Hi there,
I have seen two seemingly authoritative camera websites allude to the fact that some of the latest DSLRs with very small individual pixel sizes need to be shot at higher shutter speeds than those cameras which have bigger individual pixels. This is because the small pixel sensors are more sensitive to recording camera shake. I have also asked a techie friend of mine who confirmed this with a formula, which I don't have handy and I didn't follow it:). However, I have also had several other photographers question this and express their disbelief.
After doing lots of shooting with Canon's 7D it seemed to me that whenever I was handholding anything from 300mm upwards I had a better success rate with much faster shutter speeds that what I was used to using with 30Ds and 40Ds on the same lenses.
Thanks for reading, I would just like to hear some expert opinions on the topic.
Grant
Grant, you are right....better to have higher SS with smaller pixels. Read Roger's comments on the following thread. He makes excellent points in there. as usual.
From what I have read the problem occurs because with smaller pixel sizes you will be more vulnerable to 'pixel bleed'. I read a Canon white paper some time ago which basically said that with more pixels on the same size sensor you need more support (or faster shutter speed I guess) especially for long lenses.
Smaller pixels have more resolution, and so more capability to resolve any flaws in image capture. If you are not cropping the image more with the higher pixel count camera, however, it will not be "more susceptible" to motion blur. The motion blur is a property of the image presented to the sensor; it does not become stronger just because you recorded the image more accurately. Note also that with the greater image information provided by the extra pixels, you stand a better chance of being able to mitigate the blur using eg the motion deblur in Smart Sharpen or in the Focus Magic plugin in Photoshop.