Read on Thorsten Overgaard's Site: CL Update in 2024-2025. . .

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, KitW said:

that image noise is roughly limited by the lens and not the sensor.

That is a not correct. A lens cannot produce image noise. The sensor noise is related to the number of photons hitting a single pixel and by magnification. So on a smaller sensor of the same resolution the pixels will gather fewer photons per pixel which will increase noise (like high-resolution sensors), and the image will be magnified more which will show more noise.  The lens will always - at the same aperture- produce the same amount of light per square mm, no matter what crop the projected image has. The difference is the number of pixels/mm.

Edited June 18, 2024 by jaapv

[KitW]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

That is a not correct. A lens cannot produce image noise. The sensor noise is related to the number of photons hitting a single pixel and by magnification. So on a smaller sensor of the same resolution the pixels will gather fewer photons per pixel which will increase noise (like high-resolution sensors), and the image will be magnified more which will show more noise.  The lens will always - at the same aperture- produce the same amount of light per square mm, no matter what crop the projected image has. The difference is the number of pixels/mm.

At the end of the day we're about making images, and we choose our field of view and depth of field to produce the images we want. To achieve the same field of view on a smaller sensor, you need a shorter focal length. To achieve the same depth of field with a shorter lens, you need a wider aperture. There's no point in comparing the amount of light from the same lens at the same aperture or the same focal length on larger or smaller sensors, because we'd be taking a different picture with each sensor.

It works out that if you generate an equivalent image in terms of field of view and depth of field, you get the same number of photons hitting each pixel, even if the sensor is smaller. There's no free lunch.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[jaapv]

That depends on number of pixels… if they are smaller they have less surface to accept photons. They have to share that same number of photons. 
If you shower with a friend you only get half as wet. 

[KitW]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

That depends on number of pixels… if they are smaller they have less surface to accept photons.

Take a 24 megapixel micro four thirds sensor and a 24 megapixel full frame sensor. The micro four thirds sensor has a quarter of the area of the full frame sensor. You use a 50mm F2.8 lens with the full frame sensor.

To get an equivalent field of view and depth of field for the micro four thirds sensor you will need a 25mm f1.4 lens. The F1.4 lens will let in four times the light per mm^2 of sensor, so the photons per pixel will be the same despite the fact that the pixels have 1/4 the area of the full frame pixels.

Choose to shower with a friend and you should open the tap more, or pick a more powerful shower from the bathroom emporium.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[jaapv]

No it won't let less light per mm in, as the amountbof light that the lens lets through, at the same aperture does not change. Your idea would mean that if you crop in an enlarger, you would need to increase the exposure of the enlarger. The lens doe not know the size of the sensor. This is the light-gathering bollocks that has plagued the Internet a while back. The aperture OF THE LENS determines the amount light that falls on the sensor. 

 

[lct]

5 minutes ago, jaapv said:

This is the light-gathering bollocks that has plagued the Internet a while back

+1

[KitW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

32 minutes ago, jaapv said:

the amountbof light that the lens lets through, at the same aperture does not change.

If you crop in an enlarger, do you get a small version of the original picture, or just a part of the original picture?

If you want an equivalent image with a smaller sensor you have to use a different focal length and aperture. Do you disagree?

If not, why keep talking about "the same aperture?" At least read what I wrote and point out what I have misunderstood.

 

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[Le Chef]

6 minutes ago, KitW said:

equivalent image

That’s a very broad: what’s your definition?

[KitW]

Same field of view and depth of field for a start. Colour rendering and character of the bokeh, we can leave for another day.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[jaapv]

Aperture is a property of the lens only. The ratio between diameter and focal length. 
Sensor size. Is a property of the … sensor. 
The aperture determines the amount of light falling on the sensor per surface unit, irrespective of geometrical size. That is called exposure. 
More pixels per surface unit will result in each pixel receiving fewer photons, increasing noise, but as the pixel density has increased the total amount of light recorded on that surface unit remains the same, so the unchanged light intensity as projected by the lens will be recorded identically. 

[tom0511]

I can imagine a full frame AF-camera smaller than the SL3 makes any sense for me.

Why? Look at the lens size you need if you want reasonable speed . And what does a small body help, if the lenses are bigger.

And as soon you make interchangable lenses I highly doubt it can be as compact as a Q3 (which I dont consider compact anyways).

Look how big the TL 35 and 60 allready got.

 

[tom0511]

I would say.... TL35/1.4 has comparable DOF and FOV like the 50/2.0 on full frame.

23/2.0 is like a 35/2.8 FF equivalent when used on a dx sensor. (in regards of dof and fov, but not in regards of light gathering)

 

Edited June 18, 2024 by tom0511

[KitW]

1 hour ago, tom0511 said:

in regards of dof and fov, but not in regards of light gathering

The 35mm f1.4 applying an extra stop of light (double) to a half-area sensor.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[jaapv]

Sorry, no, that makes no sense.

Maybe you should experiment a bit. The amount of light falling on the sensor surface at the same f-stop is identical.

[KitW]

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Sorry, no, that makes no sense.

Maybe you should experiment a bit. The amount of light falling on the sensor surface at the same f-stop is identical.

The f stops are different. Two different lenses. Two different f stops. I'm struggling to see what you're not following?

I'm happy to admit I may be wrong e.g. if the relationship between depth of field and f stop is not what I understand it to be, but to make statements about constant f stops suggests you haven't read my posts, which means your criticisms are irrelevant.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[jaapv]

You were the one who suggested that a lens creates noise... Be happy...

[tom0511]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb KitW:

The 35mm f1.4 applying an extra stop of light (double) to a half-area sensor.

Yes, you can shoot one stop wider and get the same dof. But then the dx sensor will show more noise, somyoundontbgain anything, except smaller size.

[KitW]

"You were the one who suggested that a lens creates noise"

If you read back, you'll see that i said that the lens determines the noise, not that it creates it. That's a straw man you created to blow down.

Obviously newer sensors have better performance than older ones, but when comparing same-generation sensors, noise will be closely related to the number of photons hitting each pixel. The lens has some relevance to this - faster lens; more photons; less noise.

Edited June 18, 2024 by KitW

[KitW]

2 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

Yes, you can shoot one stop wider and get the same dof. But then the dx sensor will show more noise, somyoundontbgain anything, except smaller size.

Do you mean that more light will mean more noise, or that the increase in light won't make up for the increased noise of the smaller sensor?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[tom0511]

vor 26 Minuten schrieb KitW:

Do you mean that more light will mean more noise, or that the increase in light won't make up for the increased noise of the smaller sensor?

I mean that the increase in light will make up for the higher noise of the sensor because you can shoot one stop lower iso and getbthensame dof.

of course this changes when you put a 50/1.4 on the ff and shoot wide open.

this ff allows more creative room in regards of shallow dof.

dx allows a smaller equipment for same reach.