Why Canon made 1Dx best specification ... II

Started May 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 24,062
Like?
People don't need a TV at all.
In reply to qianp2k, May 25, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

Similarly not everyone needs a 120" TV, or even a 60" TV. To many a 40" or even a 32" TV is big enough.

What will look better, a 1080p HDTV or a 720p HDTV?

Oh yeah deepens on your viewing distance. A 40" TV could have higher resolution than a sloppy 50" TV. Sure I know you'd ask question why not down to 1mp? That's similar as why you cannot have a 1" TV? The issue is that can you view 1mp photo or watch on 1" TV? So everything is relative.

What are you talking about?  A 1200x800 photo on a computer monitor is 1 MP.  1920 x 1080 is 2 MP.  And?

For me, 20x30" prints or max 30" monitor is only I needed on my needs at least in foreseen future.

No one is trying to tell you want your needs are, or trying to tell you what your standards should be.

Therefore I'd only need a 46mp camera in future not for 40x60" print or on 60" monitor but view on future 30" 4K/8K ultra HD monitor or print to 20x30" ultra HD prints when they become affordable.

Well, 4K video is 8 MP, and 8K video is 33 MP.  Either way, the more pixels that the photo is captured with, the more resolution that is going to remain when downsampled to the final display size.

For example, 36 MP downsampled to 8 MP will result in a photo with higher IQ than if it were captured at 8 MP.  How much sharper?  Don't know.  Does it matter?  Would depend on a number of factors, I would imagine.

I predict I will have such ultra HD monitor first than ultra HD printer. Monitor or digital display technology will move way ahead of old print technology years down to the road.

The bottom line is that more pixels result in more captured detail, all else equal.  However, every quadrupling of pixels does not result in a doubling of linear detail.  That is, if 12 MP resolved 2000 lw/ph, 48 MP will not resolve 4000 lw/ph, all else equal.

Let's say that 12 MP to 48 MP takes the resolution from 2000 lw/ph for a particular scene and setting to 3000 lw/ph -- a 50% increase.  If we now quadruple the pixel count again to 192 MP, we won't see another 50% increase in linear resolution.  Maybe 25%.  If we quadruple again...

The point is, more pixels give more resolution, all else equal.  How much resolution does a person "need" and whether or not it is worth the operational downsides is another matter all together.

In my opinion, for the vast majority, we passed the point of "good enough" long ago, and many of those giving up FF for smaller format systems, like mFT, seem to agree.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
100New
fateNew
TrueNew
ThnxNew
OT:New
alsoNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow