Does aperture size impact image resolution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter titaniumpen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Image Resolution
AI Thread Summary
A larger f-stop does not directly lead to higher image resolution; instead, it results in a smaller aperture, which can enhance resolution by reducing focus errors and aberrations. The relationship between aperture size and resolution is complex, as digital resolution is defined by the number of pixels on the sensor, while optical resolution is influenced by diffraction and lens quality. A smaller aperture can improve image quality by mitigating focus errors, but a larger aperture gathers more light and can produce better results under certain conditions. The discussion highlights that magnification and resolution are distinct concepts, complicating the relationship between aperture size and perceived image quality. Ultimately, the impact of aperture on resolution depends on various factors, including the specific limitations of the lens and the photographer's technique.
titaniumpen
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
This is a very simple question.

Does a larger f-stop lead to an image with a higher resolution?

The reason why I think so is that with a larger f-stop (f-stop=f/D), the focal length will be greater, and because the image height is proportional to the focal length when the object is at infinity, a greater focal length will lead to a larger image. A larger image on the sensor will give a result with higher resolution.

I'm surprised that I cannot google for a relationship between f-stop and image resolution. Did I make any error in my reasoning?

Edit: I just found this, and it seemed to confirm my conclusion.
http://www.marietta.edu/~mcshaffd/macro/terms.html
(See definition for exposure.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Changing f stop changes aperture, not focal length. And the larger the aperture, the higher the resolution.
 
Hmm... I'd argue that the resolution is uniquely defined by the number of CCD pixels. The actual image quality depends on a number of factors. If you're assuming the primary error is due to diffraction, then a larger aperture should give you a better image quality. If it's because the photographer sucks as focusing then you're better off with a smaller aperture.
 
Digital and optical resolution are such different things, it doesn't make much sense to mix them together in such a question. Similarly, magnification and resolution aren't the same thing either, so while increased magnification can provide increased digital resolution, it doesn't change optical resolution and the smaller field of view makes the results not directly comparable.
 
Higher f-stop=smaller aperture=increased resolution. Smaller f-stop=larger aperture=lower resolution. Note that DOF (depth of field) decreases with smaller f-stop/larger aperture.
 
turbo said:
Higher f-stop=smaller aperture=increased resolution. Smaller f-stop=larger aperture=lower resolution.

Seems to me that this assumes that the dominant problem with resolution is with focus errors, spherical aberration and chromatic aberration. A smaller aperture can mitigate those problems, making the lens act as a pinhole camera in the small aperture limit.

If the limit on resolution is due to diffraction or light gathering ability, a larger aperture will do better.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'A scenario of non-uniform circular motion'
(All the needed diagrams are posted below) My friend came up with the following scenario. Imagine a fixed point and a perfectly rigid rod of a certain length extending radially outwards from this fixed point(it is attached to the fixed point). To the free end of the fixed rod, an object is present and it is capable of changing it's speed(by thruster say or any convenient method. And ignore any resistance). It starts with a certain speed but say it's speed continuously increases as it goes...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Back
Top