would you buy a 36mp iso 25 m43 camera?

Started Jun 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
Lights
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,190Gear list
Like?
Re: would you buy a 36mp iso 25 m43 camera?
In reply to bobn2, Jun 9, 2012

bobn2 wrote:

Steen Bay wrote:

Steen Bay wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

compositor20 wrote:

Well since a 36mp camera would be used at f4 and there are many primes and a f2.8 zoom thatt are at its best at f4 (for diffraction f4 is the maximum you could go... if schneider anounces tilt shift lens it probably wont be faster than f3.5 at 12mm) the Nikon d800 wouldn´t have so much an advantage and m43 could be the lightweight landscape or outdoor portrait camera with good light... you would be at iso 100 f8 1/500 with Nikon d800 (sunny 16 rule) and iso 25 f4 1/500.

Would you buy such camera ? a camera like that would compete with FF for a while at low iso... even though it would be bad at high iso..

If coupled with some complementary lenses, small high resolution primes that peaked at f/2.8 to f/4, it would be an excellent backpack landscape camera, so good I would feel very tempted to buy one. The problem in the market place is that not enough people understand the relationship between camera and lens resolution, or between exposure, sensor area and image noise - so very few would understand the potential such a camera would have. In short, with the right lenses, it would give D800 quality images in a much more compact form - but people do not understand that.

Wondering, would it be possible to make a 36mp mFT sensor where the pixels had the same base ISO read noise and saturation capacity as the D800 pixels, which would give us a 2 stops lower base ISO on the mFT camera, and therefore the same base ISO performance as the D800?

That is the proposition in the OP, is it not?. And the answer is 'yes' it is possible.

PS - Though, I'd probably prefer to maintain the same base ISO as the D800, and instead use strictly scaled D800 pixels with 1/4 the read noise and 1/4 the saturation capacity, which also would give us the same base ISO DR as the D800 (but with higher shot/photon noise).

Lowing the read noise does nothing for the noise in the bright/mid tones, which is photon noise, dependent on the total light collected, and responsible for the image quality associated with big sensors. If you want to achieve that on small sensors then exposure needs to be increased so that the total light is the same for the big sensor, which means a lower base ISO - not a penalty because even though the lens will be as wide (same aperture width) it will be shorter for the same AOV. So, the question is, what you are trying to achieve. If it is just that screen images and postcard size prints look OK, sure leave the base ISO the same, if you want the 'velvety' big prints associated with FF and MF, lower the ISO.
--
Bob

I don't know how well this applies, but my Old Olympus C8080wz with a 2/3 sensor (which is quite large by digicam standards) at ISO 50, in good light bests my EPL1 in shadow noise. At 100 about equal to EPL1 at 200, above that no contest. If they'd have found a way (I'm not an engineer) to have dropped the base ISO of the old 12mp sensor to ISO 50, I'd have bought one in a heartbeat. If upper limit of usability was 400...what's a flash for? It's nice to have a camera that 'will' do high ISO, but nice to have one nice and smooth in most regards at low. So....I remember you giving me a link, to that variable capacitance sensor technology. Very interesting idea. To me the 36mp on this size sensor would be a bit of overkill...maybe maybe not.
--

http://www.pbase.com/madlights
http://barriolson.aminus3.com/
"why so serious?": The Joker

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
no,New
No,New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow