Pixel binning on the SD1
Interesting. I notice though that the low resolution shot seems to lose more resolution in the brown chest of drawers than the downsized shot. Possibly a difference in sharpening?
It would be nice to see a long exposure low-light shot rather than a high iso shot for comparison.
Erik Magnuson wrote:
petr marek wrote:
But I´m not sure, if Sigma implemented this function.
Oh, it's implemented; you only have to look at X3F files from supported cameras to see how.
2) The real advantage would be, that binned superpixels with square of the photodiodes area, are more sensitive
Alas with the noise characteristics of current X3 implementations, the improvement is small vs. simply downsizing the image; the most anyone has claimed after testing is about 1 stop for LOW vs. HI downsized.
I think that various RAW image sizes may not be result of really connected photodiodes before the capture, but after the light is captured by the normal pixel array.
Line and pixel skipping would produce significant aliasing artifacts.-- hide signature --
Erik, isn't one stop improvement in dynamic range what one would expect from doubling the pixel linear dimension? That is two by two array halves the resolution and doubles the dynamic range. Hence one stop. Or am I mistaken?
- Fujifilm X-T223.6%
- Nikon D50025.4%
- Nikon AF-S 105mm F1.4E8.2%
- Olympus M.Zuiko 12-100mm F47.5%
- Panasonic Lumix DMC-G857.2%
- Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art6.7%
- Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 Art5.1%
- Sony a63006.4%
- Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III3.7%
- Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V6.3%
|Kingfisher by cjf2|
from An A to Z of Subjects- Week 11, K
|Bull Rider Being Launched by RBFresno|
from FX bodies and very high ISO