Strandlaeufer

Strandlaeufer

Joined on Jun 8, 2012

Comments

Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6
On Sony DSC-RX100 preview (544 comments in total)

The problem in low light situations is that the maximum resolution is no longer limited by the resolution of the optics but by the number of available photons (quantum noise). You can compensate for this by a longer exposure time or a larger lense aperture but not by a larger sensor. The Sony RX100 has a maximum aperture that is roughly twice as large as that of the Canon 100/95. One can therefore expect an considerably improved low light behaviour at maximum aperture, but at the expense of a lower depth of sharpness. There exists however a relationship between sensor size and maximum lense aperture for wide wide angle lenses. This is the reason why one needs larger sensors with larger maximum aperture. It would be no problem building a fast (low noise) tele lense on the basis of a tiny detector size.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2012 at 11:11 UTC as 89th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images article (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

rpm40: To all the "20 mp is too much" complainers- the pixel density on the rx-100 is lower than on the 12 mp x-10 and s100, and still lower than the 10 mp on the Oly xz-1. They went with BOTH more pixels, AND larger pixels. Sounds
like a perfectly reasonable approach to me.

How exactly us a 41 mp cell phone ending the megapixel race? You lost me there...

Hi shlam, you are right, it's the result of digital zoom and I'm very much relieved. Looks as if the RX 100 is a really great camera. I'm quite curious to see RAWs.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2012 at 08:26 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images article (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

DrakeB: It stinks that Sony used this 1'' sensor as a way to get up to 20MP and not as a way to primarily bring IQ up. There really should not have been an issue with them dropping MP. Even Nokia is not afraid of ending the MP race with their 808.

The 20 MP are not a real problem. Oversampling the lense resolution has the advantage of a smoother interpolation that is needed for removing CAs and image distortion. The bigger noise is lateron removed by necessary averaging algorithms that have to be applied for reducing the image on a size fitting to your screen.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2012 at 23:07 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images article (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

rpm40: To all the "20 mp is too much" complainers- the pixel density on the rx-100 is lower than on the 12 mp x-10 and s100, and still lower than the 10 mp on the Oly xz-1. They went with BOTH more pixels, AND larger pixels. Sounds
like a perfectly reasonable approach to me.

How exactly us a 41 mp cell phone ending the megapixel race? You lost me there...

I'm very much concerned and surprised by the image quality of image 2008006.jpg (the one with the two birds). If one is looking into the patches of grass it looks to me as if this camera would already need noise reduction at ISO 125. I have no other explanation for the smeared out patches of grass. The same holds for image 2011772. It is really annoying.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2012 at 22:48 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images article (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

Strandlaeufer: No question, this new Sony camera is capable of taking excellent photographs in a very pocketable size. By reading the review the reader is getting the impression that noise would be a matter of detector size. This isn't true. A smaller focal length leads to a higher density of light in the focal plane and this compensates the smaller detector size. Noise in photography is related to the quantum nature of light and not mainly a property of a detector. Noise depends on the IFOV of a detector element (angular resolution) and the aperture of the lens. Larger detectors allow in general lenseses with larger aperture and this is the reason for lower noise.

Noise is determined for a given angular resolution and shutter speed by the lens aperture and not by the size of the detector. The aperture of a lense is given by the focal length diveded by the f-number. Attractive apertures are those less than 4 mm and larger than 20 mm. Apertures less than 4mm are close to the aperture of the human eye and are giving your images a similar huge depth of sharpness. Apertures larger than 20 mm lead to a very narrow depth of sharpness so that the object of interest is crisp sharp while the rest is clearly out of focus. The range between is less attractive because large parts of he image are blurred without being clearly out of focus. One has only to look at the example images.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2012 at 08:40 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images article (645 comments in total)

No question, this new Sony camera is capable of taking excellent photographs in a very pocketable size. By reading the review the reader is getting the impression that noise would be a matter of detector size. This isn't true. A smaller focal length leads to a higher density of light in the focal plane and this compensates the smaller detector size. Noise in photography is related to the quantum nature of light and not mainly a property of a detector. Noise depends on the IFOV of a detector element (angular resolution) and the aperture of the lens. Larger detectors allow in general lenseses with larger aperture and this is the reason for lower noise.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 21:25 UTC as 27th comment | 13 replies
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6