The Joy of Pixel Density

Started Jul 13, 2008 | Discussions thread
touristguy87 Regular Member • Posts: 191
Re: this is NONSENSE

"n what way did the original poster botch his demonstration?"

He didn't generate any real noise. He in effect took "no noise" and boosted it 5 stops. Both cameras will produce plenty of real noise under realistic shooting-conditions. He used a highly-unrealistic shooting condition and tried to make a point based on data from that.

In fact it was such a bad test method that he came up with "results" that were completely unrealistic. Anyone can shoot those two cameras and see that the FZ50 is far more noisy than the 400d. I'd hate to see the raw shots off an FZ50.

"> ignoring the fact that one is cmos and the other ccd.

See? Now you're making the very argument that my illustration was designed to circumvent."

That is a fairly minor and well-known issue with limited impact. Varying pitch has much more influence on noise than the process..

"It's not a test. It's a demonstration. The point is to demonstrate that you don't lose anything by increasing pixel density. "

Of course you do, you lose cross-sectional area which negatively-influences SNR and in the limit of process capability you lose fill-factor. This is ignoring any difference in the filtration that may lead to increased reflection or absorption in the microlenses or AA filter.

"In fact, you gain resolution, subject, of course, to the resolution of the lens."

IF you also increase sensor area so that the total MP is increased as well. Otherwise, if you increase pitch at the same MP (as in this "test") all you are doing is increasing the FOV crop. The FZ50 has an excellent now you're bringing the lens into play.

These are issues of resolution, blur, diffraction...not noise. It is simply incredible that ANYONE who regularly reads DP would think that these two cameras would have comparable noise at the same ISO. Or, would look at the LOWEST ISO only and try to make some sweeping conclusions from that. Not to mention shoot only at the lowest ISO, vastly underexpose the shots, then push them 5 stops and try to make some great point about how noisy each camera is relative to the other based on pitch. That's not just "nonsense" that's outright stupidity. You're holding the cameras in your freaking hands and you can't see that one is far noisier than the other?

Anyone who would say something like that has no business shooting a camera without supervision.

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