Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

megapixel, sensor-size and pixelsize

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:51:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.

Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
better results (bigger sensor).
Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
(compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).

two questions:

1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor size
(1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to current
cams)

2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other remarks
?
I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as for
example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or is
there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d markII.

Frank
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:10:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Fr@nk" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:c325c$41e16f04$3e3b2a30$9414@news1.versatel.nl...
> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
> sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>
> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
> better results (bigger sensor).
> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>
> two questions:
>
> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor size
> (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to current
> cams)
>
> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other
> remarks ?
> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as
> for example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or
> is there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d
> markII.
>
> Frank
>
Can't tell you the actual pixel size because there is other circuitry on the
sensor and along the edge. The 1/1.8 sensor in the G2 is actually 7.18 x
5.32 mm. New 4mp cameras have a smaller, hence noisier, sensors, typically
1/2.7 which is 5.27 x 3.96mm (depending on the h X w ratio and such). Many
new 3mp cameras use the same size as the 4mp. The 4mp is noisier by
comparison. to get back into the 1/1.8 sensors, you have to get a 5 mp
camera.

Some cameras seem less noisy due to the noise canceling algorithms, but at
the cost of sharpness.
John
January 9, 2005 11:23:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi Frank,

Can you please post the URL for the Dutch article. Ik ben Amerikaan van
geboorte, en heb te Utrecht tot Arts gestudeerd van 1953-1957. Ik spreek en
schrijf nog een beetje Nederlands.
(Sorry to the group for the Dutch posting.)

Thanks.

Morton



"Fr@nk" wrote:

> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
> sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>
> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
> better results (bigger sensor).
> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>
> two questions:
>
> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor size
> (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to current
> cams)
>
> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other remarks
> ?
> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as for
> example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or is
> there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d markII.
>
> Frank
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:42:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Fr@nk" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:c325c$41e16f04$3e3b2a30$9414@news1.versatel.nl...
> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
> sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>
> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
> better results (bigger sensor).
> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>
> two questions:
>
> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor size
> (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to current
> cams)
>
> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other
> remarks ?
> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as
> for example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or
> is there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d
> markII.
>

check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..

you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the pixels
L/W
for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach ..
(427pix/mm)
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 10:45:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:41e18925$0$331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>
>
> check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..
>
> you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the pixels
> L/W
> for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach ..
> (427pix/mm)
>

Only if sensor is CCD. Every CMOS pixel needs 4 transitors and when
sensor size is small additional transistor take more space. Kodak
developed technology to drop average number of tranistors per pixel
to 1.75


Toomas
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 10:22:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Depends on the camera. Some do map the output pixels to correspond to
the physical ones, other cameras make some shifts. When the camera
advertising lists a given number of pixels by H and V, that is usually
the configuration of the output file pixels, not necessarily the actual
layout of the chip.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:03:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:45:39 +0200, "Toomas" <tpman@mailandnews.com>
wrote:

>
>"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:41e18925$0$331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>>
>>
>> check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..
>>
>> you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the pixels
>> L/W
>> for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach ..
>> (427pix/mm)
>>
>
>Only if sensor is CCD. Every CMOS pixel needs 4 transitors and when
>sensor size is small additional transistor take more space. Kodak
>developed technology to drop average number of tranistors per pixel
>to 1.75

hmm . I wonder if one has to consider an "apparent" pixel size in
Bayer type sensors .. guess physical "pixel" size doesn't make too
much sense here ..
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 12:35:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"mort" <mort@cloud9.net> schreef in bericht
news:41E1D90D.70EEB41@cloud9.net...
> Hi Frank,
>
> Can you please post the URL for the Dutch article. Ik ben Amerikaan van
> geboorte, en heb te Utrecht tot Arts gestudeerd van 1953-1957. Ik spreek
> en
> schrijf nog een beetje Nederlands.
> (Sorry to the group for the Dutch posting.)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Morton
>
>
>
Yes, certainly:

see: http://www.computerx.nl/
article " einde van de megapixel hype" (sorry " guys" )

and also an editorial article, (this one is in UK, and not too advertorial
as such)
http://www.thetechlounge.com/article.php?directory=beyo...
and see also the other parts.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 12:36:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Toomas" <tpman@mailandnews.com> schreef in bericht
news:34ft9qF4a0qi3U1@individual.net...

"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41e18925$0$331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>
>
> check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..
>
> you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the pixels
> L/W
> for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach ..
> (427pix/mm)
>

Only if sensor is CCD. Every CMOS pixel needs 4 transitors and when
sensor size is small additional transistor take more space. Kodak
developed technology to drop average number of tranistors per pixel
to 1.75


Toomas


How does this work with CMOS than in relation to chip size ?

Frank
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 1:23:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:41e18925$0$331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>
> "Fr@nk" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
> news:c325c$41e16f04$3e3b2a30$9414@news1.versatel.nl...
>> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
>> sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
>> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
>> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>>
>> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
>> better results (bigger sensor).
>> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
>> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>>
>> two questions:
>>
>> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor
>> size (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to
>> current cams)
>>
>> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other
>> remarks ?
>> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as
>> for example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or
>> is there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d
>> markII.
>>
>
> check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..
>
> you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the pixels
> L/W
> for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach ..
> (427pix/mm)
>
>
>
Sorry can't find the article , can you point it out ? (select a,b,c) I know
cant place a link ... sorry

Thanks a lot
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 3:03:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Fr@nk" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:D 2fdc$41e5b6a3$3e3b2a30$25616@news1.versatel.nl...
>
> "imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
> news:41e18925$0$331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>>
>> "Fr@nk" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
>> news:c325c$41e16f04$3e3b2a30$9414@news1.versatel.nl...
>>> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article
>>> defining sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
>>> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
>>> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>>>
>>> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
>>> better results (bigger sensor).
>>> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
>>> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>>>
>>> two questions:
>>>
>>> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor
>>> size (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to
>>> current cams)
>>>
>>> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other
>>> remarks ?
>>> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as
>>> for example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or
>>> is there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d
>>> markII.
>>>
>>
>> check dpreview.com they have an article on sensor sizes ..
>>
>> you can find a good approximation by dividing the sensor L/W bu the
>> pixels L/W
>> for the Canon G6 .. pixel size is approx 2.3 micron using this approach
>> .. (427pix/mm)
>>
>>
>>
> Sorry can't find the article , can you point it out ? (select a,b,c) I
> know cant place a link ... sorry
>
> Thanks a lot

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/...

HTH
Anonymous
January 17, 2005 1:42:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Which 4Mp camera has a fullframe sensor.


Fr@nk wrote:
> Just read (sorry only in Dutch available) an interesting article defining
> sensor size, resolution (megapixel), and size of the pixel .
> Where the bigger the sensor, with therefore bigger pixels (at the same
> megapixel) gives far better noise levels and therefore better results.
>
> Or hence why the sensor in a d20 compared to the the pro1 (Canon) gives
> better results (bigger sensor).
> Or for the same reason why a 4Mp can give far better results than a 8mp
> (compare 4Mp fullframe to snall chip size for the 8Mp).
>
> two questions:
>
> 1.I'm looking now for the pixel size in Um for my G2 , and the sensor size
> (1/ 1/8 inch) (4mp) (to get a better idea for myself compared to current
> cams)
>
> 2: any reactions to the above stated ? is this correct or any other remarks
> ?
> I'm looking for a new cam and thought to buy D20 (with better results as for
> example the pro1), but maybe is it worth looking for full frame ? or is
> there a difference , but not worth the proce to for example the d markII.
>
> Frank
>
>
!