Sensor quality isn’t defined by apeture so no. The 1" sensor has less surface area “measuring light” than the APS-C. So it will generally perform less, but there are also so many other variables so it’s complex.
That being said, getting lots of light to it with the large apeture is great and helps it do better in low light. Although apeture equivalency is talking about depth of field not brightness of the light coming through to expose the sensor. But the larger apeture will allow you to use a smaller ISO which might help that low light IQ gap with the APS-C.
Wait, disregarding light transmission losses, if depth of field is the same, that means the same cone of light is focused on the same % area of the sensor, therefore the same total amount of light is gathered. BUT in terms of sensor area sensitive to light, a bigger sensor will generally have less relative space taken up by supporting circuitry and therfore make a better use of that available light(assuming same resolution)
Sensor quality isn’t defined by apeture so no. The 1" sensor has less surface area “measuring light” than the APS-C. So it will generally perform less, but there are also so many other variables so it’s complex.
That being said, getting lots of light to it with the large apeture is great and helps it do better in low light. Although apeture equivalency is talking about depth of field not brightness of the light coming through to expose the sensor. But the larger apeture will allow you to use a smaller ISO which might help that low light IQ gap with the APS-C.
Wait, disregarding light transmission losses, if depth of field is the same, that means the same cone of light is focused on the same % area of the sensor, therefore the same total amount of light is gathered. BUT in terms of sensor area sensitive to light, a bigger sensor will generally have less relative space taken up by supporting circuitry and therfore make a better use of that available light(assuming same resolution)