This is why you might want a big sensor

Started Mar 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 6,974
Re: There are all kinds of issues being mixed up here

Louis_Dobson wrote:

Amin Sabet wrote:

Louis_Dobson wrote:

We are only talking base ISO here

Hence my clarification re: people discussing different things. You and I were talking base ISO.

A 4/3 sensor implementing the same technology as the D7000 or NEX-7 sensor would have base ISO shadow recovery approaching (not equaling but close enough for many people) that demonstrated in the example Louis linked.

No it wouldn't. It would be a theoretical two stops off the same technology implemented in an FF camera.

That is not correct. Two stops difference applies to shot noise. The noise dominating in shadows is read noise, which is not dependent on sensor size.

Yes, sorry, rushing out messages without thinking. However, assuming the same technology there is still a direct relationship. And you can see that fact reflected in the DxO numbers. As for your take that you can't assume the same technology - if high DR is a priority you are not going to pick a camera with an old tech sensor....

It depends on how we define "same technology". If same technology means that both saturation capacity and read noise scales with the pixel area, then a 16mp mFT sensor and a 16mp FF sensor will have (pretty much) the same DR on DxO. But, like I said above, then DxO's DR figures can be a bit misleading. If a 16mp mFT sensor and a 16mp FF sensor both have for example 12 stops of DR on DxO at iso100, then the FF sensor will in practice handle a 3 stops shadow lift better than the mFT sensor, because the FF sensor has less shot/photon noise, and that'll give it an SNR advantage if looking at the shadows e.g. 10 or 8 stops below full saturation.

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