>>4118985>Different gen camerasNo, different gen sensors, sensors aren't cameras, We're talking about sensors. If you take one of Sony's old gen sensor crop cameras, like the nex 5, and compare it to an a6400, there's about a 1.5 stop difference in noise performance and DR.
>You're both wasting your time because you have the same opinion as me???
It's the other guy that's saying there's a relevant difference from Pentax FF Vs Sony FF, not me. Silly Billy.
>1 ev is irrelevantThen explain why FF gets noticeably better low light results than crop on predominantly iso invariant sensors?
And explain pic related, showing that shadow recovery is markedly better on FF compared to crop when dealing with iso past the dual gain point?
>Any time you're not, you're not maximising DRThat depends, do I want to maximise my DR across the frame or just for my subject, you need to spend more time taking photos and less time sniffing graphs. The important thing to do is to apply the science to your creative process.
>You don't know there's different sources of noiseIncorrect, that was implied by me talking about the noise floor and the obvious increase in noise as you increase iso. The problem is you only know sound bites like e-noise and shot noise, which you regurgitate ignorantly without knowing what they actually are.
Dummy.
>>4118987The RP is clearly the worst here and slightly darker, lmao. you're blind.
>>4118989> the camera that measured worse for DR at iso 100 has worse shadow recoveryFunny that isn't it bud.
