FOV Vs. Low Light Performance?

I have a 5MP (Axis P3367-VE) in an outside area that gets fairly dark at night. Right now I have the camera set at 50% of max FOV and 1/30s max shutter, and the images are "barely" usable* for facial capture. Unfortunately I don't have remote access and performing night-time tests are difficult. So, here's the question:

I only need to capture an area that's about 1/4 of the camera's maximum FOV. In terms of improving low light performance, is it better to keep the FOV as narrow as possible (greater pixel density, but less light enters the sensor) or as wide as possible (less pixel density, more light)? I couldn't find any reference to this in the IPVM testing.

Any help would be great. Thanks.

* barely usable meaning facial features are "distorted" due to camera operating at max gain; and lengthing the shutter time results in unacceptable motion blur

Login to read this IPVM discussion.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

******** *** ****** ** ******. ******* ***** ******* **** **** somewhat **** **** ******* ****** * ** *** **** ** that **** ** ******.

* ** *** ***** *** ******** *** **** **** *** issues **** '**** ***** ******** *** ******' ****** **** **** is **** ****** **** *** **** ** *** ******** ***.

***, *** ***** ****** ** ** ** ***********? *** ** the ********?

************* ** **** **** *** ******** ***** ***** ****** ** night, ** ** ** ***. *** **'* ** * ********** area **** ****** ******** ** **** ********... **, ********* * need ******* *** ***** ****** ** ******** ******** :-)

* *** *** ** ******** *** * *** *** * or * **** ***-***** *******, *** *'* ****** ** ***** this *** ********* *** **** *******...

****** *** ***** ***** ****** - **** ***********.

** ***** ** ********* *** ***** ***********, ** ** ****** to **** *** *** ** ****** ** ******** (******* ***** density, *** **** ***** ****** *** ******) ** ** **** as ******** (**** ***** *******, **** *****)?

*****, **** ** ** *********** ********.

** *****, ******* *** *** ** ****** ** ****, ** have *** *** *** ***** ***** ** **** *** ***. In *** **** **** ** **** **** * *** ** other ***** **** *** *********** ****, ***** ** *** ******. So **** ***** ******* ** *** ******, ******* ** *** increased ***** ******, *** ********** *** **** ****** ** ***** coming **** *** **** ** *** ********* ****.

** ** ***** ******* ***** ** ** ***** **** ****, and *** **** *** ****** *** ** ****** ******* *** the ****** ** *** ****** **** ** ***** **** ***, and **** ***, *** ***. **** ****** ******** *** ******* captured ** *** *****. *** ***** ** *** ******* ***** a ***** ********** **** *** ************, *'* *** **** ****'* the '***** ******'.

******************, *** ********* ** *** *** *** ****** ***** ****** are *** *** ******'* ****** ** ***** *****, * ***** shot *** **** * ****** ******* *******. *** ****** ** because ** *** *** **** *********** ****.

****, *****/***** ***** ** *** *** ****** *********** ** ****** charge, ******* ** *** ******** ***** **** *** ***** ******** it. *** **** ***** ***** **** *** *** *** ********** accumulated ***** *********, ******* ** ******* **** ***** ***** ******.

******** (**** ***** ** **** **** **** ******* *****), **** noise ** *** * ***** ********** ** *** ******* ******, and ** ***'* *******. *** **** ** ******* *** ***** conditions, *** ********** ** ***** ***** ** * ********** ***** and *** **** ****** *** '****' ******.

** ** ***** * ****** *** *** *** ******** ********* out *** *** ***** ** *** *** ***** *** *** sensors ******. ** * ***** ***** ***** ** * ** 1, ****** ** *****. **** * **** ***, **** * small **** ** *** ****** ** ******* *** ***** **** the ***. ********* * ***** ***** ***** ** * ** 1 ****** ** *****.

** **** *** ***** **** ********** *** **** ***** (** the ***) ** ****.

*** *** *** * ****** ** **** ****** **** *** different ***** ******* ** *** ** ***?