Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and 12mp?

Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and 12mp
of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or even
4/3"?

Thanks

Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and 12mp
of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or even
4/3"?

Thanks

What ISO do you want to use?

David

80-400 probably

Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and
12mp of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or
even 4/3"?

Thanks

What ISO do you want to use?

David

Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and
12mp of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or
even 4/3"?

Thanks

What ISO do you want to use?

David

[top-posting corrected]

80-400 probably


80 - perhaps OK
400 - noise limited

David

I prefer top posting for quick replies so people do not have to
scroll all the way down.

thanks for the reply.

Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and
12mp of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or
even 4/3"?

Thanks

What ISO do you want to use?

David

[top-posting corrected]

80-400 probably


80 - perhaps OK
400 - noise limited

David

Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
I prefer top posting for quick replies so people do not have to
scroll all the way down.

thanks for the reply.

On my screen, both your comment and my replies fitted without scrolling.
I do agree that we see far too many posts where the dross in not
sufficiently trimmed. I prefer to keep the text in top-to-bottom order of
writing, as used in most Western books, newspapers, magazines etc. for the
last several centuries.

I'm glad you found my answer useful.

David

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:30:49 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
wrote:

80-400 probably

Define "sufficient".
It depends on what you find acceptable.
You can go to many sites that review cameras and look at the
representative pictures, and even at specific pictures designed to
show noise (I assume you're worried about noise from these sensors at
the ISOs you mention). Decide for yourself, because we really can't
decide for you.
If the noise is acceptable to you, then the sensor is sufficient for
your needs.
It really is that simple.

--
Rudy Giuliani began seeking
the GOP presidential nomination
on Tuesday. He's pro-choice,
pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control
and he did a skit in drag that
is on the Internet. If Osama
bin Laden hadn't attacked him
Pat Robertson would have.

Ok. I was actually not looking for a terribly specific answer,
just a general one like "It seems that 1/1.8" is really not that
effective about 6mp, in my opinion" or something like that. Or
maybe "I think 1/1.8" sorta maxes out at 8mp in general before
you get to a point of diminishing returns." No biggie. Thanks
for the reply though - I do appreciate it.

80-400 probably

Define "sufficient".
It depends on what you find acceptable.
You can go to many sites that review cameras and look at the
representative pictures, and even at specific pictures
designed to show noise (I assume you're worried about noise
from these sensors at the ISOs you mention). Decide for
yourself, because we really can't decide for you.
If the noise is acceptable to you, then the sensor is
sufficient for your needs.
It really is that simple.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:17:18 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
wrote:

Ok. I was actually not looking for a terribly specific answer,
just a general one like "It seems that 1/1.8" is really not that
effective about 6mp, in my opinion" or something like that. Or
maybe "I think 1/1.8" sorta maxes out at 8mp in general before
you get to a point of diminishing returns." No biggie. Thanks
for the reply though - I do appreciate it.

You're welcome.
I'm usually of the opinion that you can make most of these
determinations for yourself. Asking this sort of question only seems
to stir up debate based on personal opinion, simply because there is
no pat answer. It's up to what is acceptable to your own audience.

80-400 probably

Define "sufficient".
It depends on what you find acceptable.
You can go to many sites that review cameras and look at the
representative pictures, and even at specific pictures
designed to show noise (I assume you're worried about noise
from these sensors at the ISOs you mention). Decide for
yourself, because we really can't decide for you.
If the noise is acceptable to you, then the sensor is
sufficient for your needs.
It really is that simple.


--
Senator Joe Biden apologized
Thursday for calling Senator
Barack Obama clean and articulate.
He may have crippled his own
presidential campaign. Within
the hour Joe Biden was endorsed
by Mel Gibson, Isaiah Washington,
Michael Richards and Borat.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 10:55:19 GMT, Paul D. Sullivan wrote:

Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and 12mp
of data?

Or would a larger sensor be preferrable, such as a 2/3" or even
4/3"?

You've asked this question before, but worded a bit differently.
I thought that you understood the many answering replies, but . . .

The answer is that it depends. On the photographer. On the
photographer's expectations. On the year. On the types of pictures
you'll take. On all sorts of things, and for some photographers,
not only will a 1/1.8" sensor forever be insufficient, some only
accept FF sensors, deeming even APS-C sensors deficient due to their
"insanely small pixels". Many others think that 1/1.8" sensors are
more than sufficient for their needs, even with their large numbers
of small pixels. The answers you get can only represent
individual's preferences, and while it's unfortunate, you really
have to form your own preferences by examination and testing, either
of your own images or those taken by other photographers. If your
preferences are formed by agreeing with someone that makes a good
case for why *that individual* likes a particular type of sensor,
you'll never have the satisfaction of discovering for yourself what
works for *you*. Some find it simpler to be followers, becoming
disciples of a photographic guru. And if that guru suddenly decides
that not only are 4/3" sensors too small, now even APS-C sensors are
as well, followers will follow to the Full Frame Promised Land, even
if they've never made a single print any larger than 8" x 10" and
have no desire to ever do so.

If you can't afford to buy and try many cameras, you could easily
download images produced by those 1/1.8", 2/3" and 4/3" sensors, and
determine for yourself if they're lacking in the resolution that you
want, or are too noisy at high ISOs for your purposes. I think
that this has been suggested before. The answers that you're
seeking will come from people whose tastes differ. That doesn't
mean that some are right and that the others are wrong. What I'm
trying to say is that at some point you need to end the asking and
do your own tasting.