more pixels are better!

Started Dec 14, 2008 | Discussions thread
Graystar Veteran Member • Posts: 8,373
Re: SNR vs exposure

ejmartin wrote:

Graystar wrote:

ejmartin wrote:

I would say that the LX3 is better in both shadow detail and SNR in
highlights. The LX3 full well capacity is higher, and its read noise
is lower, even when normalized to a per area basis.

Well capacity, eh? That sounds a lot like you're say DR is affected
by pixel size.

Please note the phrase when normalized to a per area basis .

Sorry. I just thought that the "even" before the "when" meant that normalization per area was optional, as in "this is the result, and it is still the result even when..." But apparently that's not the case.

Any reason for the snarky tone?

Dunno...might be the confusing answers, as in the "even when" above, the taking of words out of context, people reading the phrase “Contrary to conventional wisdom, higher resolution actually compensates for noise” and somehow confusing the word “compensate” with “improves upon”, the seeming continual refusal to determine image quality by actually checking the quality of an image...or I could have just woken up on the wrong side of the bed. Who knows.

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