Sony A7 R4

Croasdail wrote in post #18895845
Not changing back... I've been a disloyal person to both camps, cheating on each with the other brand from time to time. Not brand loyal at all... have both Canon and Sony gear. Would love to consolidate - but also hate buying and selling to get what I already have. I even used to have some Nikon gear... but when I stopped shooting for a shop that was Nikon, I swapped that stuff out with Sony gear. Canon has been the constant for the last 30 years.

That said, I started out as a Minolta shooter, so in some ways this is sort of coming home again too.

Not accusing you of 'disloyalty' at all, but merely wondering about the motivations for consideration of 6DII over a new Sony, since you already have both.

Wilt wrote in post #18895836
Puzzled here...

If I simply shot a photo with a 3200x4800 pixel (15MPixel) camera vs. the 6400x9600 pixel (61MPixel) camera, each pixel in the 15MPixel camera has FOUR times the surface area to collect photons in a low light setting. And we have all been aware of the inherent noise advantage of a larger-pixel sensor. It is only noise reduction algorithms and progress in circuit manufacturing processes that have allowed manufacturers to increase pixel count while also reducing circuit noise.

But if we apply the SAME manufacturing techniques and the SAME noise reduction software to both the 15MPixel sensor and the 61Mpixel sensor, one would think that the 15MPixel camera is inherently less noisy than even sampling down the 61Mpixels to reduce noise!

Wilt, it's about perception vs. measurements. We became aware that higher resolutions = lower perceived noise in an image with the 1Ds II.

At that time the 1D Mark II (8.5mp no "S") was the absolute lowest noise digital available on the market measured in most any way. @ 100% view it was clearly better than the 1Ds Mark II's 16 MP sensor for noise handling for all the reasons you list.

HOWEVER, at the same time if one used the two cameras side by side, and took the same photo with the same settings and viewed the entire image either on screen or in a print, at the same size (vs. blowing anything up to 100%) the added detail of the higher res images = less perceived noise.

This is the inherent noise advantage of the higher resolution.


I'll add this link for some more reading on higher res;
The understated utility of smaller pixels

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18899639
HOWEVER, at the same time if one used the two cameras side by side, and took the same photo with the same settings and viewed the entire image either on screen or in a print, at the same size (vs. blowing anything up to 100%) the added detail of the higher res images = less perceived noise.

This is the inherent noise advantage of the higher resolution.

Expressed that way, it reminds me of how two cups of coffee may have milk in one and cream in the other. Similar color, but a perceived difference both for appearance and taste.

Lately I've moved from 3% whole milk to organic 6%, and most recent to 11% ... so the resolution of the milk is getting closer to half and half ...