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 an indicator of the sensor's Optical and Quantum efficiencies. That means larger pixel areas capture more light, right? The secret is to study shadow details because increasing sensor sensitivity means capturing more shadow information. What kind of shadow differences do you expect to find between the Sony ZV-E1 and an older Olympus XZ-2? While I am not testing for noise, what do you expect to see from these 2 cameras? Does the sensor's pixel control wiring add noise?

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 differences with your existing camera collection.

Preparing my Test Studio

I created a test "studio" with a 4EV exposure difference between the highs and lows and measured the brightest point to set the exposure with my camera's spot meter. That means each sensor's Saturation and SNR were 4 stops lower in the shadows. Study the photon-to-electron graph in this article to learn more about sensor saturation and SNR. Every digital photographer should know this graph...

Each camera's sensor is technically different. My knowledge of digital cameras helped me plan pixel area tests. For example, pixel area reveals more about sensor performance when comparing digital cameras. Sensor size (diagonal measurements) is an indicator of the sensor's optical characteristics. I created the chart below to illustrate the pixel area variances of the cameras I tested.

The chart lists pixel count in red. Why is it important to consider pixel count? Because pixel count determines the sensor's total 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. You can compare all the sensor sizes in this chart with this technique. That means we are evaluating pixel area and not sensor size. For example, how much more detail should the Olympus E1 capture over the E-M1 III? Does the sensor's quantum and optical efficiencies influence these camera comparisons?

The only benefit of sensor size is commercial. It's technically meaningless and reveals nothing about the sensor's ability to capture more data. 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 theory confusing so many FF enthusiasts or the equivalence factor when comparing the optical differences between M43, APC, and full-frame cameras. See the table below for more.

What is the best way to compare these different pixel areas? Take a few minutes to prepare yourself by selecting a few cameras (pixel areas), and writing down what you like to learn from these tests. For example, how many more shadow details do you expect to see from the 12MP FF sensor over the smaller 1/1.7" version? Also, study the Fuji X-T5 or Medium Format 100MP pixel areas and explain why the shadow details of these cameras would be technically similar to 20MP (M43) sensors. Why would one expect to see more shadow noise with these two Fuji cameras (sensors)?

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

Let's study these different test images...

The noise filters were OFF while taking 4 RAW images with each camera. The Enhanced RAW Files were converted in Workspace with no noise reduction (NR). I used the Photoshop 2024 Raw Converter with no NR for the other. I upped the shadows to reveal more captured data. All the cameras were optimized to deliver maximum detail and IQ. One typically expects less visible noise from a saturated sensor and a higher SNR. That said, these comparisons were all about capturing detail...

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

The following samples are crops of the above images. This will assist readers to find more details. I only upped the shadows and prepped the images for the web. I did no color corrections or NR. These converted raw files reflecs the captured sensor data. I appreciate that each person experience the results differently. Knowledge and regular practice is good advice for consistent results with different cameras. I expected larger IQ differences from 20 years and 20X pixel area variances.

How does one explain the increased noise levels of the E1, E500, E-620, and EP3? One would typically expect less noise with fewer pixels and less control wiring. The noise floor of these older sensors are larger because the the quantum efficiencies (photons to electrons conversion) and control wiring are not as optimized as newer sensors. ETTR is more effective with older digital cameras.

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 subject to compensate for lower megapixel sensors and the different focal lengths. I used Manual Exposure with an Aperture of f3.5 or f4 for these cameras. I also used the 2sec timer and +1EV ETTR for each camera.

I used the same white balance (marker) when converting the raw files.

Conclusion

You don't need to be an expert to see the Olympus XZ-2 and Sony ZV-E1 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 do we learn from this comparison? 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