>>3766980>Completely unrelated thing
1. I never mentioned image quality, this simply has to do with the myth Anon keeps trying to perpetuate that different sensor sizes collect the same amount of light, they don’t, they collect different amount of light related to their size.
2. It has nothing to do with ND filters which reduce light intensity, larger or smaller sensor sizes do not reduce light intensity, just the surface area they can collect light with.
3. The same lens and f-stop in the same conditions has the same light intensity no matter what camera it’s on
4. Light intensity is luminous flux per square area. You can also express it as photons per square mm.
5. A larger sensor collects more photons in total, thus collects more light. Because total photons = photons per square mm x square mm of collection area. The same applies to individual pixels, larger pixels collect more light.
Practical example. If you have n OMD EM5 Mk III, it’s about 20mp and 17.3mm x 13mm, it has a sensor area of 225mm^2. If you have a Canon R6, it’s 36x24mm also about 20mp, the sensor is 864mm^2.
If you have two lenses with the same t-stop, so they have the same light transmission, in the same conditions, and they are projection 1 million photons per square mm per second, and you expose both for 1 second then you are getting; 1,000,000photons/mm^2 x 225mm^2 and left with 225 million photons, and for the R6 you’d have 864 million photons
864 million photons is a lot more than 225 million photons. This is at the same transmission stop and shutter speed. So you would use the same ISO. The pixels put out a larger signal as they collect more photons and thus require much less amplification (gain) to reach the specified ISOs, ISO is the abstract sensitivity, not the native sensitivity
This is the same way a larger sail gives more forward thrust than a smaller one. A wider bucket catching more rain than a small one. A larger solar panel producing more power than a smaller one