Are performances in low lights really important ?

Started Jan 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
HumanTarget
Contributing MemberPosts: 641
Like?
Re: Are performances in low lights really important ?
In reply to dreamer61, Jan 25, 2013

dreamer61 wrote:

HumanTarget wrote:

Pixel size doesn't really matter; it's the technology used and sensor size that does. Look at the Canon Powershot G15. Its pixels are a fraction of the size of the ones in the D800 or D4, but relative to its size, it's more efficient than either. If they could put those pixels into a full-frame sensor, you'd get a 250MP camera with great low-light performance!

I would not say that pixel size does not matter ... look here

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/

Roger Clark's got some errors in his logic concerning pixel size.  Take a look at this:

http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html#pixelsize

Sensor size is the main factor, not pixel size;  cameras with lower pixel counts appear cleaner because they just don't have the resolution to show the noise.

I agree that also the way the pixels are realized matters of course. The construction is important

You mention the Canon Powershot G15

It does not seem a champion in low light by the way

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Canon/Powershot-G15

I said for its size.  A full frame sensor is about 20.8x the size of the G15's, so if they could scale the G15's pixels to full frame with the same efficiency, you'd get a score of 3434 (since you'd be getting 20.8x the light at the same exposure settings).

In other words, the G15's sensor is more efficient than the D4's despite having smaller pixels, but the D4's size advantage (20.8x) is far greater than the G15's efficiency advantage (somewhere around 10%-15%).

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