arthury Posted September 9, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Since the pixel density is the same between the two sensors, why would the noise in the M9 be significantly lower? All improvements are coming from software/firmware? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi arthury, Take a look here Pixel density: m8 = m9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marknorton Posted September 9, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 9, 2009 Maybe that but may also be newer sensor fabrication technology, circuit layout and A/D converter quality. You're correct though, the pixel density is the same and there's talk of 1 stop noise improvement. The Nikon D3 will likely still win out when it comes to noise but remember that FF camera is only 12MP and the images out of the camera are somewhat soft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreas_thomsen Posted September 9, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 9, 2009 mark did u order one or TWO M9? u all know what i mean cheers andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 9, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 9, 2009 Forgive my ignorance here (no trap): if a sensor is twice the area and has the same fill ratio (percantage of light gathering active area) wouldn't the picture look better as far as high ISO noise is concerned? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted September 9, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 9, 2009 Andreas, no, only one M9 and even that I was in two minds about - paint only finish, plastic screen cover, difficulty inter-working with M8 and M9 due to the filters. I do not share the view that a camera which looks like it has been to Hell and back is somehow authentic. To me, it just adds up to a financial liability. Ignoring the one I took to pieces, I have two fully upgraded M8s which are doing well but there's something like £8600 in them. It will be very interesting to see what happens to secondhand prices and in some way, it's better there isn't the entry level M available because that will tend to prop up secondhand M8/M8u/M8.2 values. Nugat - You are correct if the light gathering area is split into the same number of pixels. In this case, the extra area is exactly compensated for by an increase in the number of pixels so noise improvements are down to other factors. That's how the Nikon D3 achieves its excellent noise performance, big chunky pixels which allow an excellent signal to noise ratio. Downside is the spatial sampling frequency also decreases which demands an aggresive AA filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted September 9, 2009 >Downside is the spatial sampling frequency also decreases which demands an aggresive AA filter. Which seems to make images from the D3 not as smooth when compared to the old D2X; especially, on the OOF areas where the bokeh is supposed to be good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.