Any reviews comparing sony 16mp vs 24mp (APS-C) during low light conditons?

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Please share a link.

Invanovich22 said:

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Please share a link.

Click to expand...

I don't have such comparison (can ve used local DPR tool for sensors?), but from my experience of switching from older 24Mpx (A6000) to newer 24Mox (A6400), newer had less high ISO noise (better looking?, less colour noise). I would say about 1EV, so I started to consider ISO6400 as acceptable.

So after that, I doubt that even older 16Mpx sensor have less noise.

I think it would be possible to go to sites like Imaging Resource and check their reviews and test image photography. I believe that have it set it to easily compare two camera's results simultaneously.

My first mirror-less was an NEX6. It was 16 mp. I had it simultaneously with a Nikon D7200, 24mp. Later I added an A6400, also 24 mp.

Casually, I didn't notice any noise difference. Not to say there wasn't, just it didn't impact what I was doing. I tended to treat them the same or have generally at least set them to the same isos, either 100 or 400. They were different bodies, lenses, one with low pass filter, one without, seldom used together in a way that I could compare. I also think the 16 mp was at a time of rather rapid changes and improvements so one would need 16 mp and 24 mp contemporaries to check, recent sensors are likely to have noticeable improvements.

I used the NEX6 on a trip to Italy and used it for a lot of interiors and I don't recall noticing that I found it any more or less successful than the D7200 on other trips/places.

On the trip I depended a lot on multi-frame noise reduction on those interiors and it was still iffy, they were that dim and a not fast lens. I did have a number of shots that I tried in raw too/instead and I recently went back and revisited some of them with either DxO PhotoLab or Topaz DeNoise and found the revisited ones to look much better in many instances compared to the results I had at the time. But that's 8 or so years advances in processing tech, too.

Invanovich22 said:

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Click to expand...

What 16mp camera are you considering buying over any of the 24mp cameras, and why?

I owned the Sony 5T for years before upgrading to the a6300, and the was very noticeable, to me. Any of the 24mp cameras that started with the a6300 would be much better than any of the older NEX 16mp cameras, regarding less noise, being sharper, and lower light performance.

Also, what lenses would you be shooting with, or do you have any yet? That would make a difference too. Do you currently own a Sony camera or lenses, if yes, which one do you have? That information would greatly help people answer your questions.

--
Life is short, so make the best of it while you still can!
http://grob.smugmug.com/
https://grob.smugmug.com/Wildlife-Pictures/

I think it was discussed several times already, when you make images same size you will hardly get lower noise performance from different sensors. ( and of course if you use same de-noise algorithms )
Most probably you will see more noise if you look at 100% because the higher magnification. So if you have 16Mpix and 24Mpix and resize both images to 8Mpix most probably 24Mpix will be the same or slightly better. If you look at 100% 24Mpix will be more noise but also will have more details.
So I think the right question is not what is the sensor high ISO performance but you need more details or no? As actually what we see with current sensor tech, lets say since 2015-2016, is with higher ISO noise sensors become more and more similar! Actually real difference between sensors is mostly on the base ISO and mostly in the dynamic range. Of course there are other differences but we do not talk about them here.
So for me the right question is do you really need more details from the high resolution sensor? If your images always end 2-4Mpix I think the answer is NO. If you need maximum possible resolution, or sensor is too old and noise performance is very bad you then answer is YES.

Invanovich22 said:

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Please share a link.

Click to expand...

Pixel size has nothing to do with "final image" noise.

Sensor and processor "age" as in technology generation has a much bigger effect.

Even if you compare them "the wrong way" (at 100% magnification instead of "the full picture") the newer sensors still show less noise.

I made a comparison here on this forum Nex 5N versus A6000 some time ago.

In the end, the A6000 was a bit better at same output size.

However, the A6000 has a black area noise problem when pushed, the black becomes green.

The newer A6x00 especially A61 64 6600 are about a stop better than the A6000 especially in color accuracy (black is black) and chroma noise (much less color freckled noise.

The copper-interconnect sensor found in A6300 and newer provides vastly superior PDR to either of the NEX-5s.

(PDR is normalized to a given output - e.g. if you scale a 24MP image down to 16MP to match your existing camera, the noise will be about 1 stop better.

From other posts, he has either a 5T or 5N already

Bender79ita said:

Invanovich22 said:

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Please share a link.

Click to expand...

Pixel size has nothing to do with "final image" noise.

Sensor and processor "age" as in technology generation has a much bigger effect.

Even if you compare them "the wrong way" (at 100% magnification instead of "the full picture") the newer sensors still show less noise.

Click to expand...

Small pixels USED to have a PDR penalty back when manufacturing processes were old and circuitry took up a significant amount of area on the sensor. (e.g. the decade or so prior to the A7R2)

However, at the pixel pitches seen for APS-C and FF sensors, even the "older" copper FSI process used for A6300-and-newer APS-C matches modern BSI sensors in performance per unit area. PDR performance per unit area basically hasn't changed more than 1/3-1/2 stop for any Sony camera released since the A7R2.

There's an excessive amount of debate on this topic which almost universally is by people ignoring the fact that PDR performance per unit area at anything but nosebleed pixel pitches (e.g. smartphone sensors with submicron pitch) plateaued around when the R2 was released. This is because as you approach 100% area efficiency you reach diminishing returns, because you can't go past 100%. R2 and later are basically at the quantum efficiency limits for Bayer-on-silicon sensors.

I have a NEX-6 (16MP) and an a6500 (24MP).

I am happy to do any test, if you tell me precisely how to do it and why it would demonstrate whatever it is you want to see.

My guess is that there would be zero agreement on even how to do a test to compare low light performance between the two.

--
Sharpness scores and other stats for many FE lenses here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4442319
Fairly amateur photography here:
https://www.facebook.com/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/

Video-vs-photo said:

I think it was discussed several times already, when you make images same size you will hardly get lower noise performance from different sensors. ( and of course if you use same de-noise algorithms )

Click to expand...

This only holds true of sensors of a similar generation and/or sensors released after the time when we started hitting the theoretical limits of Bayer-on-silicon quantum efficiency (roughly the A7R2 and later).

All Sony 16MP APS-C cameras are from long before the R2 on vastly obsolete manufacturing processes, and do indeed have a significant PDR penalty compared to anything modern (including the copper FSI sensor found in the A6300 and all newer Sony APS-C bodies, which is competitive in PDR per unit area with anything else recent despite not being BSI.).

--
Context is key. If I have quoted someone else's post when replying, please do not reply to something I say without reading text that I have quoted, and understanding the reason the quote function exists.

Entropy512 said:

Video-vs-photo said:

I think it was discussed several times already, when you make images same size you will hardly get lower noise performance from different sensors. ( and of course if you use same de-noise algorithms )

Click to expand...

This only holds true of sensors of a similar generation and/or sensors released after the time when we started hitting the theoretical limits of Bayer-on-silicon quantum efficiency (roughly the A7R2 and later).

All Sony 16MP APS-C cameras are from long before the R2 on vastly obsolete manufacturing processes, and do indeed have a significant PDR penalty compared to anything modern (including the copper FSI sensor found in the A6300 and all newer Sony APS-C bodies, which is competitive in PDR per unit area with anything else recent despite not being BSI.).

Click to expand...

Maybe this is why I said this:
" As actually what we see with current sensor tech, lets say since 2015-2016, is with higher ISO noise sensors become more and more similar!"
I see latest MILC with 16Mpix are around 2011-2012. So we talk about 10 years old tech. And anyway 1 stop out of 10 is not a big deal.
And at the end if output is 2-4Mpix images no one will be able to find a difference.

Entropy512 said:

From other posts, he has either a 5T or 5N already

Click to expand...

He (Invanovich22) has not responded to any of our replies, so I think he has wasted our time. I still own the 5T, but I would not waste my time or others asking if it was as good at the a6300, a6500, a6100, a6400, a6600 cameras.

That question is rediculous, I'm sorry now that I even responded to it. Especially since the OP seems to have dropped out and not replied to anyone. It almost seems like a troll question, unless he replies to anyone who tried to help him, IMO.

From other topic we can see he has 5T.


So we have like around 0,5-1 stop difference here and there.

snapa said:

Entropy512 said:

From other posts, he has either a 5T or 5N already

Click to expand...

He (Invanovich22) has not responded to any of our replies, so I think he has wasted our time. I still own the 5T, but I would not waste my time or others asking if it was as good at the a6300, a6500, a6100, a6400, a6600 cameras.

That question is rediculous, I'm sorry now that I even responded to it. Especially since the OP seems to have dropped out and not replied to anyone. It almost seems like a troll question, unless he replies to anyone who tried to help him, IMO.

Click to expand...

He actually did participate in another post which is how I knew he had one of the NEX-5s.

In fact I think this post somehow originated from me commenting that his camera was ancient (in the context of him asking about gyro data which is only present for video on Sony's absolute latest cameras).

Entropy512 said:

snapa said:

Entropy512 said:

From other posts, he has either a 5T or 5N already

Click to expand...

He (Invanovich22) has not responded to any of our replies, so I think he has wasted our time. I still own the 5T, but I would not waste my time or others asking if it was as good at the a6300, a6500, a6100, a6400, a6600 cameras.

That question is rediculous, I'm sorry now that I even responded to it. Especially since the OP seems to have dropped out and not replied to anyone. It almost seems like a troll question, unless he replies to anyone who tried to help him, IMO.

Click to expand...

He actually did participate in another post which is how I knew he had one of the NEX-5s.

In fact I think this post somehow originated from me commenting that his camera was ancient (in the context of him asking about gyro data which is only present for video on Sony's absolute latest cameras).

Click to expand...

I was not talking about that other post, I was referring to this post. There were 8 people who replied to this post, including you who posted 5 times. I just think it is rude when someone asks a question and all those people, gets that many responces, and does not respond back to any of them. It is kind of like wasting peoples time and efforts, but maybe I'm wrong? :-|

--
Life is short, so make the best of it while you still can!
http://grob.smugmug.com/
https://grob.smugmug.com/Wildlife-Pictures/

snapa said:

Entropy512 said:

snapa said:

Entropy512 said:

From other posts, he has either a 5T or 5N already

Click to expand...

He (Invanovich22) has not responded to any of our replies, so I think he has wasted our time. I still own the 5T, but I would not waste my time or others asking if it was as good at the a6300, a6500, a6100, a6400, a6600 cameras.

That question is rediculous, I'm sorry now that I even responded to it. Especially since the OP seems to have dropped out and not replied to anyone. It almost seems like a troll question, unless he replies to anyone who tried to help him, IMO.

Click to expand...

He actually did participate in another post which is how I knew he had one of the NEX-5s.

In fact I think this post somehow originated from me commenting that his camera was ancient (in the context of him asking about gyro data which is only present for video on Sony's absolute latest cameras).

Click to expand...

I was not talking about that other post, I was referring to this post. There were 8 people who replied to this post, including you who posted 5 times. I just think it is rude when someone asks a question and all those people, gets that many responces, and does not respond back to any of them. It is kind of like wasting peoples time and efforts, but maybe I'm wrong? :-|

Click to expand...

Most of my responses were when the post was less than a day old.

The OP has been active on these forums in threads in the past. I'm not going to declare him a troll just because he happened to take a day off from posting.

I've had people complain that I "went silent" in a discussion in the past if I took more than a day to respond. I basically refuse to engage with them further if they pull that stunt. It has happened multiple times on weekends, with the simple explanation:

I almost never log into DPR on a weekend.

Invanovich22 said:

Have anyone come across any reviews that compare 16mp and 24mp APS-C cameras to see if there is more noise at 24mp at same ISO settings because pixel size is much smaller?

Please share a link.

Click to expand...

No.

Have no links, but do speak from experience. I did an extensive comparison between the Nex-5N (16Mp) and Nex-7 (24Mp) a long time ago.

You are comparing pixel noise versus image noise. Remember that down-sampling also reduces noise.

There is the 'amount of light', which can be collimated, and the amount of 'active' area, i.e., photon-collecting area. Since 16Mp were built on an older technology node, you are comparing apples and oranges. The bottom line is that newer, higher resolution, sensors manage to capture more active area than the older sensors, due to narrower geometries, different gains, and even BSI. Per pixel it may appear worse, but per image it will be better.

The A7-S series was built specifically for the observation you made, but aims at video (resolution), which makes it a slightly more technical camera. That is, how high an ISO can you go before you lose color DR (due to noise)?

See Bill C's graph: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony ILCE-5100,Sony ILCE-6600,Sony NEX-5,Sony NEX-6

and