Anguish Posted September 9, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) If one were to crop an M9 image made with a 135 mm lens to the equivalent of what's captured by the M8 sensor, how much finer would that cropped image be? Potential answer: M9 18 MP x .7518 (crop factor) = 13.9 MP compared to the M8's 10 MP. Would this equation yield a valid comparison? If so, how much of an advantage is the 3.9 MP? Potential answer - almost a 40 percent advantage. Is there a flaw in this analysis? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi Anguish, Take a look here 135 mm on M8 vs M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
apitong Posted September 9, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 9, 2009 density of pixels is almost the same: For a 1.33 crop factor the M9 18 MP FF has about the same pixels density per square mm as the M8 ( 1.33 x 1.33 x 10.3 MP = 18 MP) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 9, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 9, 2009 Hans' computation is the correct one : in practice, cropping M9 image to 10 MP makes a pic virtually identical in definition to the one taken with M8 - same focal. BUT... M9 has another sensor, a newer one, and can process 16 (14 indeed) bit per pixel files, so even if resolution in itself is in theory the same, it's probable that M9 cropped image is slightly better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted September 9, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 9, 2009 Ang-- Crop factor has to do only with a comparison of frame diagonals, not with number of pixels. Since M8 and M9 have the same 6.8 µm pixel pitch, there's no difference between them. That is, since the two cameras have the same pixel density, if you put a 135 on an M9 and then crop the image to the same physical size as the M8's sensor, you'll get exactly the same number of pixels. So any differences between the two would arise from the fact that the M9 has a later generation sensor with a thicker IR filter, and that the lens doesn't have a UV/IR-Cut filter as it would on the M8. In other words, you're not likely to see any difference at all. And remember, the question has the same answer with any focal length, not just 135. EDIT: Damn! Luigi, you and Hans beat me again! I gotta quit opening so many threads at one time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anguish Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted September 10, 2009 Thanks for the education. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.