Gi Lewis wrote:
I have a bit of banter with a guy who uses camera with a 230,000 pixel display and I have a 920,000 display.
He's always telling me how sharp his back looks. well my view to this (and im probably wrong) is because when we both zoomed in to near the same ratio of the same image, my back displays 3 times the amount of infomation than his so 'artefacts' shown in my display would not show as much in his display as its more compact thus looking technically sharper. Would this technically be true? oh and the MP is almost the same.
Oh and I realise 920,00 and 230,00 is not technically right either because of RGB but that's not the issue here.
Gi, I have one of each here, a 230K dot 2.7 inch LCD Pentax K200D and a 920K dot 3 inch LCD Pentax K-5. On these cameras, the newer 920K dot LCD looks sharper than the older lower resolution LCD for "fit to screen" size normal viewing and menu diving due to having twice the linear reso;ution. The higher resolution also means that I do not need to zoom the images as high in playback to get something close to a "100% crop" view in order to check sharpness of focus, not that it is impossible with the lower resolution screen, just not quite as easy.
However, the sharpness of "fit to screen" playback view also depends on the camera as to what resizing algorithm is used to scale the image down to the screen size and how it handles sharpening haloes; some cameras could conceivably look sharper than others even when both are using the same lower resolution of LCD display.
As the playback views on the back LCD screens in no way affect the usability of the cameras nor the quality of the images taken, this is not why I upgraded from the K200D to the K-5, although the human interface of the newer camera has been much improved partly due to the better display structure enabled by having four time the number of dots.