Mount Ruapehu
Rob's  Photography  New  Zealand

Home   Most Popular   Contact   Technical Articles   Image Index

 

 

 

 Analysis  of  the  “Pixel  Density  Advantage” 

 

Sony  SLT-A77   / A77II  /  A65 

 

compared  with  the  Sony  A99 / Sony A7 / A7II

 

 

 

Summary of approximate mathematical relationships between image size, pixel density, and pixel size

 

 

This page compares the 24.3 megapixel APS-C Sony A77 / A77II / A65 with the 24.3 megapixel full frame Sony A99 / Sony A7.

 

However, click  here  if you would like to to see a comparison of the pixel size (pixel pitch, pixel area), pixel density, reach etc. of the 24.3 megapixel APS-C Sony A77 / A77II / A65 with the 12.2 megapixel full frame mirrorless  Sony A7S.  

 

This summary should be read in conjunction with the full explanatory article that you can see  here. Note that the analysis on this page does not include a discussion of the various complex issues that can arise in practice when estimating pixel density and the pixel pitch or area of individual pixels. It is recommended that you study a detailed technical article if you would like to become familiar with these issues. For example, you may find this  DPR forum discussion  about pixel density and pixel size to be helpful. Therefore, the calculations set out below are presented for the purpose of calculating only a very approximate measurement of pixel density, pixel pitch, and the area of one pixel, which can be used for comparing the approximate mathematical relationships between image size and the pixel density and pixel size of different cameras.

 

This summary provides an example of how to apply the template that is published  here. In this theoretical template, the reconciliations between the percentages shown for pixel density and pixel size, work out exactly, only because the number of megapixels on the sensor is exactly the same as the image width in pixels, multiplied by the image height in pixels.  In addition, the image width divided by the image height, gives the same answer as the sensor width divided by the sensor height. In the theoretical template, the approximate area calculation for the size of one pixel is exactly equal to the pixel pitch squared. In addition, the approximate area calculation for the pixel density is exactly equal to the linear pixel density squared.

 

However, in the practical example that follows, the arithmetical reconciliations demonstrated in the template do not work out exactly because of roundings in the specifications used, and also because of the way the effective number of pixels of the cameras is calculated (that is, the image width multiplied by the image height, does not exactly equal the effective number of pixels published for the cameras). For example, the specifications for the Sony A99 state that it has 24.3 million effective pixels, and that the image size is 6000 pixels x 4000 pixels. But, when you multiply 6000 pixels x 4000 pixels, you obtain 24.0 million pixels, not 24.3 million pixels.

 

The  Sony A77II  was announced in May 2014 and is an upgrade of the Sony A77.

 

The full frame  Sony SLT-A99  was announced in September 2012. It has 24.3 megapixels and is the replacement for the 24.6 megapixel full frame Sony A900.

 

The full frame  Sony A7  was announced in October 2013. It has 24.3 megapixels and is a light weight, mirrorless camera.

 

The full frame Sony A7 II  was announced in November 2014 and it now features 5-axis sensor-shift image stabilization.

 

Note: The information below is not designed to provide information about the quality of images or the quality of the cameras, because these are separate issues.

 

This summary shows that, when compared with the Sony A99 / A7, the Sony SLT-A65 / A77 has an approximate linear pixel density that is about 52% greater than that of the A99 / A7. The approximate “area” relationships for image size, pixel density, and pixel size, are also presented below.

 

Note: If the (full frame) Sony A99 / A7 had the same pixel density as the (APS-C) Sony SLT-A65 / A77, it would have approximately 56 megapixels. In addition, if the Sony A65 / A77 had the same pixel density as the Sony A99 / A7, it would have about 10.4 megapixels.

 

 

Relevant  Specifications

 

Sony SLT-A77 / A77II / A65: Image dimensions: 6000 pixels x 4000 pixels  (approx. 24.3 million effective pixels); sensor size: approx. 23.5mm x 15.6mm

 

Sony A99 / A7 A7II: Image dimensions: 6000 pixels x 4000  pixels (approx. 24.3 million effective pixels); sensor size: approx. 35.8mm x 23.9mm

 

 

 

Crop  Factor

 

Approximately 1.5x  (35.8mm / 23.5mm).

 

 

 

Approximate  Linear  Relationships

 

 

Approximate pixel density  (in pixels per linear centimetre)

 

Pixel density in pixels per linear centimetre = image width in pixels  divided by  width of sensor in centimetres

 

A77   =    2553   (6000 / 2.35)

A99 =      1676   (6000 / 3.58)

 

Pixel Density Advantage:  A77  is approximately 52% greater than A99

 

 

Approximate pixel pitch  (in microns)

 

Refer to the reservations  here  about calculating the "true" width and area of an individual pixel.

 

Pixel pitch in microns  = width of sensor in millimetres  divided  by  image width in pixels  multiplied by 1000

 

A77   =   3.917    (23.5 / 6000  x 1000)

A99 =     5.967    (35.8 / 6000 x 1000)

 

Relationship: A99 is approximately 52% greater than A77

 

 

Crop an image from A99 to the same  field of view  as an image from A77

Gain in image width (in pixels) as a result of the above 52% pixel density advantage

 

Uncropped image width of A77 = 6000 pixels

 

Cropped image width of A99

to same field of view as A77      = approx. 3939 pixels  (6000 x 23.5 / 35.8)

 

Relationship: A77 is approximately 52% greater than A99.

 

 

Crop an image from A99 to the same  field of view  as an image from A77

Gain in comparable widths of print sizes as a result of the above 52% pixel density advantage

 

If the uncropped image of A77 (of 6000 pixels width) is printed at 200 pixels per inch (ppi), the width of the print is  30 inches  (6000 / 200).

 

If the cropped image of A99 (of 3939 pixels width) is printed at 200 ppi, the width of the print is about  19.7 inches  (3939 / 200).

 

Relationship: The net effect of the 52% “pixel density advantage” of A77, is to produce a print at 200 ppi, that is about 10.3 inches wider (or about 52% wider) than that produced with the same  field of view  from the cropped image of A99.

 

 

Crop an image from A99 to the same   field of view  as an image from A77, and compare the changed field of view of A99 with that of A77: Assume that a 300mm lens is on both cameras and that the field of view of an uncropped A99 image is 300mm

 

Field of view of A77 = focal length of lens  x  crop factor of A77 = approx. 457mm  (300mm x 35.8mm / 23.5mm)

 

Changed field of view of an A99 image when it is cropped to the same field of view as an A77 image

 

= uncropped image width of A99  /  cropped image width of A99  x  focal length of lens  =  approx. 457mm  (6000 / 3939  x  300mm)

 

Relationship: The fields of view of A77 and A99 are the same, that is, approx. 457mm.

 

Note: The image width of an A99 image, when it is cropped to the same field of view as an A77 image, is approx. 3939 pixels (6000 x 23.5 / 35.8). Click  here  to go to an article titled "Advantages and disadvantages of cropping images instead of using lenses with longer focal lengths". This article gives further details in support of the formulas used above.

 

 

Crop an image from A99 to the same  image width  as an image from A77, and compare the changed field of view of A99 with that of A77: Assume that a 300mm lens is on both cameras

 

Field of view of A77 is 300mm x crop factor = approx. 457mm  (300mm x 35.8mm / 23.5mm)

 

Field of view of an A99 image when it is cropped to the same image width as an A77 image

 

= uncropped image width of A99  /  cropped image width of A99  x  focal length of lens  =  300mm  (6000 / 6000 x 300mm)

 

Relationship: A77 is approximately 52% greater than A99.

 

Note: In this example, the uncropped image widths of A99 and A77 are the same, that is, 6000 pixels. Therefore, the full-sized A99 image does not actually need to be cropped because it is already the same width as the A77 image.

Click  here  to go to an article titled "Advantages and disadvantages of cropping images instead of using lenses with longer focal lengths". This article gives further details in support of the formulas used above.  Click  here  to see a forum discussion titled: "How do you calculate the reach advantage? Sony A900 vs Nikon D3S" Digital Photography Review, Sony SLR Talk Forum, April 2010.

 

Approximate  Area  Relationships

 

 

Approximate pixel density  (in megapixels per square centimetre)

 

Pixel density in megapixels per square centimetre = number of megapixels on the sensor  divided by  sensor area in square centimetres

 

A77   =   6.628    (24.3 / 3.666)

A99 =     2.840    (24.3 / 8.5562)

 

Relationship: A77 is approximately 133% greater than A99

 

 

Approximate pixel area  (approximate area of one pixel in square microns)

 

Refer to the reservations  here  about calculating the "true" width and area of an individual pixel.

 

Area of one pixel in square microns = area of sensor in square microns  divided by  the number of pixels on the sensor

 

A77   =   15.086    (366,600,000 / 24,300,000)

A99 =     35.211    (855,620,000 / 24,300,000)

 

Relationship: A99 is approximately 133% greater than A77

 

 

Crop an image from A99 to the same field of view as an image from A77

Gain in image area  (in megapixels)

 

Uncropped image area of A77 = approx.  24.3 megapixels  (6000 pixels x 4000 pixels)

 

Cropped image area of A99

to same field of view as A77   = approx.  10.34 megapixels  (3939 pixels x 2626 pixels)

 

Relationship: A77 is approximately 135% greater than A99

 

 

 

 

Click  here  to go to an index of further camera comparisons showing the mathematical relationships between image size, pixel size, pixel density, and reach etc.

 

Click  here  to go to the index of all the technical articles and blogs on this site.

 

 

 

Disclaimer and Limitation of Liability: The information supplied on this website is provided in good faith. However, this information is provided subject to the condition that neither Rob's Photography New Zealand, nor any person associated with Rob's Photography New Zealand, shall be liable for any errors or omissions in such information. In addition, neither Rob's Photography New Zealand, nor any person associated with Rob's Photography New Zealand, has any  responsibility in relation to any material you may obtain from any other website, even if you access it via a link from this web site. This website and all disputes or other matters arising out of it shall be governed by the laws of New Zealand and dealt with by a court of competent jurisdiction in Wellington, New Zealand. You specifically agree that if Rob's Photography New Zealand should prevail in any legal proceedings, you shall pay all of our costs.