Sony RX10. Pixel size and noise are holding me back from buying

Started Apr 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
hjulenissen Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: Sony RX10. Pixel size and noise are holding me back from buying

MoreGooderPhotos wrote:

For nearly $1300, it's hard for me to simply purchase the RX10 without being 95% satisfied. I like most everything about the RX10 except for the noise in raw images. It's got horrendous noise without the in-camera noise reduction.

Images does not have a look until they are developed. One might expect the person or the algorithm developing raw files to do noise reduction to taste.

Cramming 20mpx into a small sensor is not ideal. The only advantage to such a high pixel density is the ability to crop smaller. However, when you do crop smaller the noise is going to be more visible, which defeats the purpose of the higher density. This means you then need to apply noise reduction to the cropped portion, so there goes the fine details and the reason for cropping to begin with.

Says who? I just printed a 76cm x 129 cm triptych from my RX100M2 (thats nearly one square meter, at about 100dpi). From a cropped single image. I am really happy that my camera had many megapixels and a reasonably sharp lens for this image.

I don't know.... Someone convince me. I just can't see spending that much money on something to produce web-size images or picture books over say a Fuji XT1. Yeah I know, 200mm, Zeiss, etc. But IQ needs to be there and I'm struggling with it for the price their asking. Sure, the lens alone is great, but had they put a lower density sensor in it they would have large photo sites collecting more light at a lower ISO with better overall image quality without the hocus-pocus noise reduction/detail killer.

This is your theory. People with relevant background have argued very convincingly for the opposite on this forum.

If the noise is given (nature of light, really), would you rather sample it densely or less densely? If would prefer to sample it densely, _given_ that this does not negatively affect other aspects too much. In real-life, large pixel counts means lower frame-rates, more storage cost, possibly more battery consumption. The question is whether smaller sensels leads to (significantly) more read-out noise on a per-image basis. I think that usually the answer is that reducing sensel size would do minimally good, and often some bad (in terms of IQ).


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