Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-25-2010, 01:43 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
If all else was equal, the calculations would be perfect. But of course as things are in the real world, they are *not* equal. Obviously. So the caclulations are not *perfect*. However, even *in the real world*, there is still less variability in noise performance for a given sensor size than many imagine (especially when comparing RAW data). Bottom line is that this simple type of calculation can still be worthwhile to give you a basic idea as to approximately (say, within a stop - probably within half a stop most of the time) what kind of ballpark you're in. If someone wants to disagree that knowing within a stop or or so is useful to you, I can't argue. I'd call it useful to me, if not to you. But if you disagree that's lkely to be accurate to within a stop, I think you'll be surprised if you actually do the math and compare it to real world results.

To be sure, it's more useful in comparing between interchangle lens *systems* than between specific models. One can say FF, for example, is about a stop better than APS-C overall and use this as a basis for comaprison, because long term, that's how it's going to average out, even if at any given point in time the most interesting FF model might be behind of its curve while the most interesting APS-C might be ahead, thus temporarily narrowing the gap. The next year those shoes will be reversed. Overall, though the years, it will average out. But when comparing *specific models*, then there's no overall / "through the years" involved.

02-25-2010, 05:40 PM   #17
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
Let's get basic

ISO (or ASA, back in the day) is a measure of sensitivity to light. Plates, film, anything with a photosensitive emulsion, analog phototubes, digital sensors, ALL can be assigned ISO ratings. It just means that a certain intensity of light is needed to form an image of a certain density on the plate/film/sensor/whatever.

Digital: At a specified pixel density, sensors rated at the same ISO level should have similar noise levels, irregardless of the sensor dimensions. Increased density on same-size sensors produces more noise. That's physics.

Comparisons: The K20D density is about 4.1 mpx/cm2 (megapickles per square centimeter). My 5 megapickle PNS's of various brands, with their teeny sensors circa 2004, have densities around 13.7 mpx/cm2, so we can expect them to be about 3x noisier. My old 1 megapickle PNS has a density of about 6.2, with its even teensier sensor circa 2001, so it should be only about 1.5x noisier than the K20D. Squeezing 10 or 12 megapickles onto teensy sensors gives densities up to 45 mpx/cm2. Ay carumba! (But are they 10x noisier? And does CMOS vs CCD make a difference?)

Now, that's all at base ISO. IIRC, various makers rate their base ISO levels at anywhere from 80 to 200. The latter may be cheating, because: to attain higher ISOs, the signals from the sensors are amplified. And here is where we lose any basis for straight-across comparisons: Not all amps are equal, nor components, nor QC standards, nor even sensors from the same production line. Within and between models and makers, are variations, sometimes rather noticeable.

So we can test individual cameras, and say with certainty that THIS camera model 'W' at ISO 'X' has image noise equivalent to THAT camera model 'Y' at ISO 'Z', when tested at the same lab bench at about the same time. Fine. But beyond that, we can only generalize and equivocate. That's life, by Heisenberg!

  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
amount, camera, formula, guy, image, iso, noise, pentax help, photography, sensor, size, terms
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone uses the Lowepro inverse 100AW and Outback 100? raider Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 3 06-19-2010 11:34 PM
For Sale - Sold: Lowepro Inverse 200 hip pack heatherslightbox Sold Items 8 05-04-2009 06:19 PM
For Sale - Sold: Lowepro Inverse 100 AW Belt Pack Brand New walay Sold Items 3 09-23-2008 08:53 PM
lowepro inverse-anyone use one? jmdeegan Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 4 08-05-2008 12:46 PM
Old Flash on new bodies = bad news. But what about the inverse? Dubious Drewski Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 05-11-2008 03:28 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:39 PM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]