Image Sensor Sizes Compared: Understanding Camera Technology for Better Photos

Since 2016, the 1-inch type sensor size has become a sweet spot for photographers seeking portability in travel cameras without sacrificing image quality. While larger APS-C sensors often necessitate bulkier lenses with substantial optical zoom, they can sometimes struggle to maintain sharpness across the frame, especially at the edges. Micro Four Thirds systems, with sensors smaller than APS-C, have faced challenges in delivering the same level of sharpness and zoom range in a compact form factor. Full-frame sensors, while offering superior image quality, tend to limit zoom capabilities or add significant weight and size, making them less ideal for travel. Sensors smaller than 1-inch, although capable of supporting superzoom ranges, often compromise image quality, particularly in low-light conditions. Smartphones, leveraging computational photography, attempt to overcome the limitations of their tiny sensors, offering instantly shareable images, but they can falter in dim lighting or when significant telephoto reach is required.

The somewhat confusing “inch” sizing system for camera sensors, often referred to as archaic inch-sizing, is explained in the illustration and table provided below, clarifying the relative sensor sizes and their dimensions in millimeters. These legacy size designations, such as 1/2.5″ Type, are remnants from the era of Vidicon video camera tubes, popular from the 1950s to the 1980s.

Generally, in any given year with comparable technology, a camera equipped with a physically larger sensor area tends to produce superior image quality by capturing more light. However, this advantage comes with the trade-off of larger and heavier lenses. Recent advancements in digital sensor technology have led to more compact cameras and increased optical zoom ranges while maintaining impressive image quality. Modern smartphone cameras are now capable of producing prints suitable for up to 18 inches and capturing images worthy of publication. Ultimately, a compelling photograph can be created with any capable camera in the hands of a skilled or fortunate photographer. For nature and travel photography publishing, a mid-sized camera with a 1-inch type sensor is often preferred, offering an optimal balance of optical zoom range, good low-light performance, and the ability to produce sharp prints.

Below is a comparison of image sensor sizes for digital cameras:

The Optimal Size for Travel Cameras: 1-inch Type Sensor

Regular upgrades of digital cameras every few years are common practice as newer models consistently outperform their predecessors. Since 2016, 1-inch type sensors have become the optimal choice for serious travel cameras, providing excellent dynamic range (from bright highlights to deep shadows) and exceptionally fast autofocus capabilities in relatively compact bodies.

In 2018, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 VI (available at Amazon) emerged as a top-tier, pocketable zoom camera, weighing just 11 ounces and offering an 8x zoom lens (24–200mm equivalent, f/2.8-4.5). This model became a favorite backpacking camera. The subsequent Sony RX100 VII (2019) further enhanced autofocus speed. These cameras, along with the Panasonic ZS100 released in 2016, demonstrated that publishable image quality could be achieved with pocket-sized cameras boasting versatile 8x to 10x zoom lenses. Capturing 20 megapixels with high quality, both the Panasonic ZS100 and the superior Sony RX100 version VI rivaled the daylight image quality of camera systems used by some photographers for decades prior to 2012, even surpassing cameras up to four times heavier, with up to 11x zoom range, up to 12 megapixels, and shot at base ISO 100.

Since 2018, the Sony RX10 IV (price at Amazon) has been a primary camera choice, weighing 37 ounces and featuring a 25x zoom lens. This model is considered a highly versatile mid-size camera suitable for photographers on the move.

APS-C Sensor Size

While all-in-one solutions with 1-inch sensors offer travel convenience, cameras with larger APS-C sensors, such as the Sony A6300, provide the flexibility of interchangeable lenses and improved low-light performance at higher ISO sensitivities like 3200 and above.

For photographers who prefer a more traditional DSLR-style camera experience, APS-C sensor cameras offer the advantages of a legacy optical viewfinder, enhanced night photography capabilities, and a wide selection of lenses.

Micro Four Thirds Cameras

Panasonic and OM SYSTEM (formerly Olympus) produce excellent Micro Four Thirds sensor systems. However, these systems have struggled to keep pace with competing travel cameras from 2012 to 2023.

Despite the solid build quality of recent Micro Four Thirds cameras, including those from Olympus (rebranded as OM System in 2022), their upgrades, such as the sensor resolution increase from 16 to 20 megapixels, have been somewhat delayed compared to competitors. The Sony A6xxx series, for example, is nearly as compact yet incorporates a physically larger 24MP APS-C sensor, capturing more light. Pricing can also be comparable between APS-C and Micro Four Thirds systems, especially when considering slightly older or used equipment. For zoom ranges exceeding 8x, the 1-inch sensor Sony RX10M4 and RX10M3 cameras outperform competitors in their weight class (37 ounces), offering surprisingly sharp 25x zoom systems.

The 16-megapixel sensors and performance of early Micro Four Thirds models like the Olympus M1 (Mark I, 2013) and M10 (I-III) lagged behind the 24-megapixel APS-C systems used from 2012-2016. Consider the Panasonic GX80 (2016) as an example of a Micro Four Thirds system with interchangeable lenses. In the same weight and price category as the GX80, the Sony A6400 or A6300 cameras offer significant advantages: a 45% larger light-gathering sensor (APS-C), generally superior image quality (24MP vs. 16MP), a better viewfinder, excellent hybrid autofocus, and longer battery life (400 vs. 290 shots per charge), all in a similar weight.

Field tests in 2016 led to a shift from APS-C to the 20MP 1-inch sensor Sony RX10M3, which more than doubled the optical zoom to 25x while maintaining or improving overall image quality. The upgrade to the Sony RX10M4 in 2018 further enhanced the appeal with faster autofocus. This sharp 24-600mm f/2.4-4 zoom camera system, weighing only 37 ounces, has revolutionized hiking and general travel photography. However, the Sony RX10M4, while incredibly versatile, may not be the optimal choice for specialized photography like night or wedding photography, where extreme zoom ranges are less critical.

Achieving a comparable 25x zoom range with Micro Four Thirds lenses would necessitate a heavier and more expensive setup, arguably without a proportional increase in image quality. Consider the following high-quality, but heavier, system: a 69+ ounce Micro Four Thirds system with two lenses covering a 24-800mm equivalent zoom range:

• Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 Power OIS lens (2016, 35 oz) on a Panasonic DMC-GX9 mirrorless camera (2018, 14 oz body).
• Additional lenses to cover the 24-200mm equivalent range (20+ ounces).

This system totals 69 ounces for a 24-800mm equivalent range, offering a 33x zoom range using two lenses. While perhaps too heavy for hiking, this setup might appeal to photographers prioritizing incremental image quality gains over weight and convenience.

Full-Frame Sensor Cameras

Stepping up to full-frame sensor cameras from APS-C involves higher costs and increased bulk. Full-frame is typically only necessary for photographers who frequently shoot in low light above ISO 6400, specialize in night photography, or require prints larger than 2-3 feet viewed at close distances. It’s important to maintain perspective: even small 3-megapixel cameras can produce effective billboard-sized prints.

Comparing Camera Sensor Sizes and Performance

• For updated camera recommendations, refer to articles such as “BEST TRAVEL CAMERAS reviewed”.
• Side-by-side comparisons under various real-world conditions are invaluable for assessing camera performance.
• Evaluate image quality and resolution at 100% pixel enlargement on reputable websites like dpreview.com and imaging-resource.com.
• Conduct personal telephoto zoom comparisons, as online resources may be limited.

Advances from 2014-2016 positioned 1-inch type and APS-C sensors as the sweet spot for serious travel cameras. From 2016-2022, 1-inch sensor cameras surpassed APS-C models in portability while still delivering publishable image quality across a broader zoom range.

More affordable compact cameras often utilize smaller, noisier sensors like 1/2.3″ Type, which enable superzoom lenses but are less effective in dim light or for large prints.

Smartphones employ even smaller sensors, such as 1/3.0″ Type. However, advancements in smartphone cameras have led to impressive image quality, enabling citizen journalists to capture newsworthy photos suitable for rapid sharing and publication. Modern smartphones from Google Pixel, Samsung Galaxy, and Apple iPhone, particularly the Pro models, feature excellent cameras. Even older smartphones with 1/2.6″ sensors can capture 16-megapixel images capable of producing sharp 18-inch prints.

Smartphone photography tips: For better subject isolation at a distance, consider models with enhanced telephoto capabilities, such as the latest iPhone Pro Max or Samsung Galaxy Ultra models, which feature impressive 10x optical zoom. Avoid digital zoom, which degrades image quality; instead, physically move closer or crop during editing.

Consider the progression in image quality from early DSLRs to 2014 smartphone cameras to understand how far technology has advanced. While compelling images can be captured regardless of camera size, smaller sensor cameras have inherent limitations compared to larger sensor cameras in print enlargement, autofocus speed, and low-light performance. Ultimately, the best travel camera is the one you are willing to carry and use.

Detailed Sensor Size Information

The fractional-inch sensor sizing labels, like 1/2.5-inch Type and 1/1.7″ Type, are derived from outdated Vidicon video camera tubes. When encountering these labels, prioritize checking the actual sensor dimensions (length and width in millimeters) in the camera specifications.

Camera Sensor Size Comparison Table

(Rotate your mobile device for full table width)

* Crop Factor: The “full frame 35mm” sensor (approximately 36 x 24 mm) serves as a standard reference, with a crop factor of 1.0. The term “crop factor” originated from 35mm film photographers seeking to understand how their full-frame lenses’ angle of view would change when used on DSLRs with smaller sensors like APS-C.

Initially, there were concerns about image quality loss when using digital sensors smaller than 35mm film. However, improvements in APS-C sensors by 2009 surpassed the quality achievable with scanned 35mm film for many publishing needs.

The “Full frame sensor area is x times bigger” metric in the table offers a useful comparison point. A 1/2.5-inch type sensor has a light-gathering area approximately 35 times smaller than a full-frame sensor. An APS-C sensor gathers about 15 times more light than a 1/2.5” Type sensor and 2.4 times less than full frame. A “stop” in photography represents a doubling or halving of light. Doubling sensor area theoretically increases light gathering by one stop, though lens design also plays a role.

Lens Quality and Diameter

Lens quality and diameter are crucial factors in image quality, often rivaling the importance of sensor size. Prime lenses typically offer the sharpest results for large prints, but zoom lenses are more versatile, especially for travel photography.

Smaller Sensors Can Excel with Advanced Design and Fast Lenses

In side-by-side tests, the 25x zoom lens of the Sony RX10 III, even with its 1-inch type sensor, outperformed the 11x zoom lens on the APS-C Sony A6300 at telephoto ranges beyond 90mm equivalent, even at ISO 6400. This is attributed to the RX10’s faster f/2.4-4 lens and backside illumination (BSI) sensor technology, which compensates for the smaller sensor size compared to the APS-C sensor in the A6300 (which lacked BSI in 2016). The larger 72mm filter size of the RX10 III lens, compared to the 67mm size of the SEL18200 lens on the A6300, also contributes to improved light gathering, particularly beneficial in dim conditions.

Larger Lens Diameters Enhance Low Light Performance

Tests comparing the Sony SEL1670Z 3x zoom f/4 lens on the A6300 with the Sony RX10 III f/2.4-4 showed that while the SEL1670Z offered only about 5% better sharpness in bright light within the wider half of its zoom range, it provided no advantage in dim light. The RX10’s better low-light performance is likely due to its BSI sensor and larger lens diameter, allowing it to gather more light (72mm vs. 55mm filter size).

Full-Frame Lenses on APS-C May Not Always Improve Quality

While using the “sweet spot” of a full-frame lens on an APS-C sensor might theoretically improve sharpness, real-world results vary, especially with older film-optimized lenses. Lenses specifically designed for APS-C sensors can match or exceed the quality of full-frame lenses on the same sensor while often being lighter and more compact.

Modern full-frame lenses designed for digital sensors, employing image-space telecentric designs, may perform better on digital sensors than older film lenses. Digital sensors capture light most efficiently when it strikes squarely, unlike film, which can record light at more oblique angles. Lenses optimized for digital sensors ensure light rays are more parallel to the sensor, improving light-gathering efficiency and reducing vignetting.

Practical Testing Outweighs Theoretical Assumptions

Comparing lenses in real-world scenarios is more effective than relying solely on theory. For example, comparing the full-frame Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS lens and the APS-C Sony E 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS lens reveals that, despite being optimized for digital, the APS-C lens is lighter and performs equally to or better than the full-frame lens in terms of sharpness, distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberration.

The Importance of Raw Format

Cameras rarely capture images exactly as perceived by the human eye. Situations with overly bright skies or dark foregrounds can lead to loss of detail, especially in JPEG files. While adjusting exposure can help, it often isn’t sufficient to capture the full dynamic range.

Raw file format offers significantly greater flexibility for tonal editing, providing 16 times more latitude than JPEGs. Utilizing your camera’s raw format is highly recommended (though less critical in smartphones where HDR-generated JPEGs are common). Raw editing can recover highlight and shadow detail that would be lost in JPEGs.

Cameras are not intelligent enough to automatically determine correct exposure for all tones. They often underexpose scenes with predominantly white tones and overexpose scenes with predominantly black tones. To achieve accurate exposure, lock exposure on a midtone in similar lighting conditions to your subject.

For maximum editing flexibility, shoot in raw format. While automatic JPEG modes improve each year, raw format offers superior recovery for poorly exposed images. Aim to expose to the right (ETTR) on the histogram without clipping highlights to maximize signal-to-noise ratio and use base ISO settings (ISO 100 or 200). Raw format allows for easy white balance adjustments and avoids color distortion often encountered when editing JPEGs. 12-bit raw format offers 16 times the tonal editing headroom and color accuracy compared to JPEG.

Larger sensors generally capture a wider dynamic range and produce less noise than smaller sensors. Sony’s 1-inch type backside illumination (BSI) sensors offer sufficient dynamic range for many professional publishing needs.

HDR (High Dynamic Range) imaging can significantly extend dynamic range by combining multiple exposures. However, for cameras with 1-inch type BSI sensors or larger, HDR is often unnecessary due to the inherent dynamic range of raw files.

To maximize dynamic range when shooting raw, use base ISO settings to minimize noise. However, modern full-frame sensors at high ISOs (6400+) can achieve remarkably low noise, opening possibilities for low-light action photography.

For night and dim indoor photography without flash, full-frame sensors excel at gathering light with minimal noise. Low-noise night photography is best achieved on a tripod at slow shutter speeds in raw format at lower ISOs (100-800, or up to 1600-3200 on newer sensors). Top smartphones have also made impressive strides in automatic night modes.

Sensor Size and Depth of Field

For a given field of view, larger sensors enable shallower depth of field, a desirable effect in filmmaking and portrait photography for blurring backgrounds. Smaller sensors, like those in the Sony RX10 III and RX100 III, are advantageous for close-focus (macro) shots with greater depth of field, especially at wider angles and lower ISOs. However, the macro advantages of smaller sensors can diminish in dim light or at higher ISOs.

Landscape photographers often prefer deep depth of field, achievable with both sensor types. Optimal sharpness is typically found by stopping down the aperture slightly from its widest setting (e.g., f/4 to f/5.6 on 1-inch type sensors, f/5.6 to f/8 on APS-C or full-frame). Stopping down further increases depth of field but can introduce diffraction, softening detail, particularly at apertures like f/11-f/16 on 1-inch sensors or f/22 on APS-C. Avoid excessively small apertures unless sharpness is not a priority.

Full-Frame Sensor Comparison: Low-Light Sony A7S vs. High-Resolution A7R

To compare image quality across cameras, normalize pixel levels and examine fine detail as if printed at equal sizes after side-by-side field testing with comparable settings. Consider the full-frame Sony Alpha A7S (12MP, optimized for high ISO) and Sony Alpha A7R (36MP, optimized for high resolution).

Despite having larger photosites optimized for low light, the 36MP Sony Alpha A7R outperforms the 12MP A7S in dynamic range in normalized raw file comparisons at ISO 100-6400. The A7S only surpasses the A7R in overall image quality at ISO 12,800 and above, primarily in shadow and midtone areas in low light. The A7S is better suited for low-light videography, while the A7R is preferable for low-light landscape photography where high resolution and dynamic range are paramount.

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.