01-12-2011, 01:05 PM
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1294831952' post='5442']
I personally don't think that the higher pixel density (as in 24mp APS-C) is more important than a decent low light performance. I don't make huge prints, but indeed use different lenses and some with low speeds. Sometimes even fast lenses with VR don't help to get the required results. So I think having an ISO boost (with keeping the level of detail and color performance) is more important as it allows higher shutter speeds, which is essential. All in all, it's a priority issue based on the given type of photography, and to me higher pixel density on APS-C does not have the priority. Of course a decent low light performance + higher pixel density is very wellcome but only if it could compete with the performance of a sensor with bigger pixels.
My arguement (as a consumer) here was, why dealing with a low light performance in 24mp APS-C, when there's no (let's say) 16-18mp FX sensor that definetly could have better overall performance. Sure the manufacturers would have their reasons to do so but who cares about the cost reduction & market share measures.
In Canon world people have high pixel density with affordable prices and I'm happy for them if the resolution is the most significant criteria that counts. But here at Nikon you must pay for each pixel and I'm not sure if it's worth it.
Serkan
[/quote]
Like I said, every new generation of sensors have given a better high ISO noise performance. And yet, time and time again, the same complaints pop up... About how they should focus on "better low light performance" and not resolution. While it is the resolution that is still lacking.
And again, most photography has NO use for very high ISO settings anyway.
It does not matter how small the pixels get... the 24mp sensor with similar sensor technology will give the same high ISO noise performance as the 16mp one from for instance the Nikon D7000. Yes, the smaller pixels will get fewer photons, so we will see more noise per pixel. And yet, the noise-pixel will be smaller in the resulting image, leading to NO image degradation compared to an image for the 16mp camera.
Yet the image DOES win in resolution.
I personally don't think that the higher pixel density (as in 24mp APS-C) is more important than a decent low light performance. I don't make huge prints, but indeed use different lenses and some with low speeds. Sometimes even fast lenses with VR don't help to get the required results. So I think having an ISO boost (with keeping the level of detail and color performance) is more important as it allows higher shutter speeds, which is essential. All in all, it's a priority issue based on the given type of photography, and to me higher pixel density on APS-C does not have the priority. Of course a decent low light performance + higher pixel density is very wellcome but only if it could compete with the performance of a sensor with bigger pixels.
My arguement (as a consumer) here was, why dealing with a low light performance in 24mp APS-C, when there's no (let's say) 16-18mp FX sensor that definetly could have better overall performance. Sure the manufacturers would have their reasons to do so but who cares about the cost reduction & market share measures.
In Canon world people have high pixel density with affordable prices and I'm happy for them if the resolution is the most significant criteria that counts. But here at Nikon you must pay for each pixel and I'm not sure if it's worth it.
Serkan
[/quote]
Like I said, every new generation of sensors have given a better high ISO noise performance. And yet, time and time again, the same complaints pop up... About how they should focus on "better low light performance" and not resolution. While it is the resolution that is still lacking.
And again, most photography has NO use for very high ISO settings anyway.
It does not matter how small the pixels get... the 24mp sensor with similar sensor technology will give the same high ISO noise performance as the 16mp one from for instance the Nikon D7000. Yes, the smaller pixels will get fewer photons, so we will see more noise per pixel. And yet, the noise-pixel will be smaller in the resulting image, leading to NO image degradation compared to an image for the 16mp camera.
Yet the image DOES win in resolution.