nikonians

Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

| |
Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Print Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #86127
View in linear mode

Subject: "A PIXELATED QUESTION" Previous topic | Next topic
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Wed 26-Dec-12 06:18 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"A PIXELATED QUESTION"


Clarks Summit, US
          


In comparing a 12MP DX with a 12MP FX image are the pixels on the FX image larger or are they they same size as the pixels on the DX image but less dense?

Essentialy, does pixel size, not density, vary with the type or size of the sensor?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
JosephK Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his excellent and frequent contributions and sharing his in-depth knowledge and experience with the community in the Nikonians spirit.
26th Dec 2012
1
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
largebore Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
5
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
PerroneFord Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
2
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
KolinP Silver Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014
27th Dec 2012
3
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
largebore Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
4
     Reply message OK MOVING FORWARD
largebore Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
6
          Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
esantos Moderator Nikonians Resources Writer. Recognized for his outstanding reviews on printers and printing articles. Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas, including Landscape Photography Awarded for his extraordinary accomplishments in Landscape Photography. His work has been exhibited at the Smithsonian.
27th Dec 2012
7
               Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
PerroneFord Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
9
               Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
28th Dec 2012
15
                    Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
PerroneFord Silver Member
28th Dec 2012
16
               Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
29th Dec 2012
17
                    Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
29th Dec 2012
18
                         Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
29th Dec 2012
19
                              Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support
29th Dec 2012
22
                                   Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
29th Dec 2012
23
                                        Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support
29th Dec 2012
24
                                             Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
29th Dec 2012
25
                                                  Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
30th Dec 2012
26
                                                  Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
30th Dec 2012
28
                                                  Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
30th Dec 2012
29
                                                  Reply message RE: OK MOVING FORWARD
dhrphoto Silver Member
30th Dec 2012
30
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
27th Dec 2012
8
Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support
27th Dec 2012
10
     Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
largebore Silver Member
27th Dec 2012
11
     Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
esantos Moderator Nikonians Resources Writer. Recognized for his outstanding reviews on printers and printing articles. Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas, including Landscape Photography Awarded for his extraordinary accomplishments in Landscape Photography. His work has been exhibited at the Smithsonian.
28th Dec 2012
13
     Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
bkinthebay Gold Member
27th Dec 2012
12
          Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support
28th Dec 2012
14
               Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
dickiederson
29th Dec 2012
20
                    Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support
29th Dec 2012
21
                    Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
RABaker
30th Dec 2012
27
                         Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
largebore Silver Member
30th Dec 2012
31
                              Reply message RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community
30th Dec 2012
32
                                   Reply message THANKS TO ALL
largebore Silver Member
01st Jan 2013
33

JosephK Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his excellent and frequent contributions and sharing his in-depth knowledge and experience with the community in the Nikonians spirit. Nikonian since 17th Apr 2006Wed 26-Dec-12 07:11 PM
5084 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 0


Seattle, WA, US
          

The FX "pixels" are bigger. There are no gaps between them, if that is what you mean by density.

Bigger "pixels" have more light gathering abilities which helps reduce noise problems.

---------+---------+---------+---------+
Joseph K
Seattle, WA, USA

D700, D200, D70S, 24-70mm f/2.8, VR 70-200mm f/2.8 II,
50mm f/1.4 D, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR, 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 DX

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

    
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 12:04 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 1


Clarks Summit, US
          

>The FX "pixels" are bigger. There are no gaps
>between them, if that is what you mean by density.
>
>Bigger "pixels" have more light gathering abilities
>which helps reduce noise problems.
>
>---------+---------+---------+---------+
>Joseph K
>Seattle, WA, USA
>
>D700, D200, D70S, 24-70mm f/2.8, VR 70-200mm f/2.8 II,
>50mm f/1.4 D, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR, 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 DX
>



Yes, by density I meant how tight they are packed together.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

PerroneFord Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Apr 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 05:11 AM
2666 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 0


Tallahassee, US
          

Pixel? They are exactly the same.

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

KolinP Silver Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 13th May 2006Thu 27-Dec-12 06:39 AM
248 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 0


Weston-super-Mare, UK
          

Hello Michikon,

> (....) Essentialy, does pixel size, not density, vary with the type
> or size of the sensor?

Yes, there are real differences - both in pixels sizes and in pixel density between different sensors.

The differences are sometimes subtle, but they're always 'real'.

And they're more or less 'significant' to each of us depending on how much we care about the technicalities of our cameras versus the end-results we see in our prints and on our screens.

Here's a deliciously technical review on 'technologyblog' of some of the sensors in our cameras, which satisfied even my own hair-splitting appetite for details.

It doesn't explicitly address your question about DX pixel density (they label the 'DX' sensors as 'APS-C' sensors), but I'm sure you'll accept that the sensor-density figures are in there somewhere - with the application of a little mathematics.

Or here's another blog-post on Image Sensors World which - with a cross-reference to that item above - does raise a question (in one of the blog-responses) to the relative density between pixels on the D800 and the D3200 sensors.

Happy reading

Colin P

--
Staying busy is easy. Setting priorities is harder!
My Nikonians gallery
My other photo sites

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

    
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 12:02 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 3


Clarks Summit, US
          

>Hello Michikon,
>
>> (....) Essentialy, does pixel size, not density, vary
>with the type
>> or size of the sensor?
>
>Yes, there are real differences - both in pixels sizes and in
>pixel density between different sensors.
>
>The differences are sometimes subtle, but they're always
>'real'.
>
>And they're more or less 'significant' to each of us
>depending on how much we care about the technicalities of our
>cameras versus the end-results we see in our prints and on our
>screens.
>
>Here's a deliciously
>technical
>review> on 'technologyblog' of some of the sensors in our
>cameras, which satisfied even my own hair-splitting appetite
>for details.
>
>It doesn't explicitly address your question about DX pixel
>density (they label the 'DX' sensors as 'APS-C'
>sensors), but I'm sure you'll accept that the sensor-density
>figures are in there somewhere - with the application of a
>little mathematics.
>
>Or here's another blog-post on
>

>Image Sensors World> which - with a cross-reference to that
>item above - does raise a question (in one of the
>blog-responses) to the relative density between pixels on the
>D800 and the D3200 sensors.
>
>Happy reading
>
>Colin P
>
>--
>Staying busy is easy. Setting priorities is harder!
>
My
>Nikonians gallery>
>
My other photo sites


Great thanks.
Let me do some reading and I may be back with more questions.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

        
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 12:21 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 4


Clarks Summit, US
          

It is clear from the link on sensors that pixels do in fact vary in size from sensor to sensor.



Therefore in comparing a 12 MP APS sensor with a 12 MP FF sensor, 2 options exist.

So I have 2 questions

<1> The pixels may be the same size and the APS sensor is more densly packed and the full frame sensor has more room between the pixels ?

Or the the FF sensor has larger pixels with same density or distances between the pixels.. TRUE OR FALSE ?

HOW DOES DENSITY AFFECT PERFORMANCE ?


<2> Since pixel size may very, it is possible that a 24MP sensor while having less pixels than a 36mp sensor may have an equal or larger pixel surface area. A lesser number larger pixels producing more surface area than a larger number of smaller pixels. IS THIS CORRECT ? IF SO, IS THEIR A TERM FOR THE ABSOLUTE LIGHT GATHERING ABILITY OF A SENSOR? IS IT POSSIBLE AS DESCRIBED ABOVE THAT A HIGHER PIXEL COUNT ACTUALLY HAS LESS LIGHT GATHERING ABILITY THAN A LOWER PIXEL COUNT SENSOR of the same sensor size ?
AND SHOULD I CARE ?

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

            
esantos Moderator Nikonians Resources Writer. Recognized for his outstanding reviews on printers and printing articles. Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas, including Landscape Photography Awarded for his extraordinary accomplishments in Landscape Photography. His work has been exhibited at the Smithsonian. Nikonian since 10th Nov 2002Thu 27-Dec-12 04:20 PM
11950 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 6


McAllen, US
          

It helps to know the true definition of a pixel. Be wary of confusing pixels with photosites. Photosites are what you are talking about, light sensitive cavities in an array on a photo sensor. A pixel or picture element refers to a point of visual data on a digital image file.

Here is a good article that explains how a photosite gathers data and how that information is converted to pixels and an image file.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-sensors.htm

Ernesto Santos
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                
PerroneFord Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Apr 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 07:27 PM
2666 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 7
Thu 27-Dec-12 07:28 PM by PerroneFord

Tallahassee, US
          

>It helps to know the true definition of a pixel. Be wary of
>confusing pixels with photosites.

This was exactly my point. Pixels don't exist inside the camera sensor.

>Photosites are what you are
>talking about, light sensitive cavities in an array on a photo
>sensor. A pixel or picture element refers to a point of visual
>data on a digital image file.

Exactly, which is why I said that the pixels are the same no matter the camera used. As you note here, photosites is another matter ENTIRELY.


>Here is a good article that explains how a photosite gathers
>data and how that information is converted to pixels and an
>image file.
>
>http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-sensors.htm
>

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                    
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Fri 28-Dec-12 12:26 AM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 9


Lowden, US
          

It would have been helpful if you had explained that in your first post.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                        
PerroneFord Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Apr 2011Fri 28-Dec-12 05:17 AM
2666 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 15


Tallahassee, US
          

It was after midnight on a work night. Sorry.

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sat 29-Dec-12 02:00 AM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 7


Laurel, US
          

If sensors don't have pixels, please explain this:
Quote from Chipworks "Mainstream devices aside, the preceding survey has provided a good vehicle to review the oft-forgotten Foveon stacked pixel configuration. Foveon, now owned by Sigma, embeds three stacked collection wells per pixel within a silicon substrate. These sensors forgo color filters altogether, instead collecting three channels of color information at each photosite. In the past, this niche configuration led to semantic discussions involving “camera resolution,” “pixel count,” “number of pixels in an output file,” and even the word “pixel” itself."

http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/05/23/a-survey-of-recent-image-sensor-pixel-structures/

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                    
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sat 29-Dec-12 02:55 AM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 17


Lowden, US
          

After reading your post, out of curiosity, I looked up the definition of Pixel.

One source the Merriam Webster Dictionary agrees that camera sensors have pixels.

>> “2. any of the detecting elements of a charge-coupled device used as an optical sensor”

No other sources that I could find, including the Oxford English Dictionary, have extended the definition of pixel to include a “charge-coupled device” or any other form of light sensitive recording device.

Most sources define pixel more like this...

>> “an area of illumination on a display screen, one of many from which an image is composed”

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                        
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sat 29-Dec-12 04:08 AM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 18


Laurel, US
          

>Most sources define pixel more like this...
>
>>> “an area of illumination on a display screen, one
>of many from which an image is composed”


How about those sensor manufacures, remarkable aren't they?

Quote from CCL online " Pixel count isn't always a mark of quality in its self though and the quality of each pixel matters just as much. Toshiba have increased the amount of information each pixel can read compared to previous generations of CMOS sensors and have also reduced the size of each pixel. This new 20MP version has pixels that measures just 1.2 micrometres across, opposed to the 1.34 micrometres that featured in their 16MP sensor "

http://www.cclonline.com/article/977/News/Cameras/Toshiba-20-Megapixel-Image-Sensor/

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                            
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Registered since 25th Jul 2004Sat 29-Dec-12 12:47 PM
10916 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#22. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 19


US
          

"Toshiba have increased the amount of information each pixel can read compared to previous generations of CMOS sensors"

Considering that the above doesn't even make sense to me, I'm not sure I would hold that up as "the Gold Standard" of proper use of that terminology. Printer's ink has always been cheap and it is even cheaper in the digital age. The mere use of a term in a web site article does not in itself make the usage correct.

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sat 29-Dec-12 10:53 PM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#23. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 22
Sun 30-Dec-12 04:49 PM by dhrphoto

Laurel, US
          

>"Toshiba have increased the amount of information each
>pixel can read compared to previous generations of CMOS
>sensors"
>
>Considering that the above doesn't even make sense to me

?

>of proper use of that terminology. Printer's ink has always
>been cheap and it is even cheaper in the digital age. The
>mere use of a term in a web site article does not in itself
>make the usage correct.

Just from articles I have read.

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                    
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Registered since 25th Jul 2004Sat 29-Dec-12 11:51 PM
10916 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#24. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 23


US
          

I don't think a definition contest would be very helpful here.

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                        
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sat 29-Dec-12 11:57 PM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#25. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 24
Sun 30-Dec-12 12:07 AM by dhrphoto

Laurel, US
          

>I don't think a definition contest would be very helpful
>here.

http://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2011/faqs-the-sigma-camera-and-its-foveon-x3-direct-image-sensor/


A “pixel” on the image sensor of a digital camera is a light absorbing element (photodetector) that converts light (photons) into electrons. A pixel is also referred to as a pixel sensor when there is a need to distinguish the pixel from its location."


If someone offers advice, then you should have support to back it up and admit it when you are wrong!

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                            
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sun 30-Dec-12 12:20 AM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#26. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 25
Sun 30-Dec-12 12:27 AM by dm1dave

Lowden, US
          

>> “If someone offers advice, then you should have support to back it up and admit it when you are wrong!”

David,

Right or wrong this comment directed at Neil is disrespectful!

Please reacquaint yourself with our Terms of Use particularly paragraph 2.2.

Let’s agree to disagree and end this discussion about what is and is not a “pixel” before it gets any more personal.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                            
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sun 30-Dec-12 02:11 AM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#28. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 26
Sun 30-Dec-12 04:46 PM by dhrphoto

Laurel, US
          

>>> “If someone offers advice, then you should have
>support to back it up and admit it when you are wrong!”

>
>David,
>
>Right or wrong this comment directed at Neil is disrespectful!

It is not directed at him personally!

How is it disrepectful to correct mis-information? I just comented on something he and others have said. and responded to the last post, maybe I should have used the first post or my own to respond. BTW no disrepect was ment.

Edited for better wording

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                            
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sun 30-Dec-12 02:23 AM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#29. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 28


Lowden, US
          

Let it go, David!

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                            
dhrphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Sep 2007Sun 30-Dec-12 02:40 AM
142 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#30. "RE: OK MOVING FORWARD"
In response to Reply # 29
Sun 30-Dec-12 02:41 AM by dhrphoto

Laurel, US
          

May Your Day Be Happy And
Full Of Beautiful Images
D.H.R.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Thu 27-Dec-12 06:06 PM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 0


Lowden, US
          

As explained by Ernesto in post #7 your question is really about photosites not pixels.

The cameras sensor does not have pixels, it has an array of light sensitive photosites.

The photosites on a D700 (FX) are physically bigger than the photosites on the D300 (DX), both 12 MP cameras. Someone here can probably tell us the photosite size difference measured in microns.

The larger photosites on the D700 gather light more efficiently then the photosite on a D300. Therefore the D700 has better dynamic range and produces less noise at high ISO than the D300.

On the other hand – The smaller photosites on the D300 record the same amount of detail in a much smaller area (a narrower field of view) giving the D300 an advantage when your subject is further away. This is what people are usually referring to when they talk about DX giving them more “reach.” We all know that it is not really more reach or magnification but we have more resolution (pixels in the final image) across the area of the image that our subject occupies.

So, when the megapixel count is the same and the sensors are of the same generation...

The FX camera will have the advantage in dynamic range and high ISO performance and the DX camera will have the advantage of virtual “reach” - more resolution covering a narrower field of view.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

    
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Registered since 25th Jul 2004Thu 27-Dec-12 08:24 PM
10916 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 8


US
          

>> The larger photosites on the D700 gather light more efficiently then the photosite on a D300.

Just to avoid any possibility of misinterpretation... it is technically not "larger photosites" that gather more light or more efficiently gather more light on an FX sensor., It is solely due to the sheer size of the FX sensor. The FX sensor has about 1.4 times the surface area of a DX sensor, and 1.4x is equal to one stop.

For that reason, all else equal, an FX sensor delivers one stop better high ISO. All else equal, on a practical level, would generally be sensors developed within the same short time period.

In terms of "efficiency", sensors are measured in terms of their "quantum efficiency". The Quantum Efficiency (QE) is that percentage of the light hitting the sensor that is actually converted into electrons such that they increase the charge in the photosite wells (I hope I stated that accurately).

The QE of an FX sensor is not inherently better than a DX sensor (again all else equal). However, the larger size of the FX photosite (given same pixel count) could be construed to be "more efficient" in a certain sense.

The sensor tests we typically discuss here (Bill Claff's and DXO'
s for example) compare sensor performance at a standard output size. That eliminates the issue that (all else equal) small photosites are always noisier than larger photosites when viewed individually (i.e. at 100% zoom on a display).

But when aggregated by downsizing to a standard output size, equal size sensors will always be comparing final output pixels that span identical areas of the sensor. Again, the final result is that image quality is then dependent on total sensor size, not photosite size.

As an example, the 36 mpx D800 performs very closely to the 16 mpx D4 when viewed at a standard output size. When viewed at 100% pixels the D800 must be far noisier, and that is why you sometimes see comments that the D800 is "noisy" compared to lower resolution sensors. Those that suggest this are likely comparing pixels at 100% displays.

There are "borders" around photosites, such that higher density sensors are probably inherently slightly less efficient than lower density sensors because there is less wasted border space between wells.

Current sensors have less wasted border space around the photosite wells, compared to earlier sensors. So this is a "problem" that has diminished considerably the past 10 years or so.

My understanding is that those borders are now small enough that it does not change the final real world results. Or at least I have not seen much discussion of this in advanced discussions of relative sensor performance.

I hope this made things more rather than less clear . It is difficult to distill this down to a few sentences.

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

        
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Thu 27-Dec-12 08:30 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 10
Thu 27-Dec-12 08:30 PM by largebore

Clarks Summit, US
          

let me take a Bromo seltzer and digest all of this a bit.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

            
esantos Moderator Nikonians Resources Writer. Recognized for his outstanding reviews on printers and printing articles. Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas, including Landscape Photography Awarded for his extraordinary accomplishments in Landscape Photography. His work has been exhibited at the Smithsonian. Nikonian since 10th Nov 2002Fri 28-Dec-12 12:03 AM
11950 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 11


McAllen, US
          

No problem, we'll be here when the Bromo kicks in.

There are two illnesses you can contract here at Nikonians, NAS and the equally debilitating Photinov (Photographic Information Overload).

Ernesto Santos
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

        
bkinthebay Gold Member Nikonian since 27th Feb 2010Thu 27-Dec-12 09:30 PM
385 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 10


Auderghem, BE
          

>>> The larger photosites on the D700 gather light more
>efficiently then the photosite on a D300.
>
>Just to avoid any possibility of misinterpretation... it is
>technically not "larger photosites" that gather more
>light or more efficiently gather more light on an FX sensor.,
>It is solely due to the sheer size of the FX sensor. The FX
>sensor has about 1.4 times the surface area of a DX sensor,
>and 1.4x is equal to one stop.
>


An FX sensor si 1.5 times larger than a DX sensor in two directions. Therefore the surface of a FX sensor is 2.25 times the surface of a DX sensor.

Cheers,
Bernard.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

            
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Registered since 25th Jul 2004Fri 28-Dec-12 12:05 AM
10916 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 12


US
          

Thanks. I crossed my areas and linear dimensions, plus a little rounding to the nearest stop

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                
dickiederson Registered since 09th May 2009Sat 29-Dec-12 10:21 AM
120 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#20. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 14


San Francisco, US
          

Blimey!

So... Does a camera which produces a 36megaPIXEL image have a sensor with 36megaPHOTOSITEs?

Does 1photosite always produce 1pixel?

Does this just apply to RAW, what happens when shooting small jpegs,is the camera combining photosites into pixels or disregarding some of the photosites?!

www.shootingheadz.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                    
nrothschild Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Registered since 25th Jul 2004Sat 29-Dec-12 12:30 PM
10916 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#21. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 20


US
          

Yes, one photosite = one pixel.

I try to use the convention that a pixel is dimensionless - it has no defined size because it represents "one unit of output" in an image file or a display monitor.

A photosite receives light and converts it to a digital value (a pixel) for storage in an image file. When it is output to a digital display it is still a pixel.

In the case of a display monitor, the pixel has a dimension but it varies from monitor to monitor. For example, a 1080p TV monitor always has 1920x1080 pixels but the display size (measured diagonally) can vary from under 32" now to 65" or more.

It should be obvious from the above parallel discussion that that convention may not be universal.

Perhaps one branch of this thread dissecting the semantics of these conventions should be enough

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                    
RABaker Registered since 01st Oct 2003Sun 30-Dec-12 02:05 AM
731 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#27. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 20


Sunnyvale, US
          

"...what happens when shooting small jpegs,is the camera combining photosites into pixels or disregarding some of the photosites?"

When you choose to have the camera output a JPEG image with less than the "native" resolution of the camera's sensor, it combines pixels created from its photosites into fewer pixels for the image file. It is the same as down-sizing an image in Photoshop (or any image editor). The processor uses built-in algorithms to combine the full resolution pixels into a smaller number of pixels to match your output choice.

Good luck,
Richard


  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                        
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Sun 30-Dec-12 01:21 PM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#31. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 27


Clarks Summit, US
          

OK clean slate.

Been reading all of the suggested articles from this post. Very good education. I think I all most got it.

<1> Photosites not pixels
<2> Large sensor are good because you can put more of everything on them.
<3> Large pixels, previously known as pixels are good because they hold more charge and are thus more light sensitive with better s/n rations.
<4> Higher density small ones are good to because although not as sensitive, they carry more information on the scene.
<5> Smart algorithms and engineering can trump all of the above.

Ok so now..

How do you evaluate this.

12 mp APS vs only 14mp Full frame.
Larger sensor, bigger photosites but less photo sites per mm of sensor?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, ( file)

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                            
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sun 30-Dec-12 04:38 PM
11904 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#32. "RE: A PIXELATED QUESTION"
In response to Reply # 31
Sun 30-Dec-12 08:41 PM by dm1dave

Lowden, US
          

>>How do you evaluate this.

>>12 mp APS vs only 14mp Full frame.
>>Larger sensor, bigger photosites but less photo sites per mm of sensor?


Ignoring any other camera features/capabilities...

If I were shooting birds with my longest lens and I could shoot at an ISO under 1600 - I would choose the 12MP APS.

In any lighting that requires an ISO of over 1600 or when the scene has a particularly high dynamic range, a backlit subject for example - I would choose the 14MP Full Frame.

Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.

Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

                                
largebore Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Jan 2011Tue 01-Jan-13 11:41 AM
667 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#33. "THANKS TO ALL"
In response to Reply # 32


Clarks Summit, US
          

Thanks to all that have contributed to the thinking on this thread.

I can say that I have learned alot and that my understanding will help take some of the frustration out of learning more..

Judging from the different opnions and nomenclature, maybe this has been a group learn as I think that alot of movemement forward has been made on how we describle and talk about pixels and sensors and reach etc.

Thanks again and Happy New Year for all.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Print | Reply | Quote | Top

Forums Lobby MULTILINGUAL NIKONIANS English Café (Public) topic #86127 Previous topic | Next topic