A crazy (or dumb...) idea about sensor and noise

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

--
Yannis
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079204@N06/
https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

Switch to your GH5s?

Cheers,

Rick

This is a common misunderstanding.

Photo site area affects the signal:noise ratio on a per pixel level. It doesn't change the overall light captured on your sensor, and therefore the overall signal:noise ratio seen in your final image (at full resolution).

If you want to see less noise on your GX8 images when pixel peeping, scale them down to 14 or 8 or 4 or 2 megapixels, sharpen them to taste, and enjoy less noisy looking images.

Alternatively, just view the 20mp originals at 1920x1080 on screen or whatever print size you like and don't pixel peep.

Cheers, and happy shooting.

If you need more low light performance than any current m43 and above can produce you need to rethink your technique. concert photography is the most challenging low light scenario and I don't have a problem with my m43 gear.

Don

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldst be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

For low light cameras they do design and install lower resolution, larger pixel sensors.

There are pixel binning tricks to add pixel outputs together but that is not the same as having big pixels in the first place. Big pixels have more space to store the electrons triggered by the photons.

The legendary (to be delivered one day by unicorn express) organic global shutter sensor has tricks to store more electrons per pixel, so in theory will deliver the benefits of a larger pixel but in a higher resolution design.

The marketing push for "more MP" means that a modern 8MP camera would be dead before it started, despite being an ideal camera.

The modern way is to have too many small pixels and then use good software like DxO PL2+Prime to sort out the noise problem. Smaller pixels means smaller sized noise (in image terms) so the noise is less intrusive when the image is displayed normally.

Regards..... Guy

Skeeterbytes said:

Switch to your GH5s?

Cheers,

Rick

Click to expand...

I don't have one and can't afford one either

Donald B said:

If you need more low light performance than any current m43 and above can produce you need to rethink your technique. concert photography is the most challenging low light scenario and I don't have a problem with my m43 gear.

Don

Click to expand...

I think its quite challenging to shoot people/kids in house with low artificial light and low flash. Image below is a crop from a larger one at ISO 2500 with a fast m43 lens. I understand that cropping also makes noise look worse, but that was a case of high ISO looking bad. What would you suggest for this kind of scenario?




SOOC




RAW no NR applied




DXO



--
Yannis
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079204@N06/
https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

you need a longer focal length, as I said ,you need to re-adjust your technique and shoot out of camera getting the composition correct in the first place, you cant fix an image in PP just enhance it. 2500 is no problem with m43 the more pixels on the subject = more light just like FF sensor being larger.

Don

Yannis1976 said:

Donald B said:

If you need more low light performance than any current m43 and above can produce you need to rethink your technique. concert photography is the most challenging low light scenario and I don't have a problem with my m43 gear.

Don

Click to expand...

I think its quite challenging to shoot people/kids in house with low artificial light and low flash. Image below is a crop from a larger one at ISO 2500 with a fast m43 lens. I understand that cropping also makes noise look worse, but that was a case of high ISO looking bad. What would you suggest for this kind of scenario?


SOOC


RAW no NR applied


DXO

--
Yannis
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079204@N06/
https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

Click to expand...

Suggestions:

1. Turn on more room lights when shooting.

2. Bounce flash off ceiling

3. Get closer to your subject so you don't have to crop as much (or use a longer focal length)

4. Shoot bursts of at least 5 shots with slightly slower shutter speeds (e.g. 1/40 instead of 1/60) and discard the many blurred shots keeping only the crisp ones so you'll be able to use a slightly longer exposure

5. Get a faster (and/or longer focal length) lens

6. If you are shooting humans, strongly consider framing in portrait instead of landscape so you crop less

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP. Here's another example with 16 MP vs 36 MP. And here's an explanation as to why pixel size is such an insignificant factor with regards to noise.

If you want a less noisy photo, you need to get more light on the sensor, get a sensor that records more of the light that falls on it, and/or get a sensor that has less electronic noise (although that will matter only for *very* low light).

mmartel said:

Suggestions:

1. Turn on more room lights when shooting.

2. Bounce flash off ceiling

3. Get closer to your subject so you don't have to crop as much (or use a longer focal length)

4. Shoot bursts of at least 5 shots with slightly slower shutter speeds (e.g. 1/40 instead of 1/60) and discard the many blurred shots keeping only the crisp ones so you'll be able to use a slightly longer exposure

5. Get a faster (and/or longer focal length) lens

6. If you are shooting humans, strongly consider framing in portrait instead of landscape so you crop less

Click to expand...

Thank you!

I was using my fastest lens (25mm/1.4) but your points are valid as I had also some great shots with it at that day being much closer to the people and the child. I suppose using a portrait lens would work better at some instances.

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

I'd love this if it were possible!

M

Great Bustard said:

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP. Here's another example with 16 MP vs 36 MP. And here's an explanation as to why pixel size is such an insignificant factor with regards to noise.

If you want a less noisy photo, you need to get more light on the sensor, get a sensor that records more of the light that falls on it, and/or get a sensor that has less electronic noise (although that will matter only for *very* low light).

Click to expand...

Or blitz it with noise reduction so that it looks like a portrait taken with an iphone x

Great Bustard said:

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP.

Click to expand...

Because you, as always, cheated, by resampling everything to 1.2 MP. By downsampling a photo with larger resolution, to match the photo with smaller resolution , you made one larger pixel out of more smaller ones.

You cannot have more resolution and less (or equal) noise in a photo at the same time.

Okapi001 said:

Great Bustard said:

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP.

Click to expand...

Because you, as always, cheated, by resampling everything to 1.2 MP. By downsampling a photo with larger resolution, to match the photo with smaller resolution , you made one larger pixel out of more smaller ones.

Click to expand...

You are making no sense the point was about the OP wanting lower MP count { larger pixel } sensor. In order to get a less noisy image. When in fact at the same output and detail level there is no advantage did you click the full size links ? . End result the 42 MP camera will take advantage of its full resolution at lower ISO settings with a clear resolution advantage. At higher ISO settings the 42mp sensor can be edited to give at least as good output as the 12mp camera , win win.

Okapi001 said:

You cannot have more resolution and less (or equal) noise in a photo at the same time.

Click to expand...

???

Instead of throwing out ad hominem attacks about GB "cheating" you would be better served by engaging your brain and thinking about it

--
Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

Yannis1976 said:

Donald B said:

If you need more low light performance than any current m43 and above can produce you need to rethink your technique. concert photography is the most challenging low light scenario and I don't have a problem with my m43 gear.

Don

Click to expand...

I think its quite challenging to shoot people/kids in house with low artificial light and low flash. Image below is a crop from a larger one at ISO 2500 with a fast m43 lens. I understand that cropping also makes noise look worse, but that was a case of high ISO looking bad. What would you suggest for this kind of scenario?

Click to expand...

Strobe the crap outta those children! :-D

No, seriously, that kind of photo will look awful even with a 35mm sensor and f/1.4 lens. The randomness of photons simply conspires to make photos appear like garbage in situations like that. Definitely bounce a flash off the ceiling - once you get the hang of it, you'll never go back to half-assed solutions again.

Yannis1976 said:

[...] what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance.

Click to expand...

That has not been true for a few years now, at least. Yes, in the past, when fill factor of a single sensel was in the 50-60% range, the size of it played a big role. But now, with all the technological advances (micro lenses, BSI, stacked design and more) bumping the fill factor to well over 90% (no idea about the actual number), there's not as much penalty to smaller pixels, at least not until you get down to really, really small sizes.

Photo Pete said:

Great Bustard said:

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP. Here's another example with 16 MP vs 36 MP. And here's an explanation as to why pixel size is such an insignificant factor with regards to noise.

If you want a less noisy photo, you need to get more light on the sensor, get a sensor that records more of the light that falls on it, and/or get a sensor that has less electronic noise (although that will matter only for *very* low light).

Click to expand...

Or blitz it with noise reduction so that it looks like a portrait taken with an iphone x

Click to expand...

As you may or may not have noticed, noise filtering was used on the examples above, and the explanation linked above discusses the role noise filtering plays.

Okapi001 said:

Great Bustard said:

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

...with regards to how noisy the photo is. Here's an example of 12 MP vs 42 MP at ISO 25600, and I'm not seeing any advantage to 12 MP. Here's another example with 16 MP vs 36 MP. And here's an explanation as to why pixel size is such an insignificant factor with regards to noise.

If you want a less noisy photo, you need to get more light on the sensor, get a sensor that records more of the light that falls on it, and/or get a sensor that has less electronic noise (although that will matter only for *very* low light).

Click to expand...

Because you, as always, cheated, by resampling everything to 1.2 MP.

Click to expand...

There was no "cheating" involved -- all photos in the above link were presented at 12 MP (not 1.2 MP), the same file size as the native A7S file since the *natural* presumption is that the photos are to be displayed at the same size.

Okapi001 said:

By downsampling a photo with larger resolution, to match the photo with smaller resolution , you made one larger pixel out of more smaller ones.

Click to expand...

The pixel sizes didn't change anymore than the focal length of a lens would have changed if the photo were cropped. I simply made the photos the same display size. I could have also upsampled the 12 MP to 42 MP, or resampled both to any common output size. Again, the reason being that the photos are to be compared for the same display size.

In fact, just assume that the photos were displayed on 55 inch 2K (HD), 4K, and 8K monitors. The 42 MP photos would be no worse for wear, noise-wise, on any of the monitors (although one *might* apply more noise filtering to the 42 MP file as the monitor resolution increases, depending on the photo).

Okapi001 said:

You cannot have more resolution and less (or equal) noise in a photo at the same time.

Click to expand...

Where and when did I ever say or imply that you could? The discussion here was about noise, and what I demonstrated was that, for the same display size, the larger pixel counts were no worse for wear with regards to noise than smaller pixel counts, all else equal (to include display size), except, perhaps, for different amounts of noise filtering, depending on the photo.

That all said, in the explanation I linked in my initial post, there was the following:

So, are more pixels more noisy than fewer pixels? For sensors of the same generation, yes they are. Is it significant? Not until higher ISO settings. Can noise filtering (as opposed to downsampling) tip the balance in favor of the sensor with more pixels? Yes, it can, if the scene is such that the sensor with more pixels is able to record more detail and the light is not so low that the electronic noise dominates the photon noise.

In other words, in some situations, more smaller pixels along with the judicious use of noise filtering will allow for *both* more detail and a less noisy photo. However, as the light gets lower and lower, the advantages lessens, and can even reverse if the light is low enough (which, in the case of the example with the A7R2 and A7S2 linked above, would have to be in light so low that you'd be using ISO settings above 25600).

Of course, you would consider optimal processing to be "cheating", just like one guy a while back who argued that the only "fair" comparison for different cameras was based on how they performed with the kit lens.

Yannis1976 said:

Hi,

My knowledge is very limited in the sensor technology and what I have understood so far is that the bigger the pixel the more light it captures and also the better the high ISO performance. Nice article here: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652

Wouldn't it be nice if we could alter the size of pixels in our current sensors? So for example, I don't like the ISO 6400 of my GX8 whereas I find acceptable the ISO 6400 of my Fuji X-A10. The pixel size of GX8 sensor is 3,3μ whereas the one from X-A10 is 4,7μ being able to perform better in low light situations.

Wouldn't be great if I could reduce the resolution of GX8 and increase the pixel size to 4,7μ so as to match the low light performance? Yes, resolution would be lower (14MP?), but plenty enough for most tasks. What if I could go up to 8μ (close to FF) and have a resolution of 8MP (if this is correct)?

What do you think? Can this technically happen?

Click to expand...

You can change the effective pixel size; it's known as binning or down sampling.

48MP sensor image viewed as 12MP JPEG would have same low noisiness of 12MP sensor of the same sensor module size, viewed as 12MP image.