8.3MP vs 6.3MP

[DavidNJ]

If the new sensor has that much more resolution, it should show up in detail.

However, since the sensor is the same size, and both have the same generation Super CCD technology, won't each pixel capture less light?

Won't some of the Fuji low light capability be lost?

[CMYanko]

This is a great question and I wont pretend to 'know' hte answer but... from what I can gleen here is my take.

The sensor has about 3 million photosites and given there octagonal shape and unique arrangement they are physically closer together than traditional CCD's. What Fuji does with this is to generate their pixels not only by combining the color info from surrounding sites but also interpolates to achieve an 'effective' image resolution higher than that of the sensor. They seem to do the best job at interpolation when compared to other cameras. So... my guess is they are using the same sensor with the same number of photosites and just interpolating more. It is interesting to note that the camera list a high ISO of 2000 and not 3200 and is probably a trade off required by this arrangement so I guess you are probably at least partialy correct.

[DavidNJ]

Where do you get 3 million photo sites? The sensor is 8.3 MP...but a Bayer filter so that 4.15 are green and 2.07 are each red and blue. The interpolation is for the missing 4.15MP green cells and 6.23MP missing each of red and blue cells. The 6.3 has 2MP total less.

Fuji does make more of the sensor photo receptive, capturing more light. And their sensor are among the largest (are the largest?) in a compact camera. The combination rivals the light capture of SLRs...at least 6MP SLRs. However, the smaller sensor generally isn't as wide as the SLRs nor does it allow as narrow a depth of field. And the Fuji gives up some F-stops my not having a sensor (like Pentax) or lens (like Canon and Panasonic) image stabilization system.

Oddly, while nearly all camcorders use 3 CCDs, only the Sigma Foveons seem to have it for still photography. However, while the last generations of DV SD cameras fully sampled their images, the new generations of HD camcorders significantly undersample; ending up with resolutions equivalent to a Bayer filter, at least for green.

But I digress...

[mattdm]

If the new sensor has that much more resolution, it should show up in detail.

However, since the sensor is the same size, and both have the same generation Super CCD technology, won't each pixel capture less light?

Won't some of the Fuji low light capability be lost?

But it is actually a larger sensor -- 1/1.6" instead of 1/1.7". That's only about 13% bigger, so that doesn't cover the 30% pixel increase. Perhaps a year's improvement in technology will cover some of the rest of the difference, but you're probably right, it's not going to be quite as magical.

[Duwenbasden]

Yep, when I first saw the F10/30, I am :eek:, and remained as my camera of choice. After having the F30, when I see the F50 I am guessing I'll be :o

>Oddly, while nearly all camcorders use 3 CCDs

Nope, 3CCDs and 1 big CCD are high ends, only Panasonic and JVC do 1/6" - 1/4" 3CCDs at the consumer level; Canon and Sony remains on 1/3"-1/2.7" CCD/CMOS.

Yep, the 3CCD HD cams undersamples, and they do heavy interpolations. However, the results I am seeing are promising.

[CMYanko]

Where do you get 3 million photo sites? The sensor is 8.3 MP...but a Bayer filter so that 4.15 are green and 2.07 are each red and blue. The interpolation is for the missing 4.15MP green cells and 6.23MP missing each of red and blue cells. The 6.3 has 2MP total less.
.

I don't think so but maybe you are right. I'm basing my position on articles like these:
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=effective_pixels
http://www.dcviews.com/tutors-t.htm?tt56613

and the fact that I cannot find a single technical spec on the sensor other than 'Effective Pixels' whcih does not equate to photosites on the SuperCCD's.

Since we are talking about the same generation chip at the same size I am assuming it has the same number of photosites and more aggressively interpolating but if you can info to the contrary I'd love to see it. It is also interesting, and seems like an engineering trade-off to me, that the same generation sensor can only go to ISO 2000.

Also, remember the S7000? Didn't it do some funky double resolution mode and another on that simulated High ISO's by using half resolution? In fact I think Fuji's frequently clarify's this these days by saying ISO 3200 at full resolution in all of their marketing literature.

Still, I chose larger photosites with better dynamic range and cleaner higher sensitivities over SD cards and gyro's since it is, in the end, a camera.