more pixels are better!

Started Dec 14, 2008 | Discussions thread
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 72,009
Re: SNR vs exposure

Graystar wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

That is wrong, there is no evidence supporting the 'DR depends on
pixels size' argument, because it is physically incorrect. What there
is is a lot of anecdotes and poorly framed 'tests'. The physics says
clearly that DR depends on sensor size and efficiency...

Explain why DxO Labs reports that even though the G10 sensor has a
slightly better SNR than the LX3 sensor, the LX3 sensor has one stop
more DR.

Not sure how the question relates at all to what I said, but I'll answer it anyway. SNR according to DXO, as I understand it, is the SNR of a 18% grey, exposed as the camera chooses. DR is also essentially an SNR, but the S is the FWC and the N is the read noise. The two will be related some way, but there are a lot of unknown variables in there, like the camera's actual EI for one.

I should clarify my statement and put in the 'all alse being equal'. Of course, you can wreck the DR of an efficient and large sensor by endowing it with very high read noise.
--
Bob

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