How important is sensor pixel density really?

[Neil S.]

No. Firstly there are already larger sensors and companies fill that niche quite nicely. I don't think Nikon has anything to gain other than headache of trying to compete with yet another camera manufacturer by creating a medium format camera.

Secondly there would be two things that impact the change of the format. 1) either a new technology is created and companies work together en mass to take advantage with an interchangable format (4/3rds did this). or 2) the lens catalogue is backwards compatible (aps and micro4/3rds did this).

Creating good lenses is hard and very expensive. So if Nikon / Canon chose to create a larger sensor they'd need to redesign a camera and create a whole lot of new lenses at the same time (a kind of a resource drain that can potentially bankrupt companies), or develop a new camera for an existing format competing directly with new competitors in a field where they have zero reputation for only a TINY subset of professional customers.


My speculative opinion is that it would be madness.

You make some really good points here...

I would think that you are right, and this wont happen anytime soon.

I really hope this is the case, because I dont want to have to replace my glass lol.

As far as FF sensors are concerned, they are still very low density compared to APS-C. This is even true for the D3x, and its relatively high MP count.

There is still a lot of headroom left, and it seems that 30 MP or so would be more than enough for 99.9% of all shooters.

This will in the future give the camera makers the flexibility to go either the higher resolution route, or to focus on better dynamic range and high Iso performance as Derrel had discussed before.

- Neil

 

[Sbuxo]

what type of sensor is on the t1i and t2i?
how would you explain the reputation?
probably still doesn't make sense. :er:

 

[Big Mike]

There is still a lot of headroom left, and it seems that 30 MP or so would be more than enough for 99.9% of all shooters.

Well, some would say that 6 or 8 MP is enough for 99% of 'people who own cameras'. 12MP is probably enough for most professional photographers.
After that, it's just gravy...unless you specifically need all that resolution for some reason.

 

[Big Mike]

what type of sensor is on the t1i and t2i?

APS-C sized CMOS.

 

[Neil S.]

There is still a lot of headroom left, and it seems that 30 MP or so would be more than enough for 99.9% of all shooters.

Well, some would say that 6 or 8 MP is enough for 99% of 'people who own cameras'. 12MP is probably enough for most professional photographers.
After that, it's just gravy...unless you specifically need all that resolution for some reason.

Ya you are right.

I just meant that it seems unrealistic that anyone would ever print larger than what 30 MP would provide, even for large posters or banners.

Even the 18 MP on my 7D is way more than I usually would need.

The extra resolution is nice though, because I can crop down tighter while still having useable images.

It is true that its better to frame your shot correctly to start, but being able to crop is just gravy like you said.

 

[Neil S.]

how would you explain the reliability?

What do you mean by reliability?

 

[Sbuxo]

how would you explain the reliability?

What do you mean by reliability?

:lmao: oh god, i meant reputation. sorry. -.-

 

[Neil S.]

:lmao: oh god, i meant reputation. sorry. -.-

Well as we discussed earlier in this thread, APS-C sized sensors in general are not as good as Full Frame. This is especially true of image quality at higher Iso sensitivities where the FF sensors really shine.

They are however smaller and thus cheaper to manufacture. This is why they are used in DSLR bodies that are targeted at amateurs, which are much cheaper compared to the Pro level FF bodies.

As far as the t1i and the t2i specifically, I dont think their sensors are too bad.

I am a big fan of both Canon and Nikon bodies, and dont have much bad to say about either.

Hope this helps

- Neil

 

[Overread]

They are however smaller and thus cheaper to manufacture. This is why they are used in DSLR bodies that are targeted at amateurs, which are much cheaper compared to the Pro level FF bodies.

I would contest that point - smaller is cheaper to manufacture yes and I also fully accept that the larger sensors offer better high ISO performance - but be carefull how you classify this. One could equally compare a fullframe sensor to a medium or large formate and say that the larger format is for pros only whist the cheap DSLR fullframe is for hobbyists

The 1.6 is a crop factor nothing more - the 7D is semi pro (by classification) and many professionals use that camera body - further the 1DMIV is 1.3 crop and leading flagship camera body from canon at present (everyone is waiting to see when they release the fullframe flagship - at present though its the 5DM2)

 

[Big Mike]

The 1.6 is a crop factor nothing more - the 7D is semi pro (by classification) and many professionals use that camera body - further the 1DMIV is 1.3 crop and leading flagship camera body from canon at present (everyone is waiting to see when they release the fullframe flagship - at present though its the 5DM2)

You're not counting the 1Ds mk III?

 

[Sbuxo]

:lmao: oh god, i meant reputation. sorry. -.-

Well as we discussed earlier in this thread, APS-C sized sensors in general are not as good as Full Frame. This is especially true of image quality at higher Iso sensitivities where the FF sensors really shine.

They are however smaller and thus cheaper to manufacture. This is why they are used in DSLR bodies that are targeted at amateurs, which are much cheaper compared to the Pro level FF bodies.

As far as the t1i and the t2i specifically, I dont think their sensors are too bad.

I am a big fan of both Canon and Nikon bodies, and dont have much bad to say about either.

Hope this helps

- Neil

Ah, okay. Is it true that all film cameras have the same sensors as these full frame dslrs? I don't know much about sensors especially in digital photography cuz I hardly shoot digital. Mainly because I don't want to until I get my dslr.

 

[Neil S.]

They are however smaller and thus cheaper to manufacture. This is why they are used in DSLR bodies that are targeted at amateurs, which are much cheaper compared to the Pro level FF bodies.

I would contest that point - smaller is cheaper to manufacture yes and I also fully accept that the larger sensors offer better high ISO performance - but be carefull how you classify this. One could equally compare a fullframe sensor to a medium or large formate and say that the larger format is for pros only whist the cheap DSLR fullframe is for hobbyists

The 1.6 is a crop factor nothing more - the 7D is semi pro (by classification) and many professionals use that camera body - further the 1DMIV is 1.3 crop and leading flagship camera body from canon at present (everyone is waiting to see when they release the fullframe flagship - at present though its the 5DM2)

Ya but they dont use APS-C sensors in any pro level bodies that I know of. Well at least Canon/Nikon that is. So I am correct in saying that APS-C was not designed for/used in pro level bodies.

The 1.6 crop factor for Canon is APS-C only.

The 7D is semi-pro yes, not pro.

I was just trying to answer the question that was asked...

I am not trying to argue here. Just addressing what you said about my post.

 

[KmH]

Ah, okay. Is it true that all film cameras have the same sensors as these full frame dslrs? I don't know much about sensors especially in digital photography cuz I hardly shoot digital. Mainly because I don't want to until I get my dslr.

Equivelent film camera's (equivelent to full frame image silicon image sensors) are designed to use 135 format film:

135 film - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Each film image is 36x24 mm. Exactly how much of a 36x24mm full frame image sensor gets used varies somewhat, but it' real close.

Does everyone understand that a digital camera's heart, the image sensor, is not a digital electronic device? It's an analog electronic device.

 

[Neil S.]

Does everyone understand that a digital camera's heart, the image sensor, is not a digital electronic device? It's an analog electronic device.

I guess I hadnt really thought about it before.

Looking up the specs on my 7D, I see that it has 14-bit analog to digital converters.

It looks to me like most DSLRs are 14-bit A/D right now?

Does anyone know enough about this to give us some information on this, and if more bits is better for the A/D converters or not and why?

- Neil

 

[prodigy2k7]

Does everyone understand that a digital camera's heart, the image sensor, is not a digital electronic device? It's an analog electronic device.

I guess I hadnt really thought about it before.

Looking up the specs on my 7D, I see that it has 14-bit analog to digital converters.

It looks to me like most DSLRs are 14-bit A/D right now?

Does anyone know enough about this to give us some information on this, and if more bits is better for the A/D converters or not and why?

- Neil

This is completely out of my area of knowledge, but I did read somewhere that some data is lost in this conversion. Not really sure what that entails...

Where are those really smart people that like to write big long paragraphs on technical subjects? Garbz? Derrel? Helen?

KmH is pretty smart but he states the facts and doesn't explain the facts to us dumber people! :lmao: