It would have a similar impact on a crop sensor. The only difference I can think of is that with smaller pixel sizes, the crop sensor will have slightly fewer cases of aliasing. That is to say that it is more difficult to get the full benefit of a similar pixel count on a crop sensor, so there are more frequent times where there is enough blur (e.g. motion blur) to anti-alias the image.Originally Posted by shutterdown
It would improve resolution and contrast at the cost of aliasing. Personally, I'd rather have slightly less resolution and contrast than the increased aliasing artifacts.
There are a variety of glass and crystal layers over the sensor, including two anti-alias filters (vertical and horizontal), a red/IR filter, and an IR filter. If all of those were removed (such as for astrophotography or daytime IR photography), then the sensor would need a cover glass to be installed to make it safe for dust cleaning.
Reply With Quote