04-08-2012, 03:01 PM
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1333893829' post='17389']
As I noted in my comment above this is why the topic is hopeless. Some wish to argue light/iso/shutter and others wish to argue something else (dof, perspective, sensor quality at a given size/generation/density). This makes the conversation hopeless. It sort of like arguing about the benefit of fruit where one person focuses on apples exclusively and another can only comment on oranges.
[/quote]
Like I said before, it is not one or the other, it is all one argument. If you wish to argue sensor sensitivity, do so. The amplification of the signal is linked to light/exposure time.
Aperture and angle of view and totally linked with the amount of light.
You can claim it is apples versus oranges, but it is not. It is one whole, one should try to understand that to be able to see the simple equivalences between different systems and even different mediums. And not be caught in odd mystifications of one particular system compared to "the others".
To illustrate it is just one coherent whole:
When you set an equivalent focal length (what you called "perspective") with an equivalent f-value (what you called "DOF"), and you set an equivalent ISO setting (what you called "ISO"), you get a similar amount of light to for the image (what you called "light"), and a similar exposure time (what you called "shutter").
If then you also are dealing with same technology generation sensors (what you called "generation"), with a similar image resolution (linked to what you called "density"), you get a similar noise performance and even similar dynamic range (what you referred to as "sensor quality"), with a similar resolution image.
All this then the same, even if the sensors have a different size (which you referred to as "size").
No matter from which angle you look at it, it all is connected and a coherent whole. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
As I noted in my comment above this is why the topic is hopeless. Some wish to argue light/iso/shutter and others wish to argue something else (dof, perspective, sensor quality at a given size/generation/density). This makes the conversation hopeless. It sort of like arguing about the benefit of fruit where one person focuses on apples exclusively and another can only comment on oranges.
[/quote]
Like I said before, it is not one or the other, it is all one argument. If you wish to argue sensor sensitivity, do so. The amplification of the signal is linked to light/exposure time.
Aperture and angle of view and totally linked with the amount of light.
You can claim it is apples versus oranges, but it is not. It is one whole, one should try to understand that to be able to see the simple equivalences between different systems and even different mediums. And not be caught in odd mystifications of one particular system compared to "the others".
To illustrate it is just one coherent whole:
When you set an equivalent focal length (what you called "perspective") with an equivalent f-value (what you called "DOF"), and you set an equivalent ISO setting (what you called "ISO"), you get a similar amount of light to for the image (what you called "light"), and a similar exposure time (what you called "shutter").
If then you also are dealing with same technology generation sensors (what you called "generation"), with a similar image resolution (linked to what you called "density"), you get a similar noise performance and even similar dynamic range (what you referred to as "sensor quality"), with a similar resolution image.
All this then the same, even if the sensors have a different size (which you referred to as "size").
No matter from which angle you look at it, it all is connected and a coherent whole. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />