Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 80 of 80

Thread: Nex-5n vs Nex7

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Hmmm, I wonder about the increase in pixel count with the NEX7 verses the NEX5N bringing any real image improvement.

    I just watched the entire Yale lecture by Eric Fossum, inventor of the CMOS technology on DP Review, which now makes me question the jump from 16 meg to 24 meg on this sized sensor. Basically he sums it up in one statement ... "The force of marketing is greater that the force of engineering."

    In essence, he forwards the notion that increasing the number is good for selling, but the more the sensor exceeds the 4 micron diffraction limit, the less return on image quality, or something to that effect. He stated this a number of times during the lecture along with charts and graphs illustrating the point.

    It is also interesting why CMOS was invented in the first place ...which he also covers.

    I think I'll move from my NEX5 to a 5N with the EFV and wait on the NEX 7, which if anything like the A77 as it is currently performing, seems to prove Dr. Fossum's point.

    Just my 2˘

    -Marc

  2. #52
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Hmmm, I wonder about the increase in pixel count with the NEX7 verses the NEX5N bringing any real image improvement.

    I just watched the entire Yale lecture by Eric Fossum, inventor of the CMOS technology on DP Review, which now makes me question the jump from 16 meg to 24 meg on this sized sensor. Basically he sums it up in one statement ... "The force of marketing is greater that the force of engineering."

    In essence, he forwards the notion that increasing the number is good for selling, but the more the sensor exceeds the 4 micron diffraction limit, the less return on image quality, or something to that effect. He stated this a number of times during the lecture along with charts and graphs illustrating the point.

    It is also interesting why CMOS was invented in the first place ...which he also covers.

    I think I'll move from my NEX5 to a 5N with the EFV and wait on the NEX 7, which if anything like the A77 as it is currently performing, seems to prove Dr. Fossum's point.

    Just my 2˘

    -Marc
    HI Marc
    You may be right . . . . but I seem to remember the same arguments being put forward for the increase from 5mp to 10!

    Remember, diminishing returns doesn't mean NO returns.

    Just this guy you know

  3. #53
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Marc
    You may be right . . . . but I seem to remember the same arguments being put forward for the increase from 5mp to 10!

    Remember, diminishing returns doesn't mean NO returns.
    Yeah, I remember those type discussions too ... but those arguments back then weren't coming from the guy that invented the technology and is on the forefront of applying it now

    While it is a bit long, take a listen to what he says about the state of current pixel sizes ... in retrospect, 5 meg to 10 meg probably involved pixel sizes with-in the scope of the sensor de-fraction limit he discusses. It may well be that diminishing returns are now approaching no returns with the currently available sensor technology.

    I began suspecting this some time ago when using a FF D700 with a lower meg count but excellent IQ ... and actually have taken heart in that Canon chose to bring a FF 18 meg high performance camera to market.

    We'll see.

    -Marc

  4. #54
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,871
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I am actually coming to this point as well, that there is a reasonable limit for pixel count WRT sensor size. The optimum for FF seems to be in the area of 18-22MP. And as I could see with my E5 and the limitation to 12MP in this camera (sure 43 sensor, so half the size of FF sensor) in combination with superior image processing technology and weak AA filter delivers stunning results.

    Physics can hardly be fooled. Marketing can fool a lot!

    When I first saw the Canon 1DX announcement I was disappointed, but finally after rethinking all and looking also to my image DB comparing different DSLRs with different pixel count, I come to the conclusion that something like 18 (or 20 or 24)MP in a FF DSLR seems to be the optimum. Higher resolution just brings number of issues, not only more noise, but also more diffraction if not used in the optimum aperture range.

    Currently sitting on the fence for my next DSLR purchase (I know gearhead ) and the 1DX is VERY tempting, although I would welcome some slightly smaller form factor like the 5D2 (then hopefully the 5D3) with some MP count around 20MP.

    Times are getting interesting, especially while the Nikon D800 is rumored to have 36MP (same as later to follow A99), which would then be in perfect contradiction to what Canon found and where they are moving

  5. #55
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I haven't had a chance to watch that Dr. Fossum video yet, but the conclusions being reached from it don't sound like they jive with what he's said in the past. In fact, to quote Dr. Fossum from a forum posting from January '11:

    ------
    "Generally, image quality improves with pixel count, assuming ideal sensor technology. There is only a sweet spot according to a specific technology. The sweet spot is constantly migrating to higher pixel counts. And I am pretty sure that in our life time, there will be gigapixel sensors.

    Fill factor is indeed improving and BSI was a big step for improving FF and reducing crosstalk. You can expect pixel sizes less than a micron within 5 years in consumer products and digital biinning of sub-micron pixels to a larger pixel and lower pixel count will give better SNR for the same optics than the equivalent single RGBG kernel size from say 5 or 10 years ago.

    All this whining about the megapixel race is a waste of your time and breath. This race results in a rising technology tide that floats all boats, from VGA laptop sensors to DSLRs and astronomical applications. Don't worry, be happy."
    ------

    The returns may be diminishing, especially due to diffraction, but, until we're limited to diffraction at f1.4 or something, I have no problem with the megapixel counts moving up.

    As for the Canon 1DX, it's almost a case of marketing to 2007. In the beginning, increasing megapixel counts was desired. Then, in the mid 2000s, everyone started comparing pixels to buckets of water, etc. and decided that more megapixels meant more noise. Now, most are realizing that, if you compare at like image sizes, more megapixels doesn't mean more noise. It only means more noise at the pixel level, which doesn't have much practical application.

    In order to consolidate their product line, Canon is making a strange move and marketing to the pixel noise meme of 2007, when, really, I'd imagine that the 1DX is only 18mp because the thing has to shoot at 14fps. I'd personally be pretty PO'd if I was a Canon studio/landscape shooter, because the next round of Sony 135 chips will surely be 30+ megapixels. As a photographer, it just makes more sense for both Canon and Nikon to have 2 pro cameras catered towards different segments, but I think this is a cost cutting move by Canon. If I was a 1D shooter, I'd probably be excited, but, if I was a 1Ds shooter, I'd be disappointed.

    Back to the subject at hand, I'm really hoping that the NEX-7 performs as well as the 5N with rangefinder glass, but, seeing preliminary examples, I'm worried that the micro lens design for the smaller pixels isn't optimized well enough, and the corners may have issues, so I may actually stick with the lower megapixel camera, in this case.

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Yeah, I remember those type discussions too ... but those arguments back then weren't coming from the guy that invented the technology and is on the forefront of applying it now
    HI Marc
    Everyone has an agenda, and the current agenda might just be sponsored by Canon . . . . I'm never very convinced by the 'It Stops Here' arguments - they're so popular, and so rarely right:
    Remember Bill Gates on RAM
    Remember the rules about data transfer and copper wire
    . . . . I could go on and on (and so could you).

    Maybe the sensor in the A77 and NEX7 isn't any better than the one in the NEX5n (but in my viewing it's certainly just as good when (as Douglas says) viewing images rather than pixels) - and at low ISO it provides a lot more real-estate for cropping.

    @Douglas - right on - quite agree - thanks for the quotes

    Just this guy you know

  7. #57
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,871
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    All of this argumentation does not overcome some basic physical laws, like eg diffraction limits and even more limiting lp a lens can resolve. Only expensive pro grade lenses can in best case justify high MP count. We are actually above lens resolution of high grade glass already today with 24MP in a FF DSLR. Maybe with Leica glass you can get a bit higher but something around 30+ MP will definitely be the reasonable limit for FF.

  8. #58
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,871
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Marc
    Everyone has an agenda, and the current agenda might just be sponsored by Canon . . . . I'm never very convinced by the 'It Stops Here' arguments - they're so popular, and so rarely right:
    Remember Bill Gates on RAM
    Remember the rules about data transfer and copper wire
    . . . . I could go on and on (and so could you).

    Maybe the sensor in the A77 and NEX7 isn't any better than the one in the NEX5n (but in my viewing it's certainly just as good when (as Douglas says) viewing images rather than pixels) - and at low ISO it provides a lot more real-estate for cropping.

    @Douglas - right on - quite agree - thanks for the quotes
    BTW WRT data rate on copper - VDSL (around 50Mbps) is still the limit for copper wire telephone cable and 1Gbps is the limit for Cat6 (shielded) when trying to achieve reasonable distances.

    These limits are there since long time (over 10 years) and are not being pushed upwards because simply not possible with reasonably priced technology.

    Pretty much the same is true for optics and image sensors.

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Marc, I have to question this comment "I think I'll move from my NEX5 to a 5N with the EFV and wait on the NEX 7, which if anything like the A77 as it is currently performing, seems to prove Dr. Fossum's point." You referring to the comments from the DPR review? Or owners?

    I don't see owners having anything but praise for the IQ of the a77 from 1600 to 50 ISO. Fact is I think there might be too much detail in 50 ISO images for web or a4 and smaller prints but it all pans out by downsizing. Yes the review sites have their issues but in the real world these seem to not exist except in a extremely few owners comments. I have one and am waiting for aperture 3 support but have had no Negative IQ issues to report even using JPEG's. But that is just me and I know very well that others may have different opinions.

    It works great for my wildlife shots and especially the BIF shots but I bought it to do these and bin the pixels during cropping to obtain low cost additional effective focal length. A 600mm Minolta lens costs far more than a a77 body.

    All this pixel density and noise at high ISO chat reminds me when the Canon G10 came out and DPR forums ripped it and DPR followed with a silver review for these issues. Knuckling under to consumers complaints Canon came out with a lower pixel count G11 which few considered better than the G10 for IQ. A new G10 goes for 3 times the price of a new G12 today and is still a very high demand item for those who liked and used them. I use one still today in a underwater housing for my wet work and enjoy its IQ.

    I've gotten to the point that if DPR reviews a product as silver I look at it more seriously than one they rate at gold. Case in point: the Canon G10, the NEX 5, and now the a77 all of which I own and enjoy and DPR stoned these products and IMO got it wrong each time.

  10. #60
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Most lenses still out resolve even the 24mp asp-c sensor at larger apertures, especially in the center. As megapixels go up, this will eventually change, but the sensor is still the limiting force in system resolution in most cases, outside of when diffraction limits lens resolution. Megapixel counts have a ways to go before they out resolve lenses at all apertures.

  11. #61
    curious80
    Guest

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Hmm you guys should look at this DPReview comparison between G10 and Canon 1000D:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG10/page20.asp

    G10's pixel density is much greater than 1000D or any other current APS-C / FF sensor, but its 14.7MP still provides a real resolution advantage over 10MP APS-C sensor. I think that shows that the pixel densities where we stop getting any advantage from increasing number of pixels is is still far away.

    At high ISO though the G10's extra resolution gets eaten away quickly. And thats pretty much the reality of high MP sensors in general. You enjoy the extra resolution at low-ISOs where the per-pixel SNR is good enough to make those pixels useful. As you go to smaller and smaller pixels the per-pixel SNR will go down and the ISOs at which you can enjoy the extra resolution will go down as well, until you hit a pixel-size where even at base ISO the SNR is low enough to be not acceptable.

  12. #62
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    BTW WRT data rate on copper - VDSL (around 50Mbps) is still the limit for copper wire telephone cable and 1Gbps is the limit for Cat6 (shielded) when trying to achieve reasonable distances.

    These limits are there since long time (over 10 years) and are not being pushed upwards because simply not possible with reasonably priced technology.

    Pretty much the same is true for optics and image sensors.
    Just look back a little further Peter - I can't remember what 'the proof' was WRT copper wire, but it was something around 15kbps. . . . and it was 'proved'

    Just this guy you know

  13. #63
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    All this pixel density and noise at high ISO chat reminds me when the Canon G10 came out and DPR forums ripped it and DPR followed with a silver review for these issues. Knuckling under to consumers complaints Canon came out with a lower pixel count G11 which few considered better than the G10 for IQ. A new G10 goes for 3 times the price of a new G12 today and is still a very high demand item for those who liked and used them. I use one still today in a underwater housing for my wet work and enjoy its IQ.
    Indeed - and if we're speaking of the difference between 10 and 14mp at that sized sensor, then we're speaking of much much higher mp counts for APS-c.

    Just this guy you know

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I mean you have to buy a camera for how it's strengths perform in regard to ones needs and wants. The buyer has to also understand that these strengths were evolved and there are compromises that have to be made to develop them. If I was looking for low noise at high ISO there are cameras which that is their strengths but other compromises had to be made to bring these features to market that may not ever effect my photography or they may be deal breakers. No one can make that determination but that photographer.

    I will never say any camera is the be all end all photographic tool for everyone because that tool does not exist and when it does there won't be any other cameras to select from. I just dig my heels in when comments by non owners/users whether a test site or individuals rave or condemn a product or feature's in a camera. Plus there is no way these individuals or site can know what is good or bad for the individual photographer.

    I have watched this BS go on with nearly every new Sony product over the past several years. Non owners/users come on DPR and spout their theoretical bunk and battle and try and defend their "theories" to the point many mistake this rhetoric for facts. One has to wonder what their actual agenda's are or who they may work for. I personally, do not give any site or non users opinion much credit at all whether its good or bad. You can't know till you have used it ..... this is why I ask people who I have respect for and who actually own the products if I need a suggestion or advice. Several people in this category are active members on this site and I have asked their opinions even as recently as today on a new product I am considering. The reviews or people who repeat the reviews as if they are hardcore facts without ever using or seeing the product are of no value in my decision making process.

    Bottom line is you pay your money and you take your best guess chances......

  15. #65
    curious80
    Guest

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Jim, I am not sure which posters do you have in mind, but in case I am one of those than let me say I have been a Sony user for a few years now My main DSLR currently is a Sony A580. And I have also been a NEX-5 owner for a couple of months though it did not work out for me at that time, so I stayed with m43 for my compact system. Though taking a good look again at the 5N.

    And I agree completely with you that no one can make a determination of which tool is best for you as it depends on your particular needs. This is why I pay no attention to the scores and awards handed out by review sites like dpreview or to their subjective assessments. But I do look at the detailed objective tests which help me make my own conclusions based on my own needs.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    curious80, Mine was just a general rant not pointed at anyone. I apologize if you felt I was referring to you.

  17. #67
    curious80
    Guest

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    ohh i mentioned it "just in case", no worries

  18. #68
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Anyone bother to look at the video?

    Sure got a lot of panties in a knot

    The other quote says "assuming ideal sensor technology" ... that is assuming a lot.

    IMO, the best quote so far is one of his self confessed "favorite sayings"... "The force of marketing is greater than the force of engineering." Man-o-man is he right on that one.

    However, it is 100% true that it is totally up to the photographer what is and is not right for them and their eye. That's one of those statements that no one can argue ... but then gets attached to a discussion to support anything that follows it

    As it stands, from all of the samples I've seen to date from the A77 ... Sony has gone one toke over the line for marketing bragging rights, and to get your money at an increasingly faster pace: NEX5, NEX5N and NEX7 which will become the NEX7N before you can even charge the battery on your new NEX7 ... ... so I'll pass ... and did so by voting that way by canceling my premature NEX7 order.

    As far as Canon is concerned, I don't think the 1DX is 2007 think, it is 2013 think ... seems a perfect balance for an all around camera you could live with for some time, and fits how the market has been going for a while now. Besides, who said this is their only coming camera innovation? Another assumption.

    As always, to each their own. I'll stick with my 2008 think Sony A900s for the time being.

    -Marc

  19. #69
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,871
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Just look back a little further Peter - I can't remember what 'the proof' was WRT copper wire, but it was something around 15kbps. . . . and it was 'proved'
    This was never proved for me

    With transmission technologies known today we only can go so far as we are now. Comes down to physics and how we can use them.

  20. #70
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Sure got a lot of panties in a knot
    Certainly did

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    As it stands, from all of the samples I've seen to date from the A77 ... Sony has gone one toke over the line for marketing bragging rights, and to get your money at an increasingly faster pace: NEX5, NEX5N and NEX7 which will become the NEX7N before you can even charge the battery on your new NEX7 ... ... so I'll pass ... and did so by voting that way by canceling my premature NEX7 order.
    I'm waiting for firmware 2 and some refined raw converters before I decide on this one - Sony do, after all, have a history of improving noise on their sensors with firmware upgrades (the A700 being the obvious example).
    In the meantime I'm liking the results I'm getting from the A77, wherever dpreview decide to place the focus point

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    As far as Canon is concerned, I don't think the 1DX is 2007 think, it is 2013 think ... seems a perfect balance for an all around camera you could live with for some time, and fits how the market has been going for a while now. Besides, who said this is their only coming camera innovation? Another assumption.
    For those who want 14fps you are unquestionably right . . . . for the rest of us?
    Anyway, after remarks like that I'll be interested to see your response when yours arrives

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  21. #71
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I can not comment which sensor is better or worse or where the physical limit of pixel density would be (today) but I believe 2 things:

    - High ISO and MP stand much too high in priority list for new cameras

    - IMO color and tonality, and this not only in raw but also jpg would help me much more and are more of a creteria for me deciding between brands than MP; I am dreaming of film modes which supply colors really in the quality of various films; Most film modes today seem to extereme to me, and unrealistic;

    I also wish for a sensor which works well in mixed light, which has a WB setting which works in daylight/Shaddow/cloudy.

    And I believe user interface is underrated as well. Dontr we want big viewfinders, intuitive user interface, etc.

    And last lenses and lens quality.

  22. #72
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I just reread this entire thread. Great discussion! I like, and am keeping, my A77 and 5N. I'm also looking forward to getting my NEX 7 (shipping on 11/11/11, according to two emails from the Sony Store).

    My D3 was better then my D300s, and my D700 was better then the D3, but not better then my D3s, and my D7000 was almost as good as my D700...I no longer have any of them, and the decision to get rid of them had nothing to do with mp count.

    Keep posting. it's fun to read and I'm learning stuff.

    Cheers, Matt

    http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com

  23. #73
    Senior Member Quentin_Bargate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Saffron Walden, UK
    Posts
    1,983
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    58

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    I'm being given a January ETA for the NEX-7 I have on order from a UK supplier, which suits me fine - only just got a 5n! Waiting for a 30mm macro to arrive.
    Quentin Bargate
    Director of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2012 - 2017, ”leading individual”, Chambers HNW guide, 2017, Photographer

  24. #74
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Certainly did


    I'm waiting for firmware 2 and some refined raw converters before I decide on this one - Sony do, after all, have a history of improving noise on their sensors with firmware upgrades (the A700 being the obvious example).
    In the meantime I'm liking the results I'm getting from the A77, wherever dpreview decide to place the focus point



    For those who want 14fps you are unquestionably right . . . . for the rest of us?
    Anyway, after remarks like that I'll be interested to see your response when yours arrives

    all the best
    No Canon for me right now Jono .... been there, done that. However, now that the S2 has taken over so many things I used to do with the A900, I really only need a camera like the Canon 1DX for the remainder ... not for 14 FPS, but the AF speed and dual CF card back-up as well as higher ISO stuff. However, as usual, all the lenses one invests in for a system is more of a determining factor on sticking with a brand. Big PITA to swap systems. Nothing to worry about right now since the 1DX is going to be vaporware for most photographers for some time to come.

    All the best.

    -Marc

  25. #75
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    No panties in a knot here. I just watched Dr. Fossum's video, and he made a nice distinction between the effects of smaller pixels and sensor size. Ultimately, it backs up claims from the likes of Emil Martinec (Dr. Fossum used one of his graphs in the charts) in that lowlight image quality is connected to sensor size, not pixel size.

    One chart illustrated the effect of smaller pixels when you make the sensor smaller:


    The second chart illustrated the effect of smaller pixels while keeping the sensor size the same, and you'll notice the negatives are different from the first chart:


    While things like data throughput and power consumption are issues with more megapixels on the same sized chip, lowlight IQ reduction is not mentioned.

    Dr. Fossum is certainly right that, with image sensors in camera phones, where the lens is rarely faster than f2.8, there isn't much reason to make sensors with pixels smaller than 4 microns, outside of marketing. However, in the case of the A77/NEX-7, we're only talking about 4.65 microns, and lenses get much faster than f2.8, so we have a ways before the pixel count increases only for marketing reasons.

    Dr. Fossum actually participated in a discussion on dpreview about this video and maintains that he "still believe(s) in smaller pixels," so things need to be taken in context.

    As for the 1Dx, Canon clearly stated in their press release that this is the combination of the 1D and 1Ds lines into one, so if they do have a higher MP camera coming, I guess it'll be an all new line.

  26. #76
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    No Canon for me right now Jono .... been there, done that. However, now that the S2 has taken over so many things I used to do with the A900, I really only need a camera like the Canon 1DX for the remainder ... not for 14 FPS, but the AF speed and dual CF card back-up as well as higher ISO stuff. However, as usual, all the lenses one invests in for a system is more of a determining factor on sticking with a brand. Big PITA to swap systems. Nothing to worry about right now since the 1DX is going to be vaporware for most photographers for some time to come.

    All the best.

    -Marc
    Indeed - I was kinda playing devils advocate. Still, for me, the interesting thing with the a77 (or one of the interesting things) is the focus peaking for manual focus . . . I've started to buy some Leica R lenses before everyone else twigs. I'm going to start off using them on the NEX cameras with an adapter, but if it's a success I'll certainly consider some Leitax lens mount changes.

    My current experience of focus peaking is that it suddenly makes using 3rd party lenses a real and useful solution . . . . and those R lenses are very sweet!

    Clearly primes are the realm of the M9 . . . . but I managed to get hold of three lenses:
    180 f2.8 APO
    28-90 f2.8/4.5 zoom
    21-35 f3.5/f4 zoom

    all mint (so they say). . . for the price of a lower range M lens. . . . I will report back!

    Just this guy you know

  27. #77
    xxbluejay21
    Guest

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    we're only talking about 4.65 microns
    actually a77/nex7 has 3.9 micron pixels

  28. #78
    Workshop Member kuau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Park City, UT
    Posts
    1,071
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    34

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Jono,
    have you tried the 21-35 f3.5/f4 zoom on the your 5n, or A77 yet?
    if so how are the results

    Steven
    Steven Kornreich
    www.kuau.com

  29. #79
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Quote Originally Posted by xxbluejay21 View Post
    actually a77/nex7 has 3.9 micron pixels
    Whoops, that is correct. Still, my point is the same. We have a ways to go before pixel pitch in aps-c is small enough to negate any advantage with faster lenses.

  30. #80
    jcoffin
    Guest

    Re: Nex-5n vs Nex7

    Given the nature of a Bayer array, the lower limit of diffraction limiting (i.e., not for looking at a print, but when pixel-peeping at 100%) is (approximately) when the Airy disk is larger than the triangle of three sensor sites that produce a single output pixel.

    To put that into perspective, let's start with f/4. What's the smallest meaningful sensor pitch given an ideal f/4 lens? It turns out to be approximately 2.2 microns. For a 35mm sized sensor, that works out to over 185 megapixels.

    Things do get worse in a hurry as we reduce the aperture though. By f/8, that's already dropped to about 45 megapixels. By f/11, it would be about 25 megapixels, so the current A90/D3x are already just about diffraction limited. By f/16 the diffraction limit is below 12 megapixels (and at f/22, the useful limit is about 6 megapixels).

    OTOH, (remember, for theoretically perfect glass) as we increase the aperture, the theoretical maximum goes up pretty quickly as well. By f/1.4, the theoretical limit is approximately an 1500 megapixel sensor (and for f/1.2, it's about 2000 megapixels).

    Of course, I'd be somewhere between surprised and flabbergasted to find an f/1.4 lens that had anywhere close to that resolution, but if the lens was good enough, that's the limit that diffraction would set.

    Of course, the pixel pitch is what really matters here. I've picked full-frame 35mm as kind of a middle point. For an APS-C camera, those numbers would obviously go down, and for an MF camera they'd equally obviously go a lot higher still). Just don't ask me to carry your diffraction limited 210mm f/1.4 Super Symmar, okay?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •