Sensor resolution that makes sense on FF and cost

jsherman999 · 05-27-2015, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by philbaum

The pixel number on a sensor is not an independent commodity.

It brings a lot of relationships with it. For example, this link under the heading of "measurements" and Dynamic Range, shows that the D750 has higher dynamic range with its 24mp than the D810 does with its 36mp. Sony's A7s with its 12mp has higher dynamic range than the 24mp D750 and 36mp D810 at any iso over 800.

Nikon D750 versus Nikon D810 versus Sony A7S - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

To pretend there aren't interrelationships between MP and other sensor/camera design parameters is just silly.

Those are also all different sensel technology (A7s vs. D750 vs. D800) - if you want to compare apples-apples, look at 24MP D600 vs. 36MP D800 - no gain in DR or image noise for the same-gen 24MP sensor.

In other words you can't make the case that 'lower MP on same format always gives better SNR/DR'. It can correlate, but when it does you're often comparing sensors using different tech and sometimes a half-generation removed.

.

philbaum · 05-27-2015, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

In other words you can't make the case that 'lower MP on same format always gives better SNR/DR'. It can correlate, but when it does you're often comparing sensors using different tech and sometimes a half-generation removed.
.

I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable.

From some of the above posts, it almost sounds like some folks think they can choose a MP number without pros and cons.

rfkiii · 05-28-2015, 02:02 AM

Originally posted by philbaum

I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable.

From some of the above posts, it almost sounds like some folks think they can choose a MP number without pros and cons.

Most photographers will realize more value from a higher number of MPs (capture resolution) than they will lose from any of the cons mentioned thus far.

jsherman999 · 05-28-2015, 07:46 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by philbaum

I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable.

.

I think we agree on that. What happens more often though is the opposite - people think they want less MP because it automatically means 'less noise', and it doesn't.

For folks who do want more resolution, I think the assumption going in is that this more MP will not bring any radical drop in SNR or DR and their wishes are based on that (safe) assumption. For example, I don't know that any small difference in SNR the D750 has over the D800 would be worth it to me to give up that additional resolution, I don't think I'd ever even notice it - it's a much smaller difference than that between the D800 and any aps-c camera, for example. I would notice the drop in resolution though.

ElJamoquio · 05-28-2015, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Really?? This kind of stuff is what is fueling the MP war, even though MP is not really that important. Are photos today, with the high resolution cameras, really that much better or more important than photos in the past, taken with 6MP cameras or film?

Absolutely not.

With more MP though, I can carry fewer lenses than in the past, and crop later.

That doesn't mean 100MP is the right answer, but, for me, it means that 36 is nice to have, and I'd be happier still with 50.

kenspo · 05-28-2015, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

I'd be happier still with 50.

It won't be 50.

Na Horuk · 05-28-2015, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

That doesn't mean 100MP is the right answer, but, for me, it means that 36 is nice to have, and I'd be happier still with 50.

Well then I guess all you can do is use the 645 or higher. Im fairly sure you shot some good photos with the 16MP sensor, or even older ones. Good luck, though

rawr · 05-28-2015, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by kenspo

It won't be 50.

OK, so 49?

That kind of confirms earlier threads. 36 MP would be OK with me, 24 MP too. Both are mature formats.

With the pixel shift feature in either, 50 MP super high resolution will be possible for those who need it (under the scenarios that work for pixel shift).

ElJamoquio · 05-29-2015, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Well then I guess all you can do is use the 645 or higher. Im fairly sure you shot some good photos with the 16MP sensor, or even older ones. Good luck, though

A shift lens is far cheaper. 72MP is good enough for me.

yorik · 05-29-2015, 11:26 AM

The Phoblographer is saying that Sony rumors is saying that the Pentax FF will have the A7R (36 mpx) sensor...

To misquote Winston Churchill, it's a story about a rumor... But the rumor sounds reasonable.

Na Horuk · 05-29-2015, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by yorik

To misquote Winston Churchill, it's a story about a rumor... But the rumor sounds reasonable.

But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections? Hopefully Pentax FF won't suffer such problems, that the kinks have been ironed out by now

yorik · 05-29-2015, 01:06 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Na Horuk

But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections? Hopefully Pentax FF won't suffer such problems, that the kinks have been ironed out by now

I think the sensor has been around for long enough, that RiPx is aware of any problems and knows how to fix them... I was hoping for a 24ish mpx sensor myself, mostly because I personally don't need 36, though I suppose that it if they are only going to offer one line of FF, they should probably go big, especially if they want a decent DA-crop. Perhaps if the Pentax FF takes the world by storm, they will follow it up with a Nikon 610/750 type camera.

osv · 05-30-2015, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections?

the 24mp a7 had the sensor reflections at night, but that issue is reputed to have been resolved with the a7ii.

so pentax will be trying to compete with the d810, not the a7r... pretty big shoes to fill for a dslr.

right now there is an $1,100 price difference between the two, pentax will have to come in somewhere in that range, but it won't be near either end.

ogl · 06-01-2015, 09:58 AM

36 MP is the best for using APS-C lenses. I think it will be 36 MP with 16 MP APS-C mode. If it will be more than 36 MP, it's not bad too.

Winder · 06-10-2015, 10:38 AM

Sony a7R II Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera (a7RII Camera Body) B&H

Sony just announced the new A7rII with a 42MP sensor. So now we know.

It has a FF BSI Sensor.

05-28-2015, 07:46 AM - 1 Like	#109
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Folks are assuming there won;t be a big drop in SNR perf Originally posted by philbaum I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable. . I think we agree on that. What happens more often though is the opposite - people think they want less MP because it automatically means 'less noise', and it doesn't. For folks who do want more resolution, I think the assumption going in is that this more MP will not bring any radical drop in SNR or DR and their wishes are based on that (safe) assumption. For example, I don't know that any small difference in SNR the D750 has over the D800 would be worth it to me to give up that additional resolution, I don't think I'd ever even notice it - it's a much smaller difference than that between the D800 and any aps-c camera, for example. I would notice the drop in resolution though.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Combined effect of defraction, lens defocus and sensor/film size on resolution	ARCASIA	Pentax Medium Format	8	11-22-2020 03:19 PM
Can't make sense of CRIS diagnosis and estimate	ephophex	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	11-21-2012 03:55 PM
How to make sense of the DOF preview/Optical preview on the on/off dial ?	photoleet	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	04-17-2012 04:22 AM
Manual lens size conversion on DSLR... (if that makes sense)	ComputerControlled	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	02-25-2012 06:24 PM
Comparing FF to APS-C: What difference does the bigger sensor make?	dosdan	Photography Articles	26	07-29-2011 02:53 PM

05-27-2015, 06:33 PM	#106
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by philbaum The pixel number on a sensor is not an independent commodity. It brings a lot of relationships with it. For example, this link under the heading of "measurements" and Dynamic Range, shows that the D750 has higher dynamic range with its 24mp than the D810 does with its 36mp. Sony's A7s with its 12mp has higher dynamic range than the 24mp D750 and 36mp D810 at any iso over 800. Nikon D750 versus Nikon D810 versus Sony A7S - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark To pretend there aren't interrelationships between MP and other sensor/camera design parameters is just silly. Those are also all different sensel technology (A7s vs. D750 vs. D800) - if you want to compare apples-apples, look at 24MP D600 vs. 36MP D800 - no gain in DR or image noise for the same-gen 24MP sensor. In other words you can't make the case that 'lower MP on same format always gives better SNR/DR'. It can correlate, but when it does you're often comparing sensors using different tech and sometimes a half-generation removed. .

05-27-2015, 08:54 PM	#107
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	Originally posted by jsherman999 In other words you can't make the case that 'lower MP on same format always gives better SNR/DR'. It can correlate, but when it does you're often comparing sensors using different tech and sometimes a half-generation removed. . I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable. From some of the above posts, it almost sounds like some folks think they can choose a MP number without pros and cons.

05-28-2015, 02:02 AM	#108
rfkiii Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Texas Posts: 130	Originally posted by philbaum I wasn't making that case. I just collected some MP numbers from DXOmark to point out that sensor design is more complicated than simply choosing a MP number. The number of mp on a sensor is related to other sensor performance/design factors. Its not an independent variable. From some of the above posts, it almost sounds like some folks think they can choose a MP number without pros and cons. Most photographers will realize more value from a higher number of MPs (capture resolution) than they will lose from any of the cons mentioned thus far.

05-28-2015, 08:25 AM	#110
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Na Horuk Really?? This kind of stuff is what is fueling the MP war, even though MP is not really that important. Are photos today, with the high resolution cameras, really that much better or more important than photos in the past, taken with 6MP cameras or film? Absolutely not. With more MP though, I can carry fewer lenses than in the past, and crop later. That doesn't mean 100MP is the right answer, but, for me, it means that 36 is nice to have, and I'd be happier still with 50.

05-28-2015, 08:26 AM	#111
kenspo Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Oslo Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by ElJamoquio I'd be happier still with 50. It won't be 50.

05-28-2015, 01:40 PM	#112
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by ElJamoquio That doesn't mean 100MP is the right answer, but, for me, it means that 36 is nice to have, and I'd be happier still with 50. Well then I guess all you can do is use the 645 or higher. Im fairly sure you shot some good photos with the 16MP sensor, or even older ones. Good luck, though

05-28-2015, 04:18 PM	#113
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by kenspo It won't be 50. OK, so 49? That kind of confirms earlier threads. 36 MP would be OK with me, 24 MP too. Both are mature formats. With the pixel shift feature in either, 50 MP super high resolution will be possible for those who need it (under the scenarios that work for pixel shift).

05-29-2015, 10:57 AM	#114
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Na Horuk Well then I guess all you can do is use the 645 or higher. Im fairly sure you shot some good photos with the 16MP sensor, or even older ones. Good luck, though A shift lens is far cheaper. 72MP is good enough for me.

05-29-2015, 11:26 AM	#115
yorik Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Scotts Valley, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 991	The Phoblographer is saying that Sony rumors is saying that the Pentax FF will have the A7R (36 mpx) sensor... To misquote Winston Churchill, it's a story about a rumor... But the rumor sounds reasonable.

05-29-2015, 12:41 PM	#116
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by yorik To misquote Winston Churchill, it's a story about a rumor... But the rumor sounds reasonable. But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections? Hopefully Pentax FF won't suffer such problems, that the kinks have been ironed out by now

05-29-2015, 01:06 PM - 1 Like	#117
yorik Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Scotts Valley, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 991	Originally posted by Na Horuk But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections? Hopefully Pentax FF won't suffer such problems, that the kinks have been ironed out by now I think the sensor has been around for long enough, that RiPx is aware of any problems and knows how to fix them... I was hoping for a 24ish mpx sensor myself, mostly because I personally don't need 36, though I suppose that it if they are only going to offer one line of FF, they should probably go big, especially if they want a decent DA-crop. Perhaps if the Pentax FF takes the world by storm, they will follow it up with a Nikon 610/750 type camera.

05-30-2015, 03:21 PM	#118
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	Originally posted by Na Horuk But doesn't that sensor have some shortcommings? Spots, sensor reflections? the 24mp a7 had the sensor reflections at night, but that issue is reputed to have been resolved with the a7ii. so pentax will be trying to compete with the d810, not the a7r... pretty big shoes to fill for a dslr. right now there is an $1,100 price difference between the two, pentax will have to come in somewhere in that range, but it won't be near either end.

06-01-2015, 09:58 AM	#119
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	36 MP is the best for using APS-C lenses. I think it will be 36 MP with 16 MP APS-C mode. If it will be more than 36 MP, it's not bad too.

06-10-2015, 10:38 AM	#120
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Sony a7R II Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera (a7RII Camera Body) B&H Sony just announced the new A7rII with a 42MP sensor. So now we know. It has a FF BSI Sensor.