Why is the Nikon D3100 sensor slightly smaller than the D3000's?
Asked 2/9/2012
4 views
2 answers
0
The Nikon D3100 is a newer, more advanced model than the D3000, but its listed sensor dimensions are slightly smaller: 23.1 × 15.4 mm versus 23.6 × 15.8 mm. Why would Nikon do that, and does the smaller sensor cause any meaningful loss in image quality or field of view? Is there something about the D3100 that makes up for this difference?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
11
The basic answer to "why" is: because it doesn't matter in any practical way.
To put it into perspective, this is a 4.8% difference in sensor area. Or, linearly, it's 2.3% difference in crop factor.
This is not very much, and generally other measurement tolerances will be less precise. For example, if you measure the actual focal length of, say, a bunch of different models of 50mm lenses, they probably have a greater variation in field of view.
In general, newer sensor technology moves forward, and in this case there's no exception: the D3100's sensor is significantly better, particularly for controlling noise at high ISOs. From dpreview:
The D3100 offers little to complain about in terms of image quality, and its new 14Mp sensor delivers very good results. High ISO performance is substantially improved over the D3000 [...].
Basically, the small difference in sensor size is insignificant compared to the improvements in terms of image quality, and the small difference in framing is likewise a non-issue.
Originally by user1943. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1943
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The size difference is so small that it has essentially no practical effect. It’s about a 4.8% difference in sensor area, or roughly a 2.3% change linearly/crop-factor-wise, which is tiny in real-world shooting.
In practice, this won’t meaningfully change your photos. Variations in actual lens focal length or other tolerances can be larger than this difference.
What matters more is sensor design and image-processing technology, and the D3100’s newer sensor is generally considered better overall, especially for high-ISO noise performance. So even though the sensor is listed as slightly smaller, the camera can still produce better image quality.
As for why Nikon changed the dimensions, it’s likely related to engineering and manufacturing choices rather than any deliberate reduction in photographic capability. A slightly smaller sensor can be easier or cheaper to produce and integrate, but the key point is that the change is too minor to be a disadvantage in normal use.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why is APS-C usually called 1.5× crop when the math gives about 1.53×?
Does a Quad Bayer sensor change the sensor size used for georeferencing calculations?
Why is a Four Thirds sensor called 4/3 inch when its actual size is smaller?
Why doesn’t doubling focal length always exactly double image size at close focus?
Why does Lightroom change my custom crop ratio to 7x5?