Garbz
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2003
- Messages
- 9,713
- Reaction score
- 203
- Location
- Brisbane, Australia
- Website
- www.auer.garbz.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
My opinion of quality comes down from colour reproduction and noise. I have never reproduced a photo which required the full 20mpx of my camera, and chances are I won't. With the restriction of megapixels out of the way the above is the only thing left.
Now what I have been trying to get across is yes ok noise has a little to do with pixel density which is low on the 5D because of the full frame sensor. But it has a lot more to do with the sensor design itself. There are many different ways to use the data from the photo receptors. The way the electrical lines are run from the photoreceptor to the amplifier for one, the design of the amplifer, the path the information is read out, the order that it is read out at, the actual amplifying transistor used, the type of transistor that is used, the voltage across that resistor, the voltage across the photo diode, the precision of the voltage source... do I need to go on? Because I can think of a few more, I haven't even gotten past the edge of the silicon yet.
When I have looked at noise test photos of the 1DMkIII and the 5D, 20D and the Nikon D2X, D200. The 5D was bested by the 1DMkIII and D2X, and of course was better than the 2 prosumer choices. But the reason is the electronic design more than anything. Or how about the Nikon D1 prototype. It had a 35mm sensor with a whopping 0.56Mpx. The images from that pale in comparison to most of the DSLRs on the market nowadays. But clearly it would have had the largest pixel density of nearly any working camera.
Implementation > size of photodiodes with regards to noise on modern cameras.
Now what I have been trying to get across is yes ok noise has a little to do with pixel density which is low on the 5D because of the full frame sensor. But it has a lot more to do with the sensor design itself. There are many different ways to use the data from the photo receptors. The way the electrical lines are run from the photoreceptor to the amplifier for one, the design of the amplifer, the path the information is read out, the order that it is read out at, the actual amplifying transistor used, the type of transistor that is used, the voltage across that resistor, the voltage across the photo diode, the precision of the voltage source... do I need to go on? Because I can think of a few more, I haven't even gotten past the edge of the silicon yet.
When I have looked at noise test photos of the 1DMkIII and the 5D, 20D and the Nikon D2X, D200. The 5D was bested by the 1DMkIII and D2X, and of course was better than the 2 prosumer choices. But the reason is the electronic design more than anything. Or how about the Nikon D1 prototype. It had a 35mm sensor with a whopping 0.56Mpx. The images from that pale in comparison to most of the DSLRs on the market nowadays. But clearly it would have had the largest pixel density of nearly any working camera.
Implementation > size of photodiodes with regards to noise on modern cameras.