Timeline for Do the same camera settings lead to the same exposure across different sensor sizes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2011 at 0:29 | comment | added | Nick Bedford | Well, that's more pixels to work with. When it comes to noise, it's more related to the individual performance of the photosites. Mostly. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 6:16 | comment | added | mattdm | Imagine you use the same size photosite "buckets" in a P&S and in a dSLR. Take 12m little buckets and make a point & shoot sensor. Then take 272m buckets of the same size and make a (very high resolution!) full-frame sensor. Now, take an exposure by dumping metaphorical water on each scene. You'll need a lot more water to cover the "full-frame" field of buckets — this is your larger image circle — but the depth of water will be the same. Even though you've got the same small buckets, you've got a lot more data to work with, and therefore better SNR. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 5:07 | comment | added | Nick Bedford | Thanks for that! Can't believe I got the words round the wrong way. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 5:07 | history | edited | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
edited body
|
| Jan 28, 2011 at 5:00 | comment | added | ysap | @Nick Bedford - In your edit part, "...hitting each pixel is greater" should be smaller. In "...ratio of noise to signal is considerably less" should be more. The SNR is higher in larger pixel sizes (larger sensors, same resolution). | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:44 | history | edited | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 35 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:38 | history | edited | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 99 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:33 | history | edited | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 41 characters in body; added 321 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:24 | comment | added | Nick Bedford | That is true. I'll clarify that. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:22 | comment | added | mattdm | And actually, as I re-read, the part that is relevant at the end is, well, exactly wrong. The amount of light that the P&S sensor gets is just the same as what the equivalent area of a full-frame sensor gets, so amplification is exactly the same. Smaller sensors are noisier because 1) more electronics get packed in a much smaller area and 2) to make a print of the same size, you have to enlarge more (although one doesn't generally think of it that way when working with files) — not because they get less exposure. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:16 | comment | added | mattdm | This is a fine answer as answers go, but I think it's the answer to a different question — the question is about sensor size, not focal length, which is a whole separate thing. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:14 | history | edited | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 509 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2011 at 4:09 | history | answered | Nick Bedford | CC BY-SA 2.5 |