Pixel Density is GENIUS!

Started Jul 13, 2008 | Discussions thread
John Sheehy Forum Pro • Posts: 21,725
Re: No really, it isn't

RRJackson wrote:

No insult intended to the esteemed Mr. Fossum, but Micron is a sensor
manufacturer and that paper read more like a press release for their
new line of sensors than a serious comparison of sensor performance.

Obviously smaller and smaller photosites are managing to perform at
levels that were unimaginable just a few years ago. However, in "real
world" sensors the ones with the smallest photosites almost
invariably have the worst "real world" performance. If having the
smallest photosites you can pack on a sensor was such a huge draw the
D3 would be an in-joke among photographers and they'd all be carrying
around E-3 bodies like mine.

No; the D3's entire sensor performs very well, because it is both large, at the high end of DSLR-sensor quantum efficiency (P&S sensors tend to be higher), and it's area-based read noise is fairly low at high ISOs. A 36x24mm sensor full of the pixels in a P&S would outperform it at ISOs 100 to 400, though, and a 36x24mm sensor filled with pixels from the Canon 450D would outperform it at all ISOs.

Circumstantial market/product evidence will get you nowhere near the truth. There are no tiny sensors with huge pixels available in commercial cameras, and there are no large sensors with tiny pixels, so you are left judging tiny pixels by tiny sensors, which is nonsense.

-- hide signature --


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