Reverting to the original point of this thread and the difference between CCD and CMOS sensors, I understand there is doubt whether CMOS sensors can handle wide-angle lenses as well as CCD sensors can. I also understand tilts and shifts may be more limited with CMOS sensors than with CCDs.
Roger
This is not so much CMOS vs CCD technology, but the fact that CMOS sensors of today have smaller pixels than yesterday's CCDs and thus get the even more issues with tech wide crosstalk. You need to go back to Kodak CCDs like on the P45+ which was made with light shielding between pixels and without microlenses to have something that really worked well with tech wide lens design.
I think you could make light shields also with CMOS and certainly remove the microlenses, but that's not just how sensors are made for cameras these days regardless of CMOS or CCD. You need microlenses for better ISO performance (and somewhat for reduced aliasing but that's less of a problem), and light shields probably makes construction more complicated and may force a reduction of photo diode size, reducing full well capacity and thus DR. I don't think sensor manufacturers are prepared to make such trade-offs today. Everyone tests for DR and ISO, almost noone tests for angular response.
My guess is that the next generation of sensors may could have better angular response if the pixel size would stay the same but that will be canceled out by a further reduction in pixel size to get more megapixels, which is what's selling cameras, not tech wide compatibility. As a result the tech wides will fade away in the high end commercial segment, but will stay for a long time among users of legacy stuff as long as the older back electronics will hold up.
