It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
But the proof is in the normalized data. If one sensor indeed has better efficiency, let's say a sensor made five years in the future, it should show up as an improvement in the normalized graph regardless the actual native MP.
It's not comparing apples to oranges. Try upsampling a 16mp file to 36 sometime. It will look terrible. If you want the picture small, they will be equivalent. If you want the picture large, the megapixels will win.
TTJ, I understand not everyone has a scientific background. However, the problem I see is that you talk about the things you don't know as if you know everything. What you are doing is called pick and choose, hand waving arguments. Your arguments about price/build/AF have all been proven false, so you are hanging last hope on sensor advantage through all those subjective arguments.
Nikon must have some criteria for acceptable IQ and they label their ISO settings with ISO numbers for the range they feel is acceptable.
That means when the "Normalization" happens, COLOR IS ADDED = IMAGE IS CHANGED = LOSS OF ORIGINAL IMAGE as colors (which result in details) are replaced. THAT IS NOT "NORMALIZING" DATA that is changing it. ...What is happening is that the computer knows cobalt blue or fire engine red, surrounded by black should probably be black, so the color is replaced or that color is removed when downsizing. That is great, until it happens on the defining edge of details.
@TTJ, let's correct some of the facts you presented.Price. Df $2750. D610 $2000 (not $2500 as you mentioned).Build quality. I don't think Df is full Magnesium as D4/D800. It's comparable to D600 instead.Sensor. Nikon's 16, 24, 36MP are a wash in low light noise. If anything, D600/D800's images down sampled to 16MP may have less noise. I believe yourself boasted before how impressive D800's low light quality is. The 16MP choice in D4 is dictated by the fps requirement and processing power of EXPEED3.AF. I don't think the 39pt is known for low light accuracy. D4 is great as a low light camera because it has the 51pt AF.Now let's compare Df with D800. Price (wash). Sensor (wash). AF (D800 better). Build (D800 better).If we compare Df with D600. Sensor (wash). AF (wash). build (wash). Price (D610 better).So I think it's obvious how Df compares to the other Nikon FX cameras other than the retro look.Of course, if someone wants to buy a camera that makes one look good taking pictures, I don't think people care.
The ISO numeric range ends with 6400 for the D600/D800 sensor but ends at 12,800 for the D4 sensor giving the D4 sensor a one stop IQ advantage above the D600/D800 sensors.
If it is one stop better at ISO 12800 wouldn't you think logically the IQ will also be noticeably better at ISO 6400 and at ISO 3200?