>>3861778>>Does a larger sensor collect more photons for the same shutter and relative aperture values?>Yes. Does it collect more photons per pixel? No.Do you print and hang individual pixels on your wall?
>Why? Because every signal at the pixel level goes through a conversion path from photon to electron to digital image data, through multiple steps that introduce multiple types of noise. And things don't scale perfectly linearly (nothing does in the real world), so NO, you will NOT get the same noise from averaging pixels as you'd get from single larger pixels.Sometimes you will get less noise. Depends on the specific sensor and pixel circuitry. But more to the point, except at extreme ISOs you will get noise that is visibly similar because photon shot noise swamps read noise outside of extreme circumstances. With only 100 photons collected at a pixel 10 will be PSN and maybe 1 will be read noise.
>The science proves so, and the real world example confirm it (A7RIII vs A7RIV).A7RIII and A7RIV have virtually the same noise until ISO 51,200, pic related. (The red channel is still a little bit worse at 25,600 because red is usually the weakest response point, so it's starting to pass the point where read noise is large enough, relative to S and PSN, to be relevant.)
>>photon shot noise>Holy shit you know fuckall.>Photon shot noise is the most irrelevant type of noise you could think of and is a universal noise floor for anything to do with light, it's stupid to consider at all.LMFAO and you have the arrogance, the audacity, to tell other people they know fuck all? Read and fucking learn...
https://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/#SNRhttps://www.dpreview.com/articles/8189925268/what-s-that-noise-shedding-some-light-on-the-sources-of-noise 