A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

So, Why FF ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old September 22nd 18, 07:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 371
Default So, Why FF ?

On 9/21/2018 8:34 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Sep 21, 2018, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 9/21/2018 6:28 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Sep 21, 2018, wrote
(in ):


No, the pixel count is certainly critical. Read my premise carefully.

No, the pixel count is not critical. Consider a 24MP FF sensor and a 24MP
APS-C
sensor. The pixel count is equal. However, the pixel densities are
different,
and will contribute to the response characteristics of each sensor, and is
certainly a critical factor in sensor specs.

Your premise is worthless. Consider, it is merely your premise, and has very
little basis in fact.

Photonics Online News
https://www.photonicsonline.com recently ran
several short articles on "Understanding Resolution In Scientific Cameras"
that covered a lot the questions in this thread.
[ You do need to be a subscriber to access the articles. ]


Then it doesn’t do us non-subscribers much good. Also, judging by the nature
of the content of that site, I believe an understanding of resolution in
scientific cameras isn’t going to help the users of consumer cameras engaged
in fanciful thought exercises in this room, one iota.

OK, i did some searching and found this article that covers a lot of the
mechanics
of the pixel size/sensitivity/resolution basics.

Here's a pointer to the article:
https://www.pco-tech.com/library/knowledge-base/#c1560
~
"Pixel Size & Sensitivity"

The relationship between pixel size of an image sensor and its sensitivity
is discussed in detail to illuminate the reality behind the myth that
“larger pixel image sensors are always more sensitive than small pixel
sensors”.
~~
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--
  #52  
Old September 22nd 18, 08:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,538
Default So, Why FF ?

In article , Ron C
wrote:

Photonics Online News https://www.photonicsonline.com recently ran
several short articles on "Understanding Resolution In Scientific Cameras"
that covered a lot the questions in this thread.
[ You do need to be a subscriber to access the articles. ]


Then it doesnąt do us non-subscribers much good. Also, judging by the nature
of the content of that site, I believe an understanding of resolution in
scientific cameras isnąt going to help the users of consumer cameras engaged
in fanciful thought exercises in this room, one iota.

OK, i did some searching and found this article that covers a lot of the
mechanics
of the pixel size/sensitivity/resolution basics.

Here's a pointer to the article:
https://www.pco-tech.com/library/knowledge-base/#c1560
~
"Pixel Size & Sensitivity"

The relationship between pixel size of an image sensor and its sensitivity
is discussed in detail to illuminate the reality behind the myth that
łlarger pixel image sensors are always more sensitive than small pixel
sensors˛.


it's not that larger pixels are more sensitive, it's that they collect
more light, resulting in lower noise. sensitivity is separate.

the article even confirms that, therefore it cannot be a myth:
Still the proportionality of SNR to pixel area at a constant
irradiance is valid, meaning the larger the pixel size and therefore
the area, the better the SNR will be.
  #53  
Old September 23rd 18, 12:10 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,538
Default So, Why FF ?

In article ,
RichA wrote:


If only FF'rs would realize that it doesn't stop at FF. Medium format IS better,
by a long-shot and no one would argue it.


it's also a lot more expensive and the cameras are a lot bigger. the
additional quality is rarely needed, especially for typical consumers.

a full frame slr is only slightly bigger than a crop sensor slr. it's
the sweet spot.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.