08-28-2011, 07:57 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-29-2011, 07:09 AM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='nandadevieast' timestamp='1314557009' post='11117']
And what happens when technology starts pushing the envelope...and compensates a couple of stops by manufacturing better sensors...like incase of sony 16mp sensor (and in the said better performing sensor of new NEX 5n)...
How does the equation change then?
[/quote]
Like Klaus points out, the different makers of sensors continuously keep researching and developing. It makes little sense to single one sensor out, just because it happens to be a bit better than the rest at a point in time.
Regarding the 16mp APS-C from Sony, it actually is not a huge step in higher ISO noise performance, but rather a lower noise at base ISO. That is reached by a very low read noise, not so much by capturing more light. With higher ISO settings it loses a lot of its advantage again due to the weaker signal introducing noise again.
We do not treat the old 5mp Oly E-1 or 8mp E300 different from the E-5 or E-30 either, anyway... we still see them as equivalent, just with the older cameras being a lot noisier at higher ISO's.... similar to how film kept being more fine grained with the same sensitivity.
So, when I talk about the ISO equivalence, it is mainly to get a similar exposure time when we use equivalent f-value and focal length settings. The noise profile being equal is generation and technology dependent.
And what happens when technology starts pushing the envelope...and compensates a couple of stops by manufacturing better sensors...like incase of sony 16mp sensor (and in the said better performing sensor of new NEX 5n)...
How does the equation change then?
[/quote]
Like Klaus points out, the different makers of sensors continuously keep researching and developing. It makes little sense to single one sensor out, just because it happens to be a bit better than the rest at a point in time.
Regarding the 16mp APS-C from Sony, it actually is not a huge step in higher ISO noise performance, but rather a lower noise at base ISO. That is reached by a very low read noise, not so much by capturing more light. With higher ISO settings it loses a lot of its advantage again due to the weaker signal introducing noise again.
We do not treat the old 5mp Oly E-1 or 8mp E300 different from the E-5 or E-30 either, anyway... we still see them as equivalent, just with the older cameras being a lot noisier at higher ISO's.... similar to how film kept being more fine grained with the same sensitivity.
So, when I talk about the ISO equivalence, it is mainly to get a similar exposure time when we use equivalent f-value and focal length settings. The noise profile being equal is generation and technology dependent.