Cameralabs D7100 review up: verdict...

Started Apr 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,446
Like?
On TV
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 21, 2013

Jared Huntr wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

twamers wrote:

Reilly

I've no issue with how good the D7100 is, I'm glad nikon have another winner on their hands seeing as I'm an investor in the brand - and like you I'm not buying one so I'm just curious.

What interests me is if you print A4, put in a frame behind glass and stick on a wall and view it from 10-15ft away.  Is the average person going to clearly see the difference from say a D7100 photo and say a D7000, D5200 photo?

Maybe not.  Like the vast majority here and in the picture taking population as a whole, I rarely print.  The impact of dynamic range limited 8X10 from 10 or 15 feet away is not worth the bother, imo, 16X20 not much better.  Two feet away, things get more interesting, and I have no doubt there would be a visible difference.  But I've always been a go big or go home kind of guy from the slideshow days.  Anyone here old enough to remember the Carousel projector showing the family slides on a wrinkly screen?  Well, we're way beyond that now.  A late model 55 or 60" LED or plasma flat panel outdoes the old tech by an order of magnitude.   But wait, there's more.  Coming soon to a desktop, laptop and living room wall, 4K video.  That's four times the pixels we're presently peeping.  The D7100 will show even better than it already does. A lot better than passing around a stack of 8X10s around the coffee table.

 

Most large screen TV's only have native pixel resolutions of 1920 x 1080 pixels to support 1080p. That is something like 2.1 Mp, a lot less resolution than a cheap desktop LCD monitor.

At the proper viewing distance, I can't say I've ever been disappointed with a 2.1 Mp image with a 52"-60" TV. Sit too close and you start to see the LCD pixels in the panel.

I think you need to re-evaluate your expectations with a dose of reality.

Jared, you're back in the tube monitor analogue days with that statement.  The 1080p LED TV's have exactly the same pixel count as a really good desktop monitor, and show every bit as much detail.  Pixels is pixels.  There's no magic pixy dust sprinkled in your 720p or less computer monitor that would make it superior to a 60" LED.  Quite the contrary, actually.  The fact that you don't know that tells me everything I need to know as your competence to judge image quality.  That's a dose of reality for you if you please.

Sorry, I'm not understanding what you think I don't get.

A 1080p TV with an LCD panel (LED simply designates the type of backlighting) has a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels. My cheap desktop monitor's native res. is 1920 x 1200. So what?

Throw large pixel images at both monitors and they are still going to be limited to showing only around 2Mp's worth of actual image detail. That's the key point I am making. My point wasn't to compare TV's with monitors.

My monitor also only shows 1920 x 1200 and was not cheap. Soon 4K TV's will be available and in the same price range as my monitor. Makes a real case for using a 60inch 3840×2160 TV vs a monitor. The difference can be stunning, as I've seen. Before the monitor always won....those days are coming to an end. When you said..."I can't say I've ever been disappointed with a 2.1 Mp image with a 52"-60" TV"...I can honestly say, I have now, when compared to 4K. Who'd a thought that just a half decade ago

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
D5KNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow