Pro DX is Dead

Started Nov 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
Theodoros Fotometria
Senior MemberPosts: 2,090
Re: Pro DX is Dead
In reply to jfriend00, Nov 12, 2012

jfriend00 wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:



-- hide signature --




A couple of your assumptions/statements are not quite the way you think they are. You don't get the same visible noise in a given output image whether you shoot with the full FX sensor or the DX cropped portion. The overall noise is much less visible if you use all the MP because the additional downsizing reduces the appearance of the noise. So that assumption you based some of the rest of your conclusions on is not correct.

It doesn't work like that, you don't have raw on a DSLR to think interms of resizing... NR is applied on the 1080x1920 image in camera... you don't have resizing at all and the pixel is already huge... it's one pixel that is a combination of pixels and the sensor is always exposed to photons the shutter curtains don't work... I see you have avoided to explain why all high end makers use an APS-c sensor.... For instance, (to explain noise) if you shoot high ISO stills with D800 and D700 the D800 is less noisy, if you shoot the same with both in DX mode... D700 is less noisy! Now 1920x1080 "equivalent pixel" is much bigger than D700... it's already huge even in DX!

Further, you can take an FX sensor and stop it down a stop and raise the ISO one stop to match the DX DOF and get very similar IQ performance as DX. The larger sensor gives you one stop more light on the sensor so it starts with that advantage. Thus, you can give that advantage back by raising the ISO by one stop and stopping the aperture down by one stop and get the same DOF as DX (until you are diffraction limited).

It's more than 1.5 stops actually and increasing Iso does increase noise considerably... it also affects DR a lot and video DR is much less than the respective photographic one you are "dead" if you lose a stop of DR in video... besides lens diffraction is closer than you think... in daylight (quite common when filming) you are already at f8 and you ﻿don't ﻿have a diffraction problem due to small pixels because 1920x1080 (equivalent - but that's what you are filming on) pixels are huge!

If filmmakers are used to the APS-C field of view, that indeed could be an advantage for DX (I'll have to take your word on that one), but that presumes that the main market for such a video-centric camera is actually people with enough filmmaking experience to have this preference.

Video is only MF also..., you can't have your depth of scene moving in and out of focus DOF... you work with DOF in filming...

The argument that I would find more compelling is that FX just doesn't really offer much of an advantage for video (since everything is getting downsized anyway and shallow DOF is usually not desirable) so the 3-10x less expensive DX sensor and somewhat smaller/cheaper mid-focal-range lenses are an advantage for DX for video (as long as you don't need to go super wide angle or really low light).

Cinema is best done with FF lenses on APS-c... things like vignetting, distortion or uneven frame are fatal in filming... even if they can only appear on the edges..., just imagine moving the camera horizontally and have a subject that was blared at the edge becoming sharp at the center! Old MF FF lenses (like Nikon nonAI, AI & AI-s) are ideal for economical filming... a D5200 also... it must be  really something this one! ...I believe the D9000 though will give Nikon video a real push and establish the company to the market... that's probably why they left it for last... they want that (IMO) as fine tuned as possible.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --


Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow