A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More on the Mirrorless Battles



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 16th 18, 04:29 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:

.... Round off isn't an issue here.


yes it is.


You'll have to explain pecisely how round off figures into this.


because mirrorless and slrs *combined* has under 1% share, and that was
two years ago. it's less now.

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/lat...t-reveals-deat
h-compact-camera/
łBut literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras sold in 2016 were built
into smartphones * only 0.8% were compacts, 0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2%
mirrorless.˛
  #22  
Old September 16th 18, 06:16 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles


.... Round off isn't an issue here.

yes it is.


You'll have to explain pecisely how round off figures into this.


because mirrorless and slrs *combined* has under 1% share, and that was
two years ago. it's less now.

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/lat...t-reveals-deat
h-compact-camera/
But literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras sold in 2016 were built
into smartphones * only 0.8% were compacts, 0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2%
mirrorless.


OK fine, but I don't see a word about round off, which was my
question.

Also, smartphones are mirrorless, as perhaps other things
not included in the mirrorless tally.

Aren't only SLRs and DSLRs the only things with mirrors ?
  #23  
Old September 16th 18, 06:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles


Normal screen resolution is 1920 x 1080 pixcels.


nope. that's one of *many* display resolutions available today.

Well it's common for most desktops running Windows. Sure laptops and
others will be different. So what ? Just substitute other appropriate
numbers and my arguments still hold.

If an image is
produced by a sensor with the same resolution, then enough
information, as levels of red, green and blue, ranging from 0 to 255,
are obtained for each of the 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixcels, and the
image can be displayed accordingly. Now, if the number of sensor
pixcels are doubled in both dirrections, then the image is produced at
a higher resolution, and fully 4 pixcels have to be mapped into each
of the full screen display pixcels. In this case, the 4 should be
resolved into one, using some kind of round off scheme.


what you're describing is a retina display, except that it's a lot more
complicated than simply rounding off and may not be double either.


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.
  #24  
Old September 16th 18, 07:03 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:


.... Round off isn't an issue here.

yes it is.

You'll have to explain pecisely how round off figures into this.


because mirrorless and slrs *combined* has under 1% share, and that was
two years ago. it's less now.

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/lat...t-reveals-deat
h-compact-camera/
But literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras sold in 2016 were built
into smartphones * only 0.8% were compacts, 0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2%
mirrorless.


OK fine, but I don't see a word about round off, which was my
question.


98.4% is close enough to 100%.

Also, smartphones are mirrorless, as perhaps other things
not included in the mirrorless tally.


the categories are clear.

Aren't only SLRs and DSLRs the only things with mirrors ?


cars have them, and they even have cameras too.
  #25  
Old September 16th 18, 07:03 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:


Normal screen resolution is 1920 x 1080 pixcels.


nope. that's one of *many* display resolutions available today.

Well it's common for most desktops running Windows. Sure laptops and
others will be different. So what ? Just substitute other appropriate
numbers and my arguments still hold.


1920x1080 and 1920x1200 were popular more than a decade ago and have
been eclipsed by much higher resolutions. they do still exist, mostly
low end stuff.

the better displays are now 4k or 5k, even in laptops. heck, most
*phones* have a higher resolution than 1920x1080.


If an image is
produced by a sensor with the same resolution, then enough
information, as levels of red, green and blue, ranging from 0 to 255,
are obtained for each of the 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixcels, and the
image can be displayed accordingly. Now, if the number of sensor
pixcels are doubled in both dirrections, then the image is produced at
a higher resolution, and fully 4 pixcels have to be mapped into each
of the full screen display pixcels. In this case, the 4 should be
resolved into one, using some kind of round off scheme.


what you're describing is a retina display, except that it's a lot more
complicated than simply rounding off and may not be double either.


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.


retina display is apple's name for hi-dpi, where individual pixels are
smaller than what the human eye can resolve, and since they were first
to mass market it, the name has become somewhat generic. there is no
longer a 1:1 ratio between points & pixels and it doesn't need to be an
integral multiple either. once the pixels are smaller than what humans
can resolve, fuzziness and jagginess goes away.
  #26  
Old September 16th 18, 07:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

On Sep 16, 2018, wrote
(in ):


Normal screen resolution is 1920 x 1080 pixcels.


nope. that's one of *many* display resolutions available today.

Well it's common for most desktops running Windows. Sure laptops and
others will be different. So what ? Just substitute other appropriate
numbers and my arguments still hold.

If an image is
produced by a sensor with the same resolution, then enough
information, as levels of red, green and blue, ranging from 0 to 255,
are obtained for each of the 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixcels, and the
image can be displayed accordingly. Now, if the number of sensor
pixcels are doubled in both dirrections, then the image is produced at
a higher resolution, and fully 4 pixcels have to be mapped into each
of the full screen display pixcels. In this case, the 4 should be
resolved into one, using some kind of round off scheme.


what you're describing is a retina display, except that it's a lot more
complicated than simply rounding off and may not be double either.


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.


I don’t know about *nospam* clarifying anything, but the term “Retina
display” is an Apple thing. For example the 27” iMac 5K Retina display that
I am using right now has a resolution of 5120 x2880 with an appropriate pixel
density, and it is undoubtably a higher resolution than the 1920 x 1080 of my
old non-retina display iMac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_display

  #27  
Old September 16th 18, 08:33 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles


98.4% is close enough to 100%.

Oh THAT round off. Sheesh !

Also, smartphones are mirrorless, as perhaps other things
not included in the mirrorless tally.


the categories are clear.

Not to me they aren't. Without a mirror related to photography, means
mirrorless ! Everything except SLRs and DSLRs .

Aren't only SLRs and DSLRs the only things with mirrors ?


cars have them, and they even have cameras too.


Yes, but the mirrors on a car don't relate to the picture taking, so
any camera used in the car is also quite mirrorless.
  #28  
Old September 16th 18, 08:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

Since we're talking resolutions -

I have a desktop and a laptop, both running Windows 7 .

I wasn't fool enough to go to Windows 8, and really not fool enough to
go to Windows 10 . Windows 7 is the optimal OS IMHO .

Possible resolutions are :

Desktop -

1920 x 1080 ( recommended ), 1600 x 900, 1280 x 720 and 800 x 600

Laptop -

1366 x 768 ( recommended ) and 800 x 600

I've developed applications intended for both the recommendeds with
user selection of either.
  #29  
Old September 16th 18, 09:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:

Also, smartphones are mirrorless, as perhaps other things
not included in the mirrorless tally.


the categories are clear.

Not to me they aren't. Without a mirror related to photography, means
mirrorless ! Everything except SLRs and DSLRs .


they are to anyone who follows the industry.

slrs are cameras that use a mirror. r stands for reflex. long ago, slrs
used film. today they use digital sensors (and are much better).

everything else is mirrorless, however, the term 'mirrorless' has come
to mean interchangeable lens cameras without a mirror, not simply the
lack of a mirror. they're sometimes called a milc, for mirrorless
interchangeable lens camera (not to be confused with milf, which is
very different).

compact digicams and smartphone cameras are also mirrorless, but
they're not called that. they have their own categories.
  #30  
Old September 16th 18, 09:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:

Since we're talking resolutions -

I have a desktop and a laptop, both running Windows 7 .

I wasn't fool enough to go to Windows 8, and really not fool enough to
go to Windows 10 . Windows 7 is the optimal OS IMHO .


maybe optimal for a decade ago but certainly not now. win10 is much
better and a lot more secure than win7 and certainly win 8 (which was a
mistake).

Possible resolutions are :

Desktop -

1920 x 1080 ( recommended ), 1600 x 900, 1280 x 720 and 800 x 600

Laptop -

1366 x 768 ( recommended ) and 800 x 600


time to upgrade that aging display, although that might mean a new
computer too.

I've developed applications intended for both the recommendeds with
user selection of either.


then your apps will look like **** on modern displays, and they
shouldn't be hardcoded to specific resolutions anyway.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hasselblad mirrorless MF Alfred Molon[_4_] Digital Photography 34 July 1st 16 09:51 PM
New Nikon Mirrorless - DL Eric Stevens Digital Photography 7 April 13th 16 05:31 PM
Canon mirrorless let-down (maybe) Me Digital Photography 23 July 28th 12 10:52 PM
Mirrorless, filmless. Irwell Digital Photography 9 September 16th 10 02:55 AM
Nikon to go mirrorless Neil Harrington[_5_] Digital Photography 1 July 22nd 10 05:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.