Originally posted by Rondec The struggle with equivalence is real. One major issue with it is that it requires a similar generation Sony sensor. Pop in a Toshiba or Canon sensor and things don't work as well. Try to compare a K10 to a K5 and everything is totally weird. But hey, it is a starting place.
Yes, and well-put. This is why unless someone has the sensor data available and looks it up or already owns both cameras, you can't 'know' one sensor will perform better than another, even if one is bigger than the other. That's why this phase of the question is about expectations - which would you expect to be less noisy at the same display sizes (not 100%,) m43 or FF, with the FF slightly newer.
Quote: The magical thing happens when you downsize higher megapixel images to a normalized end result.
We're getting to that
A side question: a higher-MP image taken from similar sensor gen and same sensor size, would you expect the image noise to be similar after downsizing? And: what if it was same sensor gen, same pixel density, but a larger sensor (same framing/exposure,) how would the images compare after normalizing display size?
Quote: ...
Oh well, I think I understand it well enough. As I have said many times before, the thing that aggravates me the most is that equivalence proponents use it to show why full frame is the best format -- even better than medium format -- for all purposes.
Depends on what anyone ever means by 'better', and then when someone says 'for all purposes' they usually really mean 'for their purposes.'
And that goes both ways
You get proponents of any format making those claims, which is really about IQ preferences and use cases, and usually, cost.
But if I could get back to it - what would be your expectation for the original question, with those specific bodies?
.