Colin Maddock wrote: > > Julian wrote: > > >Because it is an 8-bit D/A, the lowest level we can read is 2^8 lower than > >1024 = 1024/256 = 4mV. This is the value of one least significant bit > >(LSB). Also, let's assume that this is an optimally engineered 8-bit > >system. Because it is optimally engineered, let's say that the > >CCD/amplifier noise is a quarter of the LSB level i.e. 1mV RMS. > > edited here > >Now, let's unplug the 8 bit D/A, and plug in a 12 bit D/A instead, to the > >same circuit. My point is - NOTHING CHANGES. > > Won't the 12bit a/d converter allow the information between 4mv and the 1mv noise >level to be resolved? > > Colin Maddock Is there anyone out there other than the participants who has any idea what they are saying? Ray Amos
- Re: filmscanners: 1:1024 r... Rick Trelles
- Re: filmscanners: 1:1024 r... Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the b... rafeb
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's ... Rob Geraghty
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's ... photoscientia
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Julian Robinson
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Julian Robinson
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Ray Amos
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- SV: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Ingemar Lindahl
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Viacheslav Zilberfayn
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Frank Paris
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? photoscientia
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin