Do you think the image of SD14(SD15/DP1/2) is cleaner than that of SD1m(DP1m/2m) ?

Started Jan 12, 2013 | Questions thread
Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,390
Re: The Clark Article is Simply Wrong

xpatUSA wrote:

Actually he says it a little differently: "there is one fundamental limit: photon counting statistics", by which he is referring to the signal-to-noise ratio. His table follows:

Yes, thats correct.

Photons, Noise, signal-to-noise (SNR)

9 3 3

100 10 10

900 30 30

10000 100 100

40000 200 200

If we agree that these figures are correct, it should be obvious to everyone that the sensor which counts 40,000 photons has a better SNR than that which counts 10,000. Better by a factor of two, do we at least agree on that? Indeed, if we can not agree that photon noise is the square root of the photon count, then our discussion might as well here.

Yes, thats also correct.

He makes two errors in the article though.

  1. He is only talking about pixel peeping. He ignore that the more pixels you have, the higher pixel density you get when printing. Then you get averaging over more pixels, the more pixels you have. And then you get back (most of) the dynamic range and S/N you lost.
  2. Even for pixel peeping, there is no limit. You can make the well depth larger. You can have some kind of clever dynamic range enhancement. Both improving S/N ratio.
-- hide signature --
 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
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