4 ms·
Assuming equal resolution (i.e. not equal pixel size), the nice thing about moving to medium format sensors from full frame is that it relaxes the tolerances re
by la_barba 7y ago
Assuming equal resolution (i.e. not equal pixel size), the nice thing about moving to medium format sensors from full frame is that it relaxes the tolerances required to create high quality lenses as far as optical quality is concerned. But OTOH, you have to deal with a larger mass of glass. On the sensor side, the yield on the wafer is probably going to be very low when you have to create such large sensors without a single hot pixel. Then there's the total light gathered, which is always going to favour larger sensors, as long as you can get your exit pupil to be large enough. Its going to be interesting to see how this plays out over the next decade.
- jws 7y agoWhat test would you run to see if your camera's sensor had a hot pixel which was replaced in processing by neighboring pixels?
- la_barba 7y agoWell, for one, neighboring pixels are already being used during demosaicing. But I understand your question. For an end-user to detect such overt manipulation, you'd probably need to take successive frames with the lens cap on, and observe how the RAW sensor values change over time and find patterns in the noise levels. A pixel thats duplicated will stand out. That's all I have :^) I'll have to think a bunch to understand it at a deeper level...