hallmark007 Posted at 4-20 23:01
I think if you see the end result and compare then you will see clearly the difference. I think its wrong to think or compare the 48 mp this camera produces to what we see in say MF or FF 48 mp.
Its not a bad thing, but its not 48mp as we know it and frankly I would say having used it with Air 2 it doesn't match up to the 16mp single shot if you compare. I do hope the raw image will be an improvement.

At lower ISO values 48MP is much better than 12MP.   In low light conditions 12MP might be preferable, but not always.

Spazoo Posted at 5-16 13:16
At lower ISO values 48MP is much better than 12MP.   In low light conditions 12MP might be preferable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNTaPt9TKFw

I think the test was really good , its very unusual for such a small sensor to produce so little noise at ISO 6400, but great but if its at the expense of a soft image then its just compromise. The fact they both have such different results at low and high ISO could be an advantage. But at 48mp QB it does not compare to a normal 48 MP camera. But I think in good light its pretty useful.

hallmark007 Posted at 5-16 13:22
I think the test was really good , its very unusual for such a small sensor to produce so little noise at ISO 6400, but great but if its at the expense of a soft image then its just compromise. The fact they both have such different results at low and high ISO could be an advantage. But at 48mp QB it does not compare to a normal 48 MP camera. But I think in good light its pretty useful.

I don't understand why some people want to say the sensor is not a 48MP sensor.  The sensor's native resolution is indeed 48MP.  It just has a filter with a different color layout.  I suppose it could be argued that QB layout has lower color resolution, but I think that is debatable.

One advantage of QB filter layout is in noise reduction.  Noise picked up by one photo site within a quad will (likely) not be picked up by the other 3 other three photo sites.  This is why 12MP images look so much better that 48MP images taken in high ISO / low light conditions.

Another advantage is increased dynamic range.  Pixels within a quad can have different exposure values.  It's similar to exposure bracketing with a single photo, since there are actually several 12MP exposures being captured simultaneously.

To your point, I agree that QB filter is not as good as having a larger sensor with larger photo sites that capture more light.  But when a larger sensor simply will not fit inside a phone, drone, etc, QB is a pretty good alternative.

Please forgive me if you already know all of this.  I don't want to come across as condescending.  I'm just trying to share my understanding.  I'm not an expert.

Spazoo Posted at 5-16 19:12
I don't understand why some people want to say the sensor is not a 48MP sensor.  The sensor's native resolution is indeed 48MP.  It just has a filter with a different color layout.  I suppose it could be argued that QB layout has lower color resolution, but I think that is debatable.

One advantage of QB filter layout is in noise reduction.  Noise picked up by one photo site within a quad will (likely) not be picked up by the other 3 other three photo sites.  This is why 12MP images look so much better that 48MP images taken in high ISO / low light conditions.

I fully understand what QB is and how it works and the results from it. It also has its limitations and shouldn’t be compared to larger sensor cameras. But its advertised like this. I shoot with a GFX 50s11its medium format at 51 mp, its quality and use are vastly different than what we see at 48mp on a small sensor, but I know this and will not think that they will ever compare either in quality or detail, but many do believe that because they both have similar MP that results will be similar. So strictly speaking and comparing with small sensor you can say yes it has 48mp but in the normal camera world it does not compare with what we traditionally know as 48 MP.

hallmark007 Posted at 5-16 23:07
I fully understand what QB is and how it works and the results from it. It also has its limitations and shouldn’t be compared to larger sensor cameras. But its advertised like this. I shoot with a GFX 50s11its medium format at 51 mp, its quality and use are vastly different than what we see at 48mp on a small sensor, but I know this and will not think that they will ever compare either in quality or detail, but many do believe that because they both have similar MP that results will be similar. So strictly speaking and comparing with small sensor you can say yes it has 48mp but in the normal camera world it does not compare with what we traditionally know as 48 MP.

I've seen plenty of Mini 3 advertising but no claims or comparisons to FF or MF cameras.

Spazoo Posted at 5-17 23:16
I've seen plenty of Mini 3 advertising but no claims or comparisons to FF or MF cameras.

I do realize that, but thats ok if everyone is as familiar with what a QB sensors is and how it works . But many are beginners casual users etc and we never say “ this is a 48mp photo shot on a tiny sensor” or do we say this is a 50mp photo shot on a MF camera. So there is no real distinction between them in name , except for the difference in quality . Don’t get me wrong 48mp on this camera has its advantages and its better having it than not.

............