What does the S95 have that the SD4000 doesn't?

Started Jun 13, 2011 | Discussions thread
sarlo100
Senior MemberPosts: 1,320Gear list
Like?
Re: What does the S95 have that the SD4000 doesn't?
In reply to J1000, Jun 17, 2011

J1000 wrote:

PaulRivers wrote:

J1000 wrote:

Fair enough, but "40%" was just thrown in there to make it sound more important than it really is I agree that you can see an image quality difference, but you won't notice unless you compare two images side-by-side.

I, for one, agree with you. The "40%" thing is misleading - you don't get 40% better picture out of the larger sensor, not even close.

I'm just glad I didn't have to be the lone person replying to his posts. Thank you!

To Blackhat: I mean no disrespect and I promise I'm not trolling. All I'm trying to do is correct you.

The only reason the S95 would ever be able to use a lower ISO value than a similar camera at an identical shutter speed is because its f/2.0 lens is 1+ stops faster than most other compact cameras. (It's not faster than the SD4000 though, incidentally.)

Set the S95 to f/2.0, ISO 200, then set a Canon DSLR to f/2.0, ISO 200, and observe the automatically chosen shutter speed. They will be the same or at least very, very close.

Old thread, but I think Blackhat confused a couple of different features about sensor size. The aperture/sensor size ratio will be uniform, that is absolutely true. Here is the point I think he was trying to make, and crossed up.

The photosites on larger sensor, given the same number of sites, will be larger, which will collect more light, generate less noise, and theoretically make for a cleaner picture once the ISO is cranked up (which is an analog process...it enhances light capture AND noise). Whether that makes for a "better picture" or not has much more to do with the original ambient lighting that anything else. In poor lighting, the S95 may have more than a 40% advantage over an SD4000. In broad daylight, it might not even be 4%.

I also wonder if he confused depth of field with his original arguments. A smaller sensor, in terms of a full sized 35mm sensor, is actually rated at a very small f/stop (say f/16 or f/22) in "absolute" terms as opposed to the "actual" f/2.0 or 2.8 on a full frame. But we're only talking absolute terms in comparison with the 24x36 sensor of a 1Ds or 5D. Anyway, under such a scenario, the "absolute" f/stop on an SD4000 sized sensor would be less than on an S95. But that only relates to depth of field, not the aperture/sensor size equation.

 sarlo100's gear list:sarlo100's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 350D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 +8 more
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