It does have a bigger sensor. Or, rather, the pixels are effectively bigger.
The linear area is the same, but the light sensitive area of each pixel (the shading factor) is bigger due to better microlens tech, and the DR is better due to increased full well capacity, which results from alterations to the sensor geometry.
These factors will make the sensor perform like a larger one, without having to increase the volume and weight of the lens, as would have to be done if the sensor's overall size were increased.
What remains to be seen are how these changes work in the real world. My guess is that they will be worth 2/3 to one full stop.
These factors will make the sensor perform like a larger one, without having to increase the volume and weight of the lens, as would have to be done if the sensor's overall size were increased.
What remains to be seen are how these changes work in the real world. My guess is that they will be worth 2/3 to one full stop.
In addition, according to Imaging Resource, the image processing algorithms have been rewritten to reduce noise not only by looking for chroma noise and luma noise seperately, but by comparing and correlating the two in an effort to find actual detail. The few side-by side comparisons I've seen at 1600 ISO demonstrate far less chroma noise (more than just a stop's worth) than was seen in the LX3. That's great for me, because I often don't mind a bit of luma noise, but chroma noise drives me crazy.
This is looking like the pocketable camera to beat for me, unless I decide that I can find a GF1 or GF2 to be "pocketable enough."
...and I still think every camera in the world should have a multi-aspect sensor.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.