Megapixels vs Sensor size

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bob Williams, Jan 25, 2006.

  1. Bob Williams

    Bob Williams Guest

    My very first digital camera purchased in early 2000 was a Canon S20.
    Its sensor size was 1/1.8" and it had 3.3 MP
    Its sensor Area/MP was 11.6 sq. microns
    In late 2005, Canon released the S80.
    Its sensor size was also 1/1.8" but it had 8.0 MP
    Its sensor Area/MP was 4.8 sq. microns

    Comparing image quality in Steve Digican Site, the S80's images, as
    expected, are much better. My question is :
    What advances in technology allowed Canon to achieve better image
    quality with no apparent increase in noise level with a much smaller
    sensel size?

    Improvement in sensor efficiency?
    Better lens design?
    Lower Noise Amplifiers?
    Better algorithms to process the data?
    All of the above?
    Any thoughts on the subject? "Inquiring Minds Want To Know" <G>
    Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Jan 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Bob Williams" <> wrote:
    > My very first digital camera purchased in early 2000 was a Canon S20.
    > Its sensor size was 1/1.8" and it had 3.3 MP
    > Its sensor Area/MP was 11.6 sq. microns
    > In late 2005, Canon released the S80.
    > Its sensor size was also 1/1.8" but it had 8.0 MP
    > Its sensor Area/MP was 4.8 sq. microns
    >
    > Comparing image quality in Steve Digican Site, the S80's images, as
    > expected, are much better. My question is :
    > What advances in technology allowed Canon to achieve better image quality
    > with no apparent increase in noise level with a much smaller sensel size?
    >
    > Improvement in sensor efficiency?


    Better sensor design. Better microlenses, lower circuit noise.

    > Better lens design?


    Irrelevant to nois.

    > Lower Noise Amplifiers?


    Very much so. It's exactly this sort of area that Sony's been busting their
    butts. Look through the back issues of Sony's CX-NEWS for articles on
    sensors to see what they've been up to over the last five years.

    http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/

    > Better algorithms to process the data?


    Somewhat, but the tweaks in the sensors are the most important.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 25, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bob Williams

    Bob Williams Guest

    David J. Littleboy wrote:
    > "Bob Williams" <> wrote:
    >
    >>My very first digital camera purchased in early 2000 was a Canon S20.
    >>Its sensor size was 1/1.8" and it had 3.3 MP
    >>Its sensor Area/MP was 11.6 sq. microns
    >>In late 2005, Canon released the S80.
    >>Its sensor size was also 1/1.8" but it had 8.0 MP
    >>Its sensor Area/MP was 4.8 sq. microns
    >>
    >>Comparing image quality in Steve Digican Site, the S80's images, as
    >>expected, are much better. My question is :
    >>What advances in technology allowed Canon to achieve better image quality
    >>with no apparent increase in noise level with a much smaller sensel size?
    >>
    >>Improvement in sensor efficiency?

    >
    >
    > Better sensor design. Better microlenses, lower circuit noise.
    >
    >
    >>Better lens design?

    >
    >
    > Irrelevant to nois.
    >
    >
    >>Lower Noise Amplifiers?

    >
    >
    > Very much so. It's exactly this sort of area that Sony's been busting their
    > butts. Look through the back issues of Sony's CX-NEWS for articles on
    > sensors to see what they've been up to over the last five years.
    >
    > http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/
    >
    >
    >>Better algorithms to process the data?

    >
    >
    > Somewhat, but the tweaks in the sensors are the most important.
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan



    Even though lens quality doesn't affect noise, it certainly affects the
    sharpness of the image. A sharp lens would allow the smaller sensel to
    capture as much or more detail than the larger sensel captured with a
    poorer lens.
    Bob
     
    Bob Williams, Jan 26, 2006
    #3
  4. Bob Williams

    frederick Guest

    Bob Williams wrote:
    >
    >
    > Even though lens quality doesn't affect noise, it certainly affects the
    > sharpness of the image. A sharp lens would allow the smaller sensel to
    > capture as much or more detail than the larger sensel captured with a
    > poorer lens.
    > Bob
    >

    Making sharp lenses for smaller sensors is much simpler and less
    expensive than for lenses as sensor size increases. The entire compact
    camera with lens by Zeiss etc, costs a fraction of the price of one
    fixed focal length lens for 35mm with the same brand on it.
    Forgetting noise performance, and assuming good lens quality then the
    largest practical difference between sensor size relates to depth of
    field, and the ratio of sensor size, pixel size, pixel count, and
    diffraction limitations on resolution.

    Some approximate comparisons are that a 1 1/8" sensor at a given focal
    length equivalent and focus distance offers a similar depth of field
    when the lens is open fully wide - say f2 or so, as a typical dslr
    sensor of 6-8mp at the same focal length equivalent set at the smallest
    aperture (around f11 or so) above which diffraction effects begin to
    limit resolution. But the 8mp compact camera with 1 1/8" sensor will
    progressively lose resolution to diffraction at apertures smaller than
    about f4 - so there is little scope to use depth of field creatively as
    for a larger format camera, as there are only a couple of "usable"
    f-stops before resolution is lost to diffraction. Conversely, the dslr
    will never be able to provide the huge depth of field of the compact
    camera whilst maintaining the resolution obtainable at apertures wider
    than the diffraction limit.

    The interrelationship between sensor size, pixel count, focal length,
    focal length equivalent, depth of field, and diffraction limitation on
    resolution is well explained here:
    http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

    This web site includes several calculators that can be used to make
    comparisons between formats. Diffraction effects occur regardless of
    lens quality. There are some serious disadvantages to increased sensor
    size as well as serious advantages.
     
    frederick, Jan 27, 2006
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steven M. Scharf

    D-SLR Sensor Resolution and Sensor Size Comparison Size Matters!

    Steven M. Scharf, May 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    5,477
    Georgette Preddy
    May 16, 2004
  2. Bill Hilton

    39 megapixels? 31 megapixels? Get 'em here ...

    Bill Hilton, Jul 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    351
    Bill Hilton
    Jul 18, 2005
  3. ftran999
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    542
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota
    Feb 22, 2007
  4. jdanield
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    262
    jdanield
    Oct 17, 2012
  5. Rob
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    396
Loading...

Share This Page