Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="J-see" data-source="post: 459443" data-attributes="member: 31330">That's true; it's cleaner. I never gave it much thought but when you start checking the SNR of all cams it is quite revealing. It's always said (by me included) that an FX is at least two or three stops better than the DX when it comes to low light performance but when I check the numbers, it's hardly more than a stop. At least in terms of the signal the sensor receives. The main difference between the cams does not seem to be the sensor but what is done afterwards. It also explains the difference between FX and DX quite simple: to get the same quality of signal with a DX, you need twice the light as an FX.</blockquote>