There.
It is like coming to a Liverpool practice session and shout that you are glad you are not Liverpool fan.
Replace Liverpool with your favorite soccer or other sport team.
(PS: I am not a fan of soccer, or any competitive sports, Liverpool just come into my mind)
:devil:
I hope those are not the topic. And apology for reacting to it, I am still not an angel.
Back to the actual topic of sensor size.
Noise amount is not just based on sensor size.
First, underexposure is the main reason why there are noise, and noise occurs there.
Second, the ISO setting (auto is the worst)
Third, the type of sensor also contributes to noise characteristics.
Fourth, the image processor capability of cleaning the noise contributes to the reduction - to this, the built in noise reduction algorithm in the image processor plus its input values (eg: strenght, size of brush etc - talking in photoshop lingo) plays a part, and the manufacturer's willingness of giving some control to these - no noise reduction, medium strength noise reduction, strong noise reduction etc menu options.
Finally, is noise really that bad? Every attempt to reduce noise (an image artefact) will cause loss of details because the algorithm will average out the information to "remove the noise". That averaging will affect those that is not noise as well. Depending on the strength, you may or may not notice the loss of details.
To me, noise reduction is best done at PP. Not in camera.
Doing it myself, I can have all the choice of noise reduction software available and have more control.
So how much percentage does sensor size affect this final outcome.. not a lot!
So why thinking so much about it? :dunno:
