This article should be read by everybody

Started Dec 12, 2013 | Discussions thread
Slideshow Bob Senior Member • Posts: 1,741
The only problem is that...

…it actually doesn't appear to work like that. Take Nikon's current FX lineup as an example, and you'll find that when listed in order of noise levels (best to worst) at the image level (so per area rather than per pixel), you'd get this...





…which is actually proving that for a given sensor size, smaller pixels are actually more noisy. You can't resize a D800 image to DF size and achieve the same (or less) noise without applying NR. NR is a post processing step, whether it's done in camera or on a PC.

Listing Canon FF cameras in the same fashion produces this...




… with the highest resolution sensor again producing the most noise, and the lowest resolution one producing the least.

I don't doubt the qualifications of the people who wrote that article, but unfortunately, their conclusion just doesn't match what happens in the real world. For a given level of technology, bigger pixels produce less noise.

tbcass wrote:

Many people will refuse to acknowledge it's validity because it goes against some misconceptions that some people incorrectly believe are truths.

The article is lengthy, written by a Physicist and is backed up by mathematical proofs. One of his statements from the article:

" Resolution doesn’t increase noise

Increasing resolution (MPixels) for a given sensor size has no direct impact on image noise. In fact, some of the lowest noise cameras (Nikon D800, Nikon D3x, Pentax K-5, Nikon D7000, Sony Alpha 580) have relatively high resolutions. See Figure 1a."

Why is it that when people say thing like "…some of the lowest noise cameras…" they don't actually list ANY of the lowest noise cameras, like the 1Dx, D3s, or D4?


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