More pixels vs larger pixels on the same sensor size: what are the trade-offs?
Asked 4/6/2017
4 views
2 answers
0
For full-frame cameras with the same sensor size, one model may have many small pixels (for example Sony A7R II, 42MP) while another has fewer larger pixels (for example Sony A7S II, 12MP). What are the practical advantages and disadvantages of higher pixel count versus larger individual pixels for real-world use? In particular, how do they affect still photography, low-light performance, noise, cropping, large prints, video, and workflow?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
9y ago
2 Answers
4
Here's a somewhat lengthy article devoted to the differences between the cameras: Sony a7S II vs A7R II Test — Which One is Right for You?. What I got from the article, with respect to sensors, is that the difference is basically a matter of bigger pixels (a7S II) vs. more pixels (a7R II). The a7S II is said to give less noisy images at high ISO, but the a7R II gives you higher resolution images. There are a number of other differences, many of them related to video (different gamma options, rolling shutter differences, frame rate differences). Read the article for a full rundown.
Why would you prefer one over the other?
Resolution isn't everything. For some people, the a7S II's cleaner images and video improvements will be more important than the a7R II's higher resolution; for others, the a7R II's higher resolution and crop mode will be more important.
Originally by user4262. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4262
9y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
With the same sensor size, the main trade-off is usually resolution versus convenience/low-light emphasis.
More pixels give higher resolving power, more detail, and more room to crop while keeping usable image size. That is why high-megapixel bodies are often preferred for still photography and large prints.
Larger pixels are commonly associated with cleaner results at high ISO and better low-light performance, which is why lower-resolution full-frame cameras are often favored for video and some specialist uses such as astrophotography. For video specifically, 12MP is already plenty for 4K-class output, so extra pixels may bring less benefit than better low-light behavior and video-oriented features.
A key point: if sensor tech and processing are similar, a higher-resolution image can be downsized to the lower resolution, and that averaging can reduce visible noise. So the noise advantage of larger pixels is not always as dramatic in equal-sized output as pixel-level comparisons suggest. But the lower-resolution camera can still be preferable if you do not need extra detail, because files and workflow are simpler.
In short: choose more pixels for detail, cropping, and stills; choose fewer larger pixels when low-light/video performance and simpler workflow matter more.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI9y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Do tetra/nonapixel smartphone sensors offer real benefits over fewer, larger pixels?
How does smartphone pixel binning compare to larger native pixels?
Will a 42MP full-frame camera cropped to Micro Four Thirds match a 20MP Micro Four Thirds camera for bird detail?
Are crop-sensor cameras worse than full frame?
What image-quality benefit does a 100MP medium-format sensor offer over a 60MP full-frame sensor with the same pixel pitch?