more pixels are better!

Started Dec 14, 2008 | Discussions thread
Graystar Veteran Member • Posts: 8,373
Re: Contrary to conventional wisdom, higher resolution actually ..

boels069 wrote:

compensates for noise: !

"If you keep the same optics, the same sensor size (and therefore the same field of view), what will be the result? Basically, the same amount of light captured by the optics will be shared by more pixels, and since each individual pixel will receive less light, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) will be lower. In short, you will end up taking photos with more noise."

This article is why I don't entirely accept DXO Labs as trusted source just yet. This statement is wrong. The pixels may have more noise...but the photos, viewed as a whole, will have the same noise (or less, assuming that new, same-sized sensor has been improved.)

Also, the technology in the 1DsMIII sensor is a pretty big leap from the 350D. No matter how they try to equalize it, I can't take a comparison like that seriously.

“Suppose now that the images have exactly the same field of view (by changing the lens focal length) and are printed on 30x20cm paper with the same 300dpi printer. Because of the very high resolution of the 1Ds Mark III, the printer will downsample the image and decrease the noise, giving a clear advantage (about 3dB) to the 1Ds Mark III.“

But if the sensors were the same size, then the high MP sensor would have had more noise to begin with. But they're comparing the same image taken with two different sized sensors, which always favors the larger sensor!!

Comparision of RAW images show that the G10, having nearly 50% more pixel than the LX3, has pretty much the same noise performance as the LX3. Obviously there's a problem with DxO's analysis.

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