Short test with a Nikon D800E

Started Jul 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
Duplo Veteran Member • Posts: 6,656
Re: Short test with a Nikon D800E

PK24X36NOW wrote:

Duplo wrote:

tcom wrote:

MightyMike wrote:

I've always understood the regardless of pixel pitch and pixel count a larger sensor will always be better then a smaller sensor, part of that is the CoC, part of that is lower levels of enlargement for the same final image size and i'm sure there are other factors.

With film you would be able to make that assumption as a larger area meant larger resolution, but in digital we enlarge x number of pixels as much as an image area.

The assumption still holds. Smaller formats will always be at a disadvantage, and digital doesn't change that. Enlarging/amplifying pixels more amplifies noise and artifacts more as well, and smaller formats always demand more resolution from the taking lens, since the lens must be capable of resolving the same details to a much smaller size (in the case of APS-C of the Nikon/Pentax variety, about 42.25% as big as for FF). This particular advantage of a larger format completely dispenses with the supposed advantage of using less of the image circle of the lens, in fact. Marketing be damned, the physics can't be denied.

No physics cannot be denied, yet digital does change the argument a bit, all pixels are not created equal and pixel technology does advance, thus a new pixel of smaller size may bear enlargement better than a larger pixel build on older technology.

Thus when we talk about pixels we need to assume same technology (or equally efficient technology) in order for your argument to be valid.
Now in general I fully support your argument.

Yet in this case, we are discussing two specific examples where the pixel technology is not equal and that does change the argument somewhat.

Yes you need a better lens on the smaller format, but we are not lens limited quite yet. now the next generation 645D will likely make this a moot point entirely and deliver +60MP with slightly better pixel level quality compared to the D800e sensor and then we are back to the cycle of catching up.

Now just to make sure these finer points do not get twisted into me saying something I am not.

I never said the D800e is clear cut better than entry level MFDB, just that it is scary close to what the somewhat older tenology in the entry level MFD sector are able to deliver.

In terms of DR and noise levels it is actually slightly better, but it is not quite there when it comes to colour and tonality.

Now the really scary part is that it roughly take 2-5 years for the smaller format to catch up with the lower end of the larger and that is something one from a business point of view needs to be aware of.

secondly the difference between 35mm and a 645D is a factor 1.3 difference so not nearly as large a difference in size as in the days of film.

True, the 645D is a compromised "cropped" format as well, reducing the format size advantage as compared with FF 35mm.

If you frame identically in terms of AOV, then you have roughly the same resolution, but slightly larger though older pixels on the subject for the 645D.

Yeah, it's a little difficult to frame the same way given different form factors, one or the other must be cropped to get the "same" image. Kind of apples to oranges no matter what you do in that respect.

You will need to crop either one or the other and depending on which one you crop you end up either widening or narrowing the gap and depending on preference you will likely do either one or the other.

-- hide signature --


Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Link to homepage and blog in profile~~

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow