“Wad,
Ok I liked that analogy. I totally see what you mean there with the ice tray, its about the same thing I was trying to say but at a loss for the right words. This completely paints a picture very easy to put into perspective.
That little block with (for example) with compared to one ice tray, the amt of water left behind in the 3 will be more than the one tray (We can leave sensor size out of this for now, its not relevant) We are talking one amt of space with 3 vs 1 will appear as more noise in the image and takes higher ISO and hence more noise.
As cameras started adding more pixils (and a whole lot more) we intuitavley would assume more pixils = more resolution = better photo. Well, ok, if you dont mind noise. I was trying to understand WHY and now I get it, I had not heard that concept before, so Im glad to hear everyones take on this. The topic came up when they were discussing mirrorless vs DSLR (and many are switching) but the disadvantage in mirrorless (in general) have more pixils per sq cm than most dslr's and it was merely a topic for discussion. I can see here that everyone here is basicly saying the same thing, differently.
We started out with Jpeg when we were changing from film, to now we can get all the way up into RAW and really get nit picky like most advanced shooters do in post. Some are still hesitant to switch due to this and of course the lens replacement costs, as the converters arent consistant with the same quality. Im greatful for everyones own interpretations of this, I find this a very interestsing topic and good learning.
In general, the image with ONE will fair better than the one with THree in that same amt of space. (We arent taking them away per measurement for comparisson.) Just comparing 1 to 3 in the same space as the example... Thanks guys”
————————————————————————————
You’re welcome.
The number of pixels on a given area is not important as the size of the pixels. Quality versus Quantity. The better sensor is the one that has the highest coverage of the given area. In other [words], less blank surface where light can fall, and not be collected.
The EOS 6D has had an image sensor with some of the largest photosites of any Canon DSLR, and it has low light performance to match. The new 6D Mark II has 30% more pixels on the same size image sensor, yet Canon has somehow managed to keep the pixel size nearly the same. This is quite a feat. [The sensor has less “lost” space on its’ surface.]
I would rather have a lower resolution camera with larger photosites, than a higher resolution sensor with much smaller photosites. Also, image processing plays a large role in the quality of the final image, too. Having Dual CPUs is a major adavantage over cameras with a single CPU.
--------------------------------------------------------
"Fooling computers since 1972."
