How much of a difference does Pixel Area make?

Last Update: 4th May 2024

Introduction.

My son said I may try his Sony ZV-E1 while he tried my Fuji XT-5. The Sony ZV-E1 uses the same FF 12MP BSI sensor as the Sony A7S III. A camera like this should be tested. I would have liked to include my Fuji XT-5. The test results are exciting and reveal much about what to expect from various cameras. For example, the Sony ZV-E1 pixel area is 5 times larger than the Olympus E-M1 III and almost 20 times larger than the Olympus XZ-2. How much do these pixel area differences impact the IQ of these cameras? What should we look for, and how will you test these cameras?

Sensor Sensitivity is determined by the Optical and Quantum efficiencies of the pixels. That means larger pixels should capture more light and convert more photons into electrons, right? The secret is to study shadow details because more sensitive sensors should capture more shadow information. How many shadow detail variances do you expect to find between the Sony ZV-E1 and the older Olympus XZ-2? While I am not testing for noise, what do you expect to find between these 2 cameras? Those studying my articles have enough information and knowledge to evaluate these questions.

I included several Olympus cameras in this test. We learn much from the pixel area variances between these cameras. For example, the pixel area of the Olympus E-1 is three times larger than the EM1 III. It is sometimes easier to simulate sensor size differences with your available equipment.

Why do golfers use a handicap? It lets experienced and weaker golfers play competitively. It's safe to say equivalence is unfortunately used like a golf handicap. That means equivalence sets unnecessary restrictions on M43 photographers. Do we need a handicap to evaluate cameras? Each camera is unique and should get a chance to showcase its capabilities. The only variable that should be the same is the test studio. I applied this basic philosophy to the test images further down.

Preparing my Test Studio

The test image had a 4EV variance between the brightest and darkest parts. Each exposure was set at the brightest point with the camera's spot meter. Each sensor's Saturation and SNR levels were 4 stops lower in the shadows. Study the photons to electrons graph further down in this article, to learn more about sensor saturation and SNR levels. Every digital photographer should know this graph...

Each image sensor is technically different or unique. Knowledge about digital cameras guided me in planning these camera tests. For example, it's better to focus on pixels when testing digital cameras. The sensor's diagonal measurement only determines the sensor's optical characteristics. I created the chart below to help you study the pixel area variances between the cameras tested.

The chart shows each sensor's megapixels in red. Why do we need to consider the sensor's pixel count? Because pixel count influences pixel area. For example, go to the 12MP FF sensor on the horizontal axis and compare its pixel area to the 12MP (1/1.7") sensor on the vertical axis. We can compare all the sensors in this chart. That means we should focus on pixel area and not size! For example, how much will the Olympus E1 shadow details differ from the Olympus E-M1 III?

Sensor size is a marketing tool used to entice those with little knowledge. It's meaningless and tells us nothing about image sensors. For example, it's better to focus on the sensor's diagonal measurements. The reason is the lens image circle has to cover the complete sensor. This explains the more light "effect" confusing so many FF enthusiasts or the equivalence factor when comparing the optical differences between M43, APC, and full-frame lens mounts. See the table below for more.

How should we study these controlled image quality tests of different sensor sizes and pixel areas? To prepare yourself, take a few moments, select a few cameras (pixel areas), and write down what you like to learn from these tests. For example, how many more shadow details do you expect from the 12MP full-frame sensor over the smaller 1/1.7" sensor? Also, study the Fuji X-T5 or Medium Format 100MP sensor and explain why their shadow details should technically look similar to the Olympus 20MP sensor. Why is image noise a potential challenge for these two Fuji cameras..?

Olympus C-770UZ  (4MP) - ISO64, f3.2, 1/160 - OOC JPEG and not edited...

Let's study the different test images...

All the noise filters were off while taking 4 RAW files with each camera. The Olympus Enhanced RAW Files were converted in Workspace (No NR), and I used the Photoshop 2024 Raw Converter (No NR) for the rest. I brightened the shadows to reveal the captured details of each camera. All the cameras were optimized to deliver better detail and IQ. One typically expects less visible noise from a saturated sensor with higher SNR values. That said, these test images are all about detail...

The test images are best viewed on a large display. Click on the first image...

I cropped the above samples. The goal is to assist readers in studying the details. I upped the shadows and prepped them for the web. I did no NR or color changes. These converted raw files give a good indication of the captured sensor data. Studying my reader's feedback, it's clear that each person sees the results differently. Knowledge and regular practice help photographers get good results from different cameras. I expected more IQ differences between 20 years and 20X pixel areas.

How does one explain the increased noise levels of the E1, E500, E-620, and EP3? One would typically expect less noise from fewer pixels with less control wiring. Older image sensors have more noise because their quantum and optical efficiencies are lower. That means a lower photon-to-electron conversion rate with older image sensors. This translates into losses and more noise...

How would you explain the increased noise levels of the Panasonic LX-10?

What were my camera configurations? I used the 17mm f1.2 lens on my M43 cameras and the 50mm f2 macro lens on my 4/3rds DSLRs. The Canon 6D II had an EF 35mm f2.0 lens, and the Sony ZV-E1 had a 55mm f1.8 Zeiss lens. That means I used my tripod distance to the image to compensate for lower megapixel sensors and the different focal lengths. I used Manual Exposure with an Aperture of f3.5 or f4 on these cameras. I also used the 2s timer and +1EV ETTR on each camera.

I used the same white balance (marker) to convert the raw files.

Conclusion

You don't need an expert to tell you the Olympus XZ-2 and Sony ZV-E1 image results are very similar. For example, I couldn't find 20 times more image details for the Sony. That means the Olympus XZ-2's image details compare well with the Sony ZV-E1 and its 20 times larger pixel areas. The 20-year age difference between some cameras also didn't make a 20X difference. Finally, less than 100% pixel area differences seem insignificant. That means one can ignore the sensor sensitivity differences between M43 (Live MOS) and APC (Standard CMOS and BSI) sensors. What makes a real difference is knowledge, lens selections, and regularly using Workspace and one's Olympus camera.

I used the Olympus E-M1 II for years and the E-M1 III for eighteen months. This is an exceptional camera with excellent IQ, speed, and functionality. The most fascinating part about them is the 20MP Live MOS sensor. I would love to see the specs Olympus used to find this sensor 12 years ago.

What did we learn from this review? We simply can't trust those repeating the same size and capture phrases. The Sony ZV E1 is a top performer and delivers excellent image details and shadow data. We also saw that the Image Quality differences between cameras are way less than expected. Is this the reason why photographers are rediscovering older cameras and sensors? For example, the TruePic processors and 16MP sensors in the E-M1, E-PL9, E-M5 II, and E-M10 II/III are excellent. Photographers are better off evaluating costs, functionality, speed, application, and form factor.

The following 4 samples are the final edits with Workspace, Photoshop, and Photolab 6. I did them to help readers get a feel for the various edited versions of the above samples...

Olympus E-1 with 50mm f2.0 lens - ISO100, f4.0, 0.6 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photoshop.

Olympus E-1 with 50mm f2.0 lens - ISO100, f4.0, 0.6 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Enhanced Raw converted and edited in Workspace.

I used the standard NR filter on the above image. Workspace has an older NR filter for older cameras like the E-1. The E-410 and newer models have a different and more advanced NR filter...

Olympus EM1 III with 17mm f1.2 Pro lens - ISO100, f4.0, 1/2 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photoshop.

Those photographers who make a habit of improving their Enhanced Raw files and Image Editing skills enjoy an advantage. The benefits of improving one's knowledge and camera and editing skills are remarkable. I often write about the benefits of converting your Enhanced Raw Files with Workspace. Also, see this video reviewing the Enhanced Raw Format and Workspace.

Olympus EM1 III with 17mm f1.2 Pro lens - ISO100, f4.0, 1/2 seconds (1EV ETTR) - Raw converted and edited in Photolab 6.

Final observations. Study the "deeper" shadows between the above flowers to see the details from these cameras. The Canon 6D II revealed more shadow details than others. The last four edits are interesting. One can spend hours editing these raw files for different results. DxO PL-6 or 7 is a good solution for older Olympus raw files, especially if you prefer basic conversions and editing.

See this article where I comment on 12MP versus 100MP printed samples.

Also, see my Workspace firmware update page - link.

Best Siegfried

Spot the difference between 12 vs 100MP images

Last Update:- 25th April 2024

Introduction.

Watch this video from Chris Hau and his team comparing the Sony A7S III and the Fuji GFX100S. Chris asked if they could see the image quality differences between these 2 cameras? Before watching the video, list the points you will use to help you find any differences between these cameras.

Which one of the following two options do you trust more? The 1st option is theoretically analyzing the results from these two cameras, and the 2nd option is the oversimplified "size and capture," which is constantly abused to promote the virtues of higher resolution and full-frame cameras.

Why is this exercise meaningful?

Some will say it's only a fun video. While light-hearted videos have a role, the impressions they leave are enough to influence the buying behavior of many. The fun part is to study the images.

How did I identify the right camera for each photo?

- Pixels capture Photons

The Sony A7S III pixel area is 386% larger than the GFX100S. Both cameras use BSI sensors. The Sony should extract more shadow details because the larger pixel areas improve sensitivity.

- Depth of Field

Chris applied the same camera settings for both cameras. This means the Fuji has a smaller DOF with more background blur. It was difficult to see any differences because the subject versus background distances influenced the results. You need to review the images carefully to see any differences. 

- Image noise

Fuji has 8.5 times (102/12) more pixels with control circuits, whereas the A7S III has only 12MP. Each control circuit adds noise to the sensor's noise floor. It's normal to see high-resolution sensors with more visible noise. For example, a similar story is the Olympus Pen F versus the A7R IV. It needed more planning to manage the visible noise (SNR) from the Sony A7R IV than my Pen F.

Study this article for more on the different types of image noise...

Conclusion

How many photographers are tricked by undisclosed promoters voicing wild claims about the roles of sensor size and resolution? Instead of studying the functional benefits of various cameras, we see those who never prepared articles or theoretical papers repeating the wildest statements...

The answer is to focus on shadow details, DOF (background blur), and shadow noise. You won't find any optical and technical "size and capture" trademarks like a full-frame look, noise-free image, better image quality, "less" lens diffraction, subject isolation, dynamic range, bokeh, or the GFX100S captures more light. Chris said he edited the photos but gave only a few details.

Here is a summary of what I found:

- First round - B is Fuji. (DOF and shadow noise)

- Second round - A is Fuji. (DOF and shadow noise)

- Third round - A is Fuji. (Mainly DOF with some loss of detail under the balconies)

- Fourth round - The left one is Fuji (Mainly DOF - study the background carefully)

- Fifth round - The right one is Fuji. (We need to see the focal point? A very tight DOF)

It was difficult to spot shadow detail differences. The tight DOF and the image editing made it difficult to analyze these images. It would be nice to see an example like the one below for each camera. See this example of editing deep shadows with an Enhanced Raw File and Workspace.

See this article analyzing the shadow details of 15 cameras.

Any thoughts

Siegfried

An example of the Sony A7R IV at ISO3200. The sensor was not fully saturated.

Additional opinions:-

- See the video from Jimmy (RED35). Is 20MP enough?

- See the 2 parts response from Joseph Ellis to the above video.

- SLR Lounge with a 90-second overview of Megapixels

- See this video from Duade Paton for an engaging overview

Should it be Full-Frame or APC or M43 Sensor?

Last Update: 28th December 2020

I guess one could say, the mobile phone is now the official always with me camera. Some say they do everything with their mobile phones. But mobile phones use tiny sensors! There are many articles and YouTube videos discussing this same question. Mobile phone channels say phones are better today, and photography presenters say, cameras are still the preferred option for photographers? If the size of the sensor kept you from only using your mobile phone, then why not test different sensor sizes. Considering sensor size, I had a few cameras and thought, let's study the images and see for ourselves. Should I keep my camera or simply get the next mobile phone?

So often we see how M43 photographers are pushed around on subjects like equivalence and anyhing related to sensor size. To make things worse, there is no alternative to biased info we see in camera reviews and on photography forums. With only one or two cameras, how will you ever know?

For example, what is the so-called "Full Frame" look talked about on forums? With all the hype about full-frame sensors, wouldn't it be nice to at least simulate this "Full Frame" look? I am also searching for a formal definition but could not find anything describing this full-frame look...

Olympus Pen F, handheld @ 1/15Sec, f4.0 and ISO2000 (see the slow shutter speed and higher ISO)

I had a few cameras with different sensor sizes. It didn't take much to create a semi-controlled test for these cameras. The next step was to take images and compare them.

A little Photography wisdom...

Photography is one of those things that has a negative for each positive. Interestingly manufacturers are working hard to build new features to "bridge" these negatives. For example, study the above image and the camera settings below the picture. It's basically a blue hour scene from my wife and me strolling through this coastal town. I had my Pen-F and 17mm f1.8 with me. 

Let's study the positives and negatives:-

- Positive: Increasing the ISO helped me to up the shutter speed. Great for a blue hour
- Negative: Slow shutter speeds cause camera shake and a higher ISO more image noise.
- Solution: Build-in Image Stabilization with fast lenses, ISO w ETTR, or using a tripod?

I think we can agree that it's quick to create a long list of positives and negatives for almost every situation. I am not going to do that in this article, I believe readers know the arguments and they generally have the information when buying a new camera.

Let's look at another option:

- Positive: High ISO values enables the photographer to safely work in low-light situations.
- Negative: High ISO settings result in more noise, a lower DR, and color response issues
- Solution: Select the right solution for the job. You need more light in low-light conditions

Digital photography is much more than the size of a sensor, image noise, or IBIS. I believe the informed photographer will plan and match his or her gear to support their photography. 

To illustrate, let's consider a few more examples:

Example 1

Two hobby Photographers are going on a 5-day mountain hike. They like doing birding, animal, and landscape photography. One specializes in landscape and bird photography and the other enjoys wildlife, macro, and video. The size of their equipment and carrying weight are important to them. Image quality is important because they promote and publish their work. What typical photography gear do you think these two photographers will carry with them?

Example 2

Both the wife and husband turned 50 and they planned a 6-day bus tour in celebration. Both enjoy photography, street photography, cityscapes,, and video (storytelling). They like good IQ and prefer light and portable photography gear. Both are active on social media and each has a blog or video channel. They both won prizes and both published images. When home they do photo editing, video editing, and scrapbooking. What gear will this couple have in their camera bags?

Example 3

A 40-year-old sports fanatic and hobby photographer likes to photograph live football games and he never misses an opportunity to watch Formula One. Through the years he is a well-known face at Formula One and his action shots are popular amongst motorcar enthusiasts. Camera speed, fast and accurate autofocus, and long zoom lenses are all basic must-haves for him. Because he likes to move around during the game or race, he found mobility is important to him. What will he carry in his camera bag?

Let's study a few cameras and images...

I read a few articles and technical papers as I prepared for this article. I looked at equivalence, something discussed a lot on forums. We also know that photographers and artists are people who focus on the visual aspects of their surroundings. I, therefore, thought it was a good idea to take a few simple images and compare them so readers can examine the differences for themselves.

I used the following cameras:

Unfortunately, I had no 1" sensor camera available. I purposely mixed older and newer cameras to see if age makes any difference in image quality. Interestingly, older cameras have a lower maximum high ISO value. (The LC1 has a max ISO of 400 and the Konica Minolta A2 is ISO 800)

I used these lenses with the above cameras:

- Sony FE 50mm f1.8
- Panasonic M43 Leica 25mm f1.4
- Fujinon 35mm f1.4

I created the following "Controlled Environment" to record these images.

- I used one large Video LED soft light with fixed settings and it's on a tripod.
- I used the same "dark Room" camera setting for all the images at higher ISOs, 
- Each camera was on the same tripod in a "fixed" position. (No IBIS or IS used)
- All images were taken with a focal length of +/- 50mm and a 3:2 image ratio.
- Used RAW images and used the same basic editing for each image with PS.
- I applied no noise reduction and left the raw images "as is" or OOC.
- I focussed on the maize in the front. Background = the fruit basket and 2 chairs.

Testing background Blur @ ISO 200 & lower and f2.8

The purpose was to see how these cameras isolate the subject. It also helps to see the background blur from each camera/lens combination.

 Fujifilm XT-20, 1/15, f2.8, ISO 100

Sony A2 MKII, 1/40, f2.8 ISO 200

Konica Minolta A2, 1/25, f2.8, ISO 100

 Olympus EM1 MKII, 1/13, f2.8, ISO 64

 Panasonic G9, 1/40, f2.8 ISO 200

 Panasonic LC1 (5MP), 1/30, f2.8, ISO 100

 Panasonic LX7 (10MP), 1/25, f2.8, ISO 100

 Fujifilm X20 (12MP), 1/60, f2.8, ISO 160

Depth of Field @ ISO 200 & lower and f9.0

The purpose of this test was to study the depth of field with f9.0 selected on all these cameras. One can see how landscape images will benefit from using smaller sensor cameras.

In terms of focusing, I focused on the main subject (Corn). Using the 3rd's rule, the distance from the camera to the subject is the same as the distance from the fruit platter to the subject and the same from the chair to the fruit platter. I placed the subject on the first 3rd.

 Sony A2 MKII, 1", f9.0, ISO200

 Olympus EM1 MKII, 1/3, f9.0, ISO 200

 Panasonic G9, 1", f9.0, ISO 200

 Panasonic LX7, 1/3, f8.0, ISO 200

 Fujifilm X20, 1/5, f9.0, ISO 100

Fujifilm XT-20, 1/5, f9.0, ISO 100

High ISO (3200) and an f-stop closest to f2.8

The purpose of these test images was to see the different cameras perform at high ISOs. I was looking for things like image noise, color variations, image detail, and finally how the images compare at higher ISOs. Keep in mind I used a custom white balance for Photoshop and ALL the images. I used the "WB point" just above the chairs on the background wall.

Also important is the fact that manufacturers have different levels of noise reduction for their jpegs. Canon APS-C cameras were always praised for their good high ISO noise performance. See the Canon reviews at DPReview. The fact is, most of these highly acclaimed cameras deliver clean high ISO images with no image detail. This seemed completely irrelevant to most reviewers.

What reviewers refuse to talk about is noise reduction smears image details. This "eagerness" to present clean jpeg files happens today, also with many full-frame cameras. This is why I used RAW files for these test images and not jpegs. I also used no noise reduction with these images.

 Sony A2 MKII, 1/25, f2.8, ISO 3200

 Olympus EM1 MKII, 1/25, f2.8, ISO 3200

 Panasonic G9, 1/30, f2.8, ISO 3200

 Panasonic LX7, 1/80, f2.8, ISO 3200

 Fujifilm X20, 1/80, f2.8, ISO 3200

Fujifilm XT-20, 1/50, f2.8, ISO 3200

Testing the Full Frame look @ ISO 200 and max Apertures

The purpose of this test was to see what these different solutions look like with max apertures. What does the background blur look like and what is the ability of each camera to isolate its subjects' background? Keep in mind these images were taken in a similar "controlled" environment.

 Sony A7 MKII, 1/50, f1.8, ISO 100

 Olympus EM1 MKII, 1/160, f1.4, ISO 200

Fujifilm XT-20, 1/60, f1.4, ISO 100

Does the size of the sensor change the exposure settings?

I used the Sony A7 III, the Olympus EM1 II, and the Panasonic LX7 in this example. Three sensor sizes and three different cameras. The settings used with each camera were exactly the same. I used 50mm, f4, and 1/5 seconds at ISO 200. I used a small video LED source for each test.

I edited the RAW files in Photoshop. See the histogram for each camera next to the sample image.

The purpose of this test was to see if any of these cameras receive more light than the other. I also wanted to see if I had to adjust my exposure setting for any one of these cameras...

Well, as you can see the size of the sensor did not change the amount of light reaching the sensor. In other words, it was NOT necessary to change my exposure settings for any of these cameras...

Conclusion

If you get the chance to try different cameras in a similar "controlled" environment, then you will see how the results make you view this complete sensor size or "size and capture" thing differently. To be honest I did not discover any "Full Frame" look either. What I did see was a bunch of interesting and capable cameras, each with its own appeal and benefits.

At the start of this article, I said your photography gear should match your unique photography needs. For example, I see NO reason for having a wide angle lenses if I only do macro photography. If you are really interested in something more than a mobile phone or any specific camera or lens configuration, then search for something secondhand and sell it again if you didn't like it...

Also, study some of my other articles...