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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
In article ,
wrote: I presented EXACTLY what I did. It's hardly my fault if someone doesn't understand exponentials. These are forms that represents many things, where something follows change according to some rate, either negiaive ( i.e. - radioactive decay, leaking vessel, etc. ) or posative ( i.e. - interest earning account, etc. ). The DSLR / Mirrorless issue has both, and follows exponentials quite closely. I simply presented the relatinships as annual percentage rates. Round off isn't an issue here. yes it is. both are dwarfed by smartphones, which continue to improve. computational photography is the future, not mirror versus mirrorless. In a nutshell, photography is more popular than it has ever been take a look at the rise of Instagram or Snapchat, for example, Skafisk tells PetaPixel. 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. Come back in a few years, and there won't be a mirror to be seen anywhere. yes there will, just not a lot of them. film is still used even though it's not as good as digital. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
( neg A tive, pos I tive ... )
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 14:18:01 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , wrote: decrease and increase of what? Just read the first post starting this thread, dumbass. quote it in your post for context. THis from the guy who routinely deletes text when replying to posts and justifies it by saying that if you want to know what was previously there you should look up the thread. better yet, ignore it. Refuge of someone who's lost an argument. nope. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 17:34:47 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , wrote: quote it in your post for context. OK, with all due respect, here it is since it's apparently needed. The initial post related to the DSLR / Mirrorless issue, and referenced the following site : https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...irrorless.html Here there was an article, which presented among other things, an informative graphic related to DSLR and Mirrorless usage, in some scale from 4 to 16 million, over a 5 year period. In addition to yearly data points, linear expressions were presented. I expressed, that an exponential fit to the points was prefferable to a linear fit, and presented the exponential fits, which I computed from the graphic. fit it however you want. it's still a roundoff error compared to smartphones. Swift protective change of subject. be sure to display the image at its full resolution, not scaled to the browser window: https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2017/03/cameraproductionchart.jpg full article: https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/lat...t-reveals-deat h-compact-camera/ ³In a nutshell, photography is more popular than it has ever been Â* take a look at the rise of Instagram or Snapchat, for example,² Skafisk tells PetaPixel. ³But literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras sold in 2016 were built into smartphones Â* only 0.8% were compacts, 0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2% mirrorless.² slrs and mirrorless *combined* are *under* 1% of cameras sold. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: quote it in your post for context. OK, with all due respect, here it is since it's apparently needed. The initial post related to the DSLR / Mirrorless issue, and referenced the following site : https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...irrorless.html Here there was an article, which presented among other things, an informative graphic related to DSLR and Mirrorless usage, in some scale from 4 to 16 million, over a 5 year period. In addition to yearly data points, linear expressions were presented. I expressed, that an exponential fit to the points was prefferable to a linear fit, and presented the exponential fits, which I computed from the graphic. fit it however you want. it's still a roundoff error compared to smartphones. Swift protective change of subject. nope. there is no change of subject. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: decrease and increase of what? Just read the first post starting this thread, dumbass. quote it in your post for context. THis from the guy who routinely deletes text when replying to posts and justifies it by saying that if you want to know what was previously there you should look up the thread. i *always* quote the relevant context in my replies. i delete what is superfluous. in other words, noise. better yet, ignore it. Refuge of someone who's lost an argument. nope. like that part that you didn't snip. you didn't comment on it and there is no need to include it. it's noise. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
Round off generally refers to a lowering of precision, to simplify or
clarify something. Take, Pie = 3.14159..., and e = 2.71828..., might be rounded off to 3.14 and 2.72 . |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
More on the Mirrorless Battles
Normal screen resolution is 1920 x 1080 pixcels. 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. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
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. 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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |