Pixels vs Noise vs Dynamic Range etc etc

[Bob_Defly]

Just wondering if any of the pros/semi-pros on here that use Nikons are feeling slightly limited by their current pixel count? I have been waiting to upgrade my camera body or a while now (from D300), and much as I like the D700 I just think that when you are competing with the canon shooters of this world, submitting 12mp images to a marketing/art director seems a bit amateur. Anyone agree?

I know the larger pixels in the D700 and D3 give both of those FF cameras an amazing dynamic range and great tonality, is there a perfect pixel size for an FF sensor? The D3's pixel pitch is about 8.5 microns vs 6.4 on the 5D MKII, which is nice and all that jazz, but when your competitors are submitting 21mp images vs your 12...

Personally I think 18mp-21mp is about right for a FF sensor. I'm not bothered about pixel count for my own personal photography, it's more for getting stuff in print at 300dpi without upsizing.

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/digital.sensor...

The dynamic range of the 5D MKII is stunning, even though the pixels are smaller. Also I found this interesting:

Focal Length Limited Apparent Image Quality FLL-AIQ-MAX
In focal length limited situations where you want the maximum detail on a subject, the highest resolution will be delivered by the sensor with the smallest pixels, assuming the lens can deliver the detail. Most will judge the highest image quality on the image with more fine detail even with more noise, as long as the noise is not excessive and the dynamic range is adequate. The best metric for this situation is the inverse of the pixel size, as given in the Camera Sensor Figure of Merit (CSFM) section below.

And no, before you ask, I can't afford a D3X.

[Simpo Two]

I guess the kind of people who answer to fussy art directors CAN afford a D3X!

For myself, 10Mp is fine; my main concern is low-light/noise performance.

[Elderly]

Bob_Defly said:

I have been waiting to upgrade my camera body or a while now (from D300)......



...... The dynamic range of the 5D MKII is stunning, even though the pixels are smaller.

IF it's dynamic range that primarily concerns you, you might as well stick with your D300 -
The 5D MKII has a dynamic range of 11.9 Evs, the D300 is a fraction better at 12.0 Evs.

Hours of anorak fun here - http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/...

[itsnotarace]

Bob_Defly said:

Just wondering if any of the pros/semi-pros on here that use Nikons are feeling slightly limited by their current pixel count?

Not even in the slightest but it depends what you are shooting for, and where the shots are going to be used doesn't it?

[clonmult]

Elderly said:

Bob_Defly said:

I have been waiting to upgrade my camera body or a while now (from D300)......



...... The dynamic range of the 5D MKII is stunning, even though the pixels are smaller.

IF it's dynamic range that primarily concerns you, you might as well stick with your D300 -
The 5D MKII has a dynamic range of 11.9 Evs, the D300 is a fraction better at 12.0 Evs.

Hours of anorak fun here - http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/...

Thats definitely hours (and hours) of anorak-grabbing entertainment.

Interesting though - the Nikon D60 and the Sony A200 both use *exactly* the same sensor iirc, yet they're quoted as slightly differing resolutions and dot pitch. The D60 is also quoted with slightly better dynamic range.