Why a small sensor will give you sharper images

[v1fan]

People have dismissed Nikon V1 as a camera with a useless small sensor. But then most people in the internet forums are gearographers and not really photographers.




One major factor in sharpness of an image is focus and depth of field. but even for close up such as macro dof is essential to get sharp images.

Lets say you have just bought a V1 with the 10mm prime. At f2.8 you have the same dof as F8 with a FF frame sensor. This means you can shoot at f2.8 and ISO 100 even in very low light and still have the dof and sharpness of F8! Not to mention you don't have to worry about mirror slap and the weight of a DSLR.

But forget f2.8, if you shoot at 5.6 which is the sweet spot for all Nikon 1 lenses, especially the 10mm, you have a dof of F16 equivalent in a FF sensor, which means, you can shoot landscape with really high shutter speed and never move from ISO 100, even in less favorable light condition.

For street photography, just use shutter priority and even if you have to shoot at F2.8 you still have the dof needed for sharp images with decent dof and zone focus space.




Small high quality sensors are the way to go. And Nikon V1 and V2 are the only cameras that offer that with the flexibility of a very advanced system.

 

[Jared Huntr]

v1fan wrote:

Lets say you have just bought a V1 with the 10mm prime. At f2.8 you have the same dof as F8 with a FF frame sensor. This means you can shoot at f2.8 and ISO 100 even in very low light and still have the dof and sharpness of F8! Not to mention you don't have to worry about mirror slap and the weight of a DSLR.

I really HATE this new bug-ridden dpr editor - once again, I can't escape the quote to post my response below!!

Anyways, what I meant to say is be prepared for a rebuttal to the effect that large sensors can afford to shoot at higher ISO's to compensate for having to use smaller apertures.

 

[Ola Forsslund]

v1fan wrote:

One major factor in sharpness of an image is focus and depth of field.

True.

Lets say you have just bought a V1 with the 10mm prime. At f2.8 you have the same dof as F8 with a FF frame sensor. This means you can shoot at f2.8 and ISO 100 even in very low light and still have the dof and sharpness of F8!

But you do not gather any more light than an FF camera would, there is just as much noise as in the FF image. (There simply is no free lunch, nor magic.)

Not to mention you don't have to worry about mirror slap and the weight of a DSLR.

This is very true.

But forget f2.8, if you shoot at 5.6 which is the sweet spot for all Nikon 1 lenses, especially the 10mm, you have a dof of F16 equivalent in a FF sensor, which means, you can shoot landscape with really high shutter speed and never move from ISO 100, even in less favorable light condition.

But there is NO difference from using F16 on the FF sensor! Using ISO 100 or 400 does change the amount of light, nor noise.

For street photography, just use shutter priority and even if you have to shoot at F2.8 you still have the dof needed for sharp images with decent dof and zone focus space.

Still no difference!

Small high quality sensors are the way to go. And Nikon V1 and V2 are the only cameras that offer that with the flexibility of a very advanced system.

No, the D3s is just as efficent, will produce the exact same image.

 

[v1fan]

The small sensor of V1 gives you 2.7x more dof than FF sensor for the same f stop and ISO.

This translates in real like having a top ISO range of 17920 ISO with V1!

The ISO 100 of V1 is like ISO1400 with D3s!

 

[André BARELIER]

v1fan wrote:

The small sensor of V1 gives you 2.7x more dof than FF sensor for the same f stop and ISO.

This translates in real like having a top ISO range of 17920 ISO with V1!

The ISO 100 of V1 is like ISO1400 with D3s!

Sorry, but what are you talking about?????????

 

[v1fan]

Lets say you want to shoot a sunset, so you need a decent depth of field but light is low.

With V1, you can shoot at f 2.8 and ISO 100 comfortably knowing you will have sharp focus from ~3m to infinity. Hand held at 1/60.

With a D3s to have the same dof and sharpness, you need to shoot at f8 and ISO100. But since light is low you have to bump the ISO by 2.7x stops to have the same shutter speed as the V1! Meaning you have to shoot at ISO600!

Think of it this way. ISO 100 in V1 is like ISO600 in a D3s. This is really incredible because you would have to shoot in really low light to bump the ISO from ISO100. With the 18.5mm 1.8 about to be released it means you can shoot virtually at complete darkness and still maintain ISO100.




Correction: ISO600 (ISO 100 * 2.7)

 

[v1fan]

2.7 times of ISO hundred is ~ISO600

 

[Ola Forsslund]

v1fan wrote:

With a D3s to have the same dof and sharpness, you needs to shoot at f8 and ISO100. But since light is low you have to bump the ISO by 2.7x stops to have the same shutter speed as the V1! Meaning you have to shoot at ISO1400!

First of, 2.7 stops from ISO 100 is ISO 650. But that is not the point.

You seems to forget that the sensor in the D3s captures 2.7^2 as much area, so even thought the intensity is 1/(2.7^2) lower per area, it is still the exact same amount of light. If it wouldn't be, the images wouldn't be identical.

The point is, that ISO does not create noise. It's the low exposure that contains the noise. Since the two sensors in your example has the same efficiency, both will have the same amount of noise when the same amount of light is captured.

 

[v1fan]

Basically the whole point I'm trying to make is the small sensor of V1 gives you loads of dof, which means you can comfortably shoot at wider f stops and still have the required dof-- meaning keeping the ISO down.

This pretty much cancels the small sensor argument against V1 because at ISO 100 V1 produces just as good an image as far more larger sensors and the tests are there at image source where according to them at ISO100 prints of 20x16 is great from V1.

The fast lenses of 1.8 and 1.2 that on their way for V1 really puts this little camera on a different level, so before people feel bad about V1 listen to all the trolls and shills who keep dismissing this camera, all they have to do is find out the befits of a high quality small sensor.

Personally I'd take a high quality small sensor anyday because dof for me is essential in making sharp and clear images. Bokeh is for gearogrpahers.

 

[Kaj E]

You are completely wrong.

A larger sensor will always have a sharper image below diffraction limit. Once diffraction limit is reached the DOF is the same regardless of sensor size.

Some useful reading:

http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF6.html

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dof_myth/index.html

 

[Jared Huntr]

Kaj E wrote:

You are completely wrong.

A larger sensor will always have a sharper image below diffraction limit. Once diffraction limit is reached the DOF is the same regardless of sensor size.

Some useful reading:

http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF6.html


http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dof_myth/index.html

 

[JasonED]

Read this...

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/

 

[Jared Huntr]

JasonED wrote:

Read this...

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/

 

[André BARELIER]

v1fan wrote:

Basically the whole point I'm trying to make is the small sensor of V1 gives you loads of dof, which means you can comfortably shoot at wider f stops and still have the required dof-- meaning keeping the ISO down.

This pretty much cancels the small sensor argument against V1 because at ISO 100 V1 produces just as good an image as far more larger sensors and the tests are there at image source where according to them at ISO100 prints of 20x16 is great from V1.

The fast lenses of 1.8 and 1.2 that on their way for V1 really puts this little camera on a different level, so before people feel bad about V1 listen to all the trolls and shills who keep dismissing this camera, all they have to do is find out the befits of a high quality small sensor.

Personally I'd take a high quality small sensor anyday because dof for me is essential in making sharp and clear images. Bokeh is for gearogrpahers.

I see your point. But you forget that, generally, you shoot landscapes in good light, and can use small apertures without bumping the iso.

It's when you have to isolate the subject that the small sensor looses its advantages. I'm not even talking about the smoothness of bokeh, just shallow DOF.

 

[Mouser]

...so mobile phone images should be even sharper than Nikon 1?

 

[Kaj E]

Jared Huntr wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

You are completely wrong.

A larger sensor will always have a sharper image below diffraction limit. Once diffraction limit is reached the DOF is the same regardless of sensor size.

Some useful reading:

http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF6.html

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dof_myth/index.html

 

[v1fan]

Mouser wrote:

...so mobile phone images should be even sharper than Nikon 1?

Sure, find a 10mp camera phone with quality glass lenses... but still maybe you haven't heard of Nokia 808 PureView.

 

[quezra]

Boy I can't wait to tell all the award winning full frame landscape photographers they have it all wrong!

 

[SunnyFlorida]

Mouser wrote:

...so mobile phone images should be even sharper than Nikon 1?

+1

 

[SunnyFlorida]

quezra wrote:

Boy I can't wait to tell all the award winning full frame landscape photographers they have it all wrong!

+1,000