MP fans vs ISO lovers. what's the ratio?

Started Apr 4, 2009 | Discussions thread
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 16,053
Like?
Re: MP fans vs ISO lovers ...50D has it...
In reply to AnuN, Apr 5, 2009

AnuN wrote:

More pixels equals to better image quality. Adding pixels
is the easiest, fastest way of getting better IQ.

Even when the tech is inferior for high ISO per unit of area for higher pixel densities, the higher densities can still have qualities not present in the lower ones. These two crops are from the same sensor area, the one on the left from the Canon 400D, pushed to ISO 3200 from 1600, and the right, the Panasonic FZ50 pushed to 3200 from 100. Focal length and absolute exposure are the same for both cameras. The 400D uses the Tamron 90mm macro, the sharpest lens I own, and the right uses the FZ50's built-in zoom. The 400D is upsampled, so that the same sensor area is the same size on the monitor for both images. While the FZ50 clearly has more noise in flat areas, you see what looks like more detail in its capture. I can't say that I prefer the 400D, with less noise.

If you squint, when you look at these two, the brain's NR kicks in, but you still see more detail, by far, in the FZ50 image. I would not mind having an APS sensor full of FZ50 pixels! The line noise isn't really an issue related to pixel density, either, and could conceivably be a lot weaker. I hear that the LX3 has a lot less pattern noise than the FZ50.

Oh, BTW, the insets are scaled so that the 400D is at 1:1 pixel zoom.

-- hide signature --

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow