Could you help an advanced level photographer understand...how size of aperture blades & shutter...

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
GBJ
GBJ
Regular MemberPosts: 178
Like?
Could you help an advanced level photographer understand...how size of aperture blades & shutter...
6 months ago

I have one biq question I don't know the answer to yet: When taking a photo of a landscape for example, does a FX camera with a FX lens attached, allow more quantity of light to strike its sensor than if a DX camera is recording exactly the same scene with a DX lens attached, assuming that both cameras are getting photographs of identical exposure? I am not talking about depth of field, I am just speaking of quantity of light passing the shutter of the cameras.

I think that the amount of light that passes the FX aperture blades within the lens is exactly the same amount of light that passes the DX aperture blades? Is this correct?

Also, is the size of the shutter blade opening larger in a FX camera than a DX camera, or the same? I know of course that shutter speed is the duration that the shutter blades are open to allow light to pass through to the sensor, but I am talking about the actual size of the rectangular hole that works with the shutter mechanism.

Is the diameter of a FX lens, set to F1.8 the same exact diameter of the opening of F1.8 on a DX lens? I believe that that these diameters are an identical measurement?

Am I right that the barrel size of the lens (on the landscape side of the aperture blades, not towards the sensor side of the lens) is larger on the FX lens so that it can collect and funnel the light towards the aperture blades more effectively? In low light scenes, this ability to funnel low light with a larger barrel would seem very beneficial?

It does not seem correct to me the statement: ...if for some reason you allow more light to hit a sensor(any size) the Dynamic Range and noise will improve compared to the other camera (DX or FX). The way I understand it, if I am shooting a DX or FX camera at the highest efficiency ISO, say it is ISO 100 for both cameras, and the shutter speed for, say for F8, is 1/2000 second for a 'properly' exposed image, then if I need to change to F11 and 1/1000 shutter speed on the FX camera to match the Depth of field of the DX camera, then there would be the same amount of light hitting the sensor. If I allowed more light than this to hit either sensor, then this would just result in overexposure, and this would not result in Dynamic range improvement or noise improvement, the way I understand it. When I raise the ISO, it will decrease the Dynamic Range accordingly?

If the proper amount of light for correct exposure is striking the sensor of a DX or FX camera, and say the amount of light that is passing the shutter opening is exactly the same for the DX or FX camera, the difference would then be the SIZE of the sensor. Wouldn't a FX sensor, with its larger surface area to collect light, be able to take the same amount of light entering the camera, and use it more efficiently because there is more surface area for light receptors within a larger surface? It will use the same amount of light more efficiently. If I'm sailing, if my sail is too small, then I need a larger sail to catch the wind. The wind isn't blowing any faster.

I am not fully understanding sensors and photons and pixels and the amount of light differences between DX and FX completely, so I know I may need some correction, and would appreciate to learn more.

Thanks.

I know my posting title says advanced photographer, but I do not consider myself this yet, of course.

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