[Kev50027 @ Mar 27th 2007 10:35AM]

This means nothing without a decent lens and some pictures to prove it. Honestly, that sensor is so small, it can't possibly get enough light to compare with a DSLR.

[cjameshuff @ Mar 27th 2007 11:19AM]

Sensor size makes no difference in image quality until you reach the diffraction limit. It makes no difference whatsoever in light gathering capability, that is determined entirely by the lens system.

Also, CCD sensors are widely used because they're cheap and easy to make, and more development has been done with them. A CMOS sensor such as this may have numerous advantages.

[Dan @ Jun 7th 2007 6:43AM]

smaller photodiodes are more sensitive than larger ones, if a photodiode is 1/4th the size of one in another sensor, it is 4 times more sensitive, if they both receive 10,000 photos, the smaller one is more sensitive, it in reality it'll only receive 25,000 as its area is only a quarter of the larger, thus produces the same sensitivity levels, it needs have a more refined fabrication process, the CMOS process is exactly the same, in fact it IS the process for fabrication of CPUs, making smaller photodiodes is more difficult and they need to be made more identical to the ones around them to keep noise down (same with the second photo resistor).