SUMMARY INTRODUCTION: In dental radiography, as well as in medical radiology in general, digital detectors are increasingly used as a medium for receiving and converting analog images into digital ones. These devices provide diagnostic images that are significantly better than those made on the receptors of older technologies such as film or phosphor plates. The most commonly used modern digital detectors are CCD (Charge-Coupled Device) and CMOS (Complementary Metal-oxyde Semiconductor). As there is a difference in production technology between these two detectors, research has been conducted over the last 20 years to compare CCD and CMOS in image quality and other properties, in order to rank their suitability for various imaging purposes. AIM: The aim of this study was to conclude whether there is a difference in the quality of the diagnostic image made by one or another detector and whether there are differences in other properties of the detector that could influence the decision to use one of them. The initial hypothesis was that the qualitative difference did not exist or was not significant. METHOD: The paper is a systematic review of professional literature describing the technical and technological properties of digital detectors and scientific journal articles that examine and compare CMOS and CCD. By searching and selecting articles from bio-medical databases, 14 professional articles were selected in which detectors were compared and where the obtained results were quantified. Extracted data were presented in a simplified way in 8 detector properties that were researched and 9 properties that were not measured, which the authors mentioned as personal impression or observation. RESULTS: The results of the measurements did not show a significant difference in the quality of the image, but the recorded observations and impressions of the researchers about other detector properties are on the side of CMOS. CONCLUSION: Conclusion is that CMOS and CCD are equally or comparatively good in image quality, and that differences in the "secondary" properties of both detectors could contribute to the recommendation or decision to use one of them. These characteristics, and especially economics, could be the subject of future research. l