What is 4 times better?

Started Mar 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
24hrexposure
Regular MemberPosts: 295Gear list
Like?
Re: What is 4 times better?
In reply to ultimitsu, Mar 24, 2013

Most of the discussion about sensor size can be summed up as quality versus convenience. When I see someone drinking coffee from 7-eleven, I don't look down my nose at them over my fresh-ground cup straight from the press pot, because sometimes I'm in a hurry and buy coffee at 7-eleven too. These days I count myself lucky to have time even for that.

And now, for my work of fiction:


I will here list the performance advantages of my Phase One MF system over full frame*:

  • You can get 2.5x (1.3 stops) less noise by keeping the illumination the same and collecting 2.5x the light
  • You can (must) have a lens with an iris 2.5x the surface area and more than 2.5x heavier by keeping the illumination the same and collecting 2.5x the light
  • You can (must) have 1.6x shallower DoF by keeping the illumination the same and collecting 2.5x the light
  • You can expose at 20% the illumination (or use 1.3 stops higher ISO) but still collect the same light, thereby keeping noise the same
  • You can have the same density of photosites and have 2.5x the pixels. (The increase in linear resolution is only 1.3x.)
 24hrexposure's gear list:24hrexposure's gear list
Gimp +1 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