alfred Molon]

Perhaps the A/D converters of these cameras have 16 bit?
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-04-19 21:05, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 18.04.2022 um 05:55 schrieb geoff:
>> On 18/04/2022 11:38 am, RichA wrote:
>>> I wonder what the difference is for?  By scientific, I include
>>> consumer astronomy cameras which can cost as little as $200.00.
>>> Seems like it might
>>> tie-in to processor power as consumer astronomy cameras are tied to
>>> laptops or tablets.
>>
>> ????  Do you mean that 'they' use 16-bit processors ?
>
> Perhaps the A/D converters of these cameras have 16 bit?

Having more bits in A/D increases noise.

Astronomy "cameras" I have seen include a Peltier cell to cool the
sensor and reduce thermal noise. Probably more expensive units use
liquid CO2 or N2.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <vgn3ji-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

>
> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.

nope. having more bits increases dynamic range, making noise less of an
issue.

> Astronomy "cameras" I have seen include a Peltier cell to cool the
> sensor and reduce thermal noise. Probably more expensive units use
> liquid CO2 or N2.

that's separate issue and unrelated to bit depth.

[geoff]

Surely it relates to 'useful' bit depth - the lower the thermal noise,
the greater dynamic range achievable.

geoff

[Alfred Molon]

Am 19.04.2022 um 23:51 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>
> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.

More bits reduce the quantisation noise.

[nospam]

In article <Zo-dnaFrT-2K5_3_...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.
> >
> > nope. having more bits increases dynamic range, making noise less of an
> > issue.
> >
> >> Astronomy "cameras" I have seen include a Peltier cell to cool the
> >> sensor and reduce thermal noise. Probably more expensive units use
> >> liquid CO2 or N2.
> >
> > that's separate issue and unrelated to bit depth.
>
> Surely it relates to 'useful' bit depth - the lower the thermal noise,
> the greater dynamic range achievable.

true, but thermal noise in the sensor is still independent of bit depth
of the a/d.

[geoff]

That's a bit of a backwards way of looking at it !

Lower thermal noise potentially allows more benefit to be obtained when
used with a higher bit-depth A-D.

geoff

[nospam]

In article <CYGdnTYjlac7Uv3_...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.
> >>>
> >>> nope. having more bits increases dynamic range, making noise less of an
> >>> issue.
> >>>
> >>>> Astronomy "cameras" I have seen include a Peltier cell to cool the
> >>>> sensor and reduce thermal noise. Probably more expensive units use
> >>>> liquid CO2 or N2.
> >>>
> >>> that's separate issue and unrelated to bit depth.
> >>
> >> Surely it relates to 'useful' bit depth - the lower the thermal noise,
> >> the greater dynamic range achievable.
> >
> > true, but thermal noise in the sensor is still independent of bit depth
> > of the a/d.
>
> That's a bit of a backwards way of looking at it !

no, since it's the correct way of looking at it.

> Lower thermal noise potentially allows more benefit to be obtained when
> used with a higher bit-depth A-D.

it reduces noise in the shadows, but the dynamic range is still limited
by the a/d converter.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-04-20 23:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 19.04.2022 um 23:51 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>>
>> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.
>
> More bits reduce the quantisation noise.

Yes.

But the "analog" noise makes the least significant bits in the A/D
converter useless, so they simply don't make those and save money. Now,
make the sensor less noisy, get a stable "analog" signal, with noise
levels under the value of the last bit in the converter, and you can add
bits.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <plm8ji-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> Having more bits in A/D increases noise.
> >
> > More bits reduce the quantisation noise.
>
> Yes.
>
> But the "analog" noise makes the least significant bits in the A/D
> converter useless, so they simply don't make those and save money.

what do you mean they don't make those?

> Now,
> make the sensor less noisy, get a stable "analog" signal, with noise
> levels under the value of the last bit in the converter, and you can add
> bits.

you're confused about the various types of noise as well as sampling.

[RichA]

Not all of them, but higher-end ones do.