Sensor Size VS Aperture Size For Low Light Performance
Feb 25, 2016 07:05:20 #
What point and shoot camera is better for low light performance? One with a maximum aperture range of f/2.8-5.9 with a 1" sensor or one with a constant f2.8 aperture with a 1/2.3" sensor? Thanks.
Feb 25, 2016 07:45:40 #
As in all photography, the answer is context-sensitive!
We can speculate, based on conventional wisdom, or do real world tests at different light levels, ISOs, zoom settings, and scene brightness ranges.
I suspect the results would be quite surprising, and probably disappointing.
We can speculate, based on conventional wisdom, or do real world tests at different light levels, ISOs, zoom settings, and scene brightness ranges.
I suspect the results would be quite surprising, and probably disappointing.
Feb 25, 2016 07:48:46 #
johnnycamra wrote:
What point and shoot camera is better for low light performance? One with a maximum aperture range of f/2.8-5.9 with a 1" sensor or one with a constant f2.8 aperture with a 1/2.3" sensor? Thanks.
For low light/high ISO performance it isn't the size of the sensor that affects the camera's performance, it's the size of the pixels. Larger pixels gather light better. If you have two sensors of the same size area-wise, the one with the lower pixel count will most likely have the better low light performance. All things being equal, that is. The camera's processing power and sensor design can make a difference also, with newer models seeming to have a performance advantage over older ones of the same megapixels and sensor size. Whether or not the sensor is more of an advantage then the lens aperture depends on the capabilities of the different cameras in low light.
Feb 25, 2016 09:15:44 #
LFingar wrote:
Good point!For low light/high ISO performance it isn't the size of the sensor that affects the camera's performance, it's the size of the pixels. Larger pixels gather light better. If you have two sensors of the same size area-wise, the one with the lower pixel count will most likely have the better low light performance. All things being equal ...
Feb 25, 2016 20:08:56 #
lev29 wrote:
Good point!
It's also important to take into consideration the age of the camera. Newer cameras have less noise than older ones. A Nikon D70 has huge photosites - it is an APS-C camera, but only 2000x3000 px. Compared to a D3300, which has 24mp, it ought to be much less noisy. But the newer camera has a better processor, better sensor, etc - so it is actually less noisy despite the smaller photosites.
Feb 26, 2016 05:29:50 #
Gene51 wrote:
It's also important to take into consideration the age of the camera. Newer cameras have less noise than older ones. A Nikon D70 has huge photosites - it is an APS-C camera, but only 2000x3000 px. Compared to a D3300, which has 24mp, it ought to be much less noisy. But the newer camera has a better processor, better sensor, etc - so it is actually less noisy despite the smaller photosites.
One other thing came to mind - megapixel count. Since many large images require fewer pixels, it is not uncommon to downsample a 36mp image to 12-16mp, which has the effect of diminishing noise.
https://photographylife.com/why-downsampling-an-image-reduces-noise
Obviously, this would work for both small and large sensors.
And here is a sample set of images taken with a small sensor Panasonic GM1
http://daily.lenswork.com/2013/12/a-case-for-more-pixels.html
Feb 26, 2016 10:10:03 #
johnnycamra wrote:
What point and shoot camera is better for low light performance? One with a maximum aperture range of f/2.8-5.9 with a 1" sensor or one with a constant f2.8 aperture with a 1/2.3" sensor? Thanks.
If you look it up, a "1 inch" sensor is nowhere near one inch. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/one-inch-sensor.htm
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.