The flagship 1Ds is nowhere to be found.
On one hand, maybe since it's a FF, he doesn't need that in his post. But on the other, the 5Ds are listed...
CALImagery Goldmember 3,375 posts Likes: 2 Joined Apr 2008 Location: O-H More info | Mar 14, 2009 23:50 | #16 ef2 wrote in post #7524584 The flagship 1Ds is nowhere to be found. On one hand, maybe since it's a FF, he doesn't need that in his post. But on the other, the 5Ds are listed... Christian
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 15, 2009 00:42 | #17 basroil wrote in post #7525241 No stupid questions, but sorry to say this is a stupid comment. As others and myself have said, you can print any size, so stating that is meaningless. Additionally, enlargement is function of sensor size in the non-resolution limited case (which most prints follow perfectly, only magazine prints or other specialty things are resolution limited even with 12mp images). And if you didn't know, you can easily do most of the calculations you want to do according to that post in your head, and if you find that too slow, you can use a simple calculator. No point in putting tables up, it'd be like having multiplication tables for all numbers between 1 and 3000. I wouldn't even want to see that, and 99% of the values would be meaningless to me. My Canon kit 450D/s90; Canon lenses 18-55 IS, 70-210/3.5-4.5....Nikon kit: D610; 28-105/3.5-4.5, 75-300/4.5-5.6 AF, 50/1.8D Nikkors, Tamron 80-210; MF Nikkors: 50/2K, 50/1.4 AI-S, 50/1.8 SeriesE, 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor (AF locked), 85mm/1.8K-AI, 105/2.5 AIS/P.C, 135/2.8K/Q.C, 180/2.8 ED, 200/4Q/AIS, 300/4.5H-AI, ++ Tamron 70-210/3.8-4, Vivitar/Kiron 28/2, ser.1 70-210/3.5, ser.1 28-90; Vivitar/Komine and Samyang 28/2.8; 35mm Nikon F/FM/FE2, Rebel 2K...HTC RE UWA camera
LOG IN TO REPLY |
xarqi Cream of the Crop 10,435 posts Likes: 2 Joined Oct 2005 Location: Aotearoa/New Zealand More info | Mar 15, 2009 01:23 | #18 kitacanon wrote in post #7525596 I'm not interested in the print size listed [...] ...only how big the display would be if printed... That depends on the print resolution. There is no standard, but 300 dpi is very common. that is, what size monitor would be required to display the entire image of a 100% crop on the other models... That depends on the display resolution. There are several standards, of which 72 ppi is probably most common.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdodd Goldmember 3,733 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Essex, UK More info | Mar 15, 2009 02:19 | #19 Your image size in inches will be the total sensor resolution expressed in terms of height x width in pixels divided by the pixels per inch (PPI) of your monitor.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
SkipD Cream of the Crop 20,476 posts Likes: 165 Joined Dec 2002 Location: Southeastern WI, USA More info | Mar 15, 2009 06:28 | #20 kitacanon wrote in post #7525596 I guess I need to clarify myself... I don't know the size of images from different models when displayed at 100%, so I asked a simple question that seems to be too confusing... I'm not interested in the print size listed in the image size at the 100% view...or how big or small a print can be made...only how big the display would be if printed... The fact is that there is no single answer for your question because, as illustrated above, there's no single definition for the resolution of computer displays. Skip Douglas
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tzalman Fatal attraction. 13,497 posts Likes: 213 Joined Apr 2005 Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel More info | Mar 15, 2009 06:53 | #21 tzalman wrote in post #7524151 There is no single print size for any camera unless you specify two conditions: 1.No resampling. 2. A given ppi. Substitute "monitor display" for "print" in my previous answer and it still applies. Elie / אלי
LOG IN TO REPLY |
basroil Cream of the Crop 8,015 posts Likes: 2 Joined Mar 2006 Location: STL/Clayton, MO| NJ More info | Mar 15, 2009 09:20 | #22 kitacanon wrote in post #7525596 I guess I need to clarify myself... I don't know the size of images from different models when displayed at 100%, so I asked a simple question that seems to be too confusing... I'm not interested in the print size listed in the image size at the 100% view...or how big or small a print can be made...only how big the display would be if printed... If that is too confusing, then forget the printing part... On the 30D I know that the same image would be 32x48 @ 72 dpi or 6.6x10 @ 350dpi...but if I measured the 350dpi display it would be 32x48 so I guess I'm interested in the DISPLAY size not the print size...that is, what size monitor would be required to display the entire image of a 100% crop on the other models... ...given models' different size sensor, i.e. number of pixels, the size of the sensor itself, I wondered if there is any significant difference among them. Maybe that is clearer...if each person with the model listed replied with the answer I'd add it to the list... Again, thanks to all who reply... and I did add the 1Ds....if another is missing just let me know and I'll add it... Sorry, but you are still not making any sense. All you are looking at is how many MP there are. Simply look at that number and you know exactly what you want to know. There are only three important features when discussing sensors in terms of display or printing. That is sensor size, pixel density, and bit depth (which will likely never come into play as no cheaper monitors can properly display 16 bit images, most do only 8 per channel). All other results are derived from these three (generally just the first two actually) from simple math (multiplication, division). There is no point in listing everything else since all you are doing is repeating the same information a million times over. I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
sandpiper Cream of the Crop More info | Mar 15, 2009 10:56 | #23 No, you asked a question that has no answer (or to be more accurate has a very large number of answers, all different and all correct ..... for someone).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
YohanPamudji Goldmember 2,994 posts Joined Jun 2007 Location: Mississippi More info | Mar 15, 2009 21:29 | #24 kitacanon wrote in post #7525596 I guess I need to clarify myself... I don't know the size of images from different models when displayed at 100%, so I asked a simple question that seems to be too confusing... I'm not interested in the print size listed in the image size at the 100% view...or how big or small a print can be made...only how big the display would be if printed... I already posted the formula for you. All you have to do is use it. It calculates exactly what you asked for earlier in this thread: if you're looking at an image at 100% magnification (pixel level) on a monitor, assuming that view is equivalent to the corresponding crop of a print how big would that print be. If that is too confusing, then forget the printing part... What? After I spent all that time laboring to derive a formula for you? Ingrate! On the 30D I know that the same image would be 32x48 @ 72 dpi or 6.6x10 @ 350dpi...but if I measured the 350dpi display it would be 32x48 so I guess I'm interested in the DISPLAY size not the print size...that is, what size monitor would be required to display the entire image of a 100% crop on the other models... ...given models' different size sensor, i.e. number of pixels, the size of the sensor itself, I wondered if there is any significant difference among them. Physical sensor size has nothing to do with how big you can theoretically print; only sensor resolution (number of pixels) matter. There's the issue of pixel quality that nobody has been able to quantify, but assuming an easy scene that wouldn't tax any modern sensor (e.g. bright daylight), image resolution is what matters. In other words, you'd be able to print just as large from an 8MP 20D image as you would from an 8MP 1DII image for instance, even though they have different physical sensor sizes (20D is 1.6x, 1DII is 1.3x).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 16, 2009 00:23 | #25 Thank you all for your replies...this all came to my mind when I'd read someone's advice to view a 100% crop from a distance rather than peep at pixels from 12"...while reading about the optimal viewing distance of different size HD TV screens (apparently it is 1.3x to 1.5x the diagonal) and wondered what in fact would be the recommended viewing distance of the full frame of the 100% crop...but to do that I'd need to know the measurements of the full frame... My Canon kit 450D/s90; Canon lenses 18-55 IS, 70-210/3.5-4.5....Nikon kit: D610; 28-105/3.5-4.5, 75-300/4.5-5.6 AF, 50/1.8D Nikkors, Tamron 80-210; MF Nikkors: 50/2K, 50/1.4 AI-S, 50/1.8 SeriesE, 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor (AF locked), 85mm/1.8K-AI, 105/2.5 AIS/P.C, 135/2.8K/Q.C, 180/2.8 ED, 200/4Q/AIS, 300/4.5H-AI, ++ Tamron 70-210/3.8-4, Vivitar/Kiron 28/2, ser.1 70-210/3.5, ser.1 28-90; Vivitar/Komine and Samyang 28/2.8; 35mm Nikon F/FM/FE2, Rebel 2K...HTC RE UWA camera
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tzalman Fatal attraction. 13,497 posts Likes: 213 Joined Apr 2005 Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel More info | Mar 16, 2009 06:06 | #26 The 72 ppi "standard" has been obsolete for twenty years, its original intent was to allow CRT TV sets to be used as monitors, and has persisted as an urban myth. You will still see posters on these forums falsely advising others that any image posted on the web has to be 72 dpi. Elie / אלי
LOG IN TO REPLY |
SkipD Cream of the Crop 20,476 posts Likes: 165 Joined Dec 2002 Location: Southeastern WI, USA More info | Mar 16, 2009 07:12 | #27 tzalman wrote in post #7532580 List of displays by pixel density From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Could you please post a link to this info? That would be handy to have (though for other reasons than the PPI part). Skip Douglas
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdodd Goldmember 3,733 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Essex, UK More info | Mar 16, 2009 07:26 | #28 |
Mar 16, 2009 14:31 | #29 The last 2 charts suggest why it's impossible to make the chart.... My Canon kit 450D/s90; Canon lenses 18-55 IS, 70-210/3.5-4.5....Nikon kit: D610; 28-105/3.5-4.5, 75-300/4.5-5.6 AF, 50/1.8D Nikkors, Tamron 80-210; MF Nikkors: 50/2K, 50/1.4 AI-S, 50/1.8 SeriesE, 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor (AF locked), 85mm/1.8K-AI, 105/2.5 AIS/P.C, 135/2.8K/Q.C, 180/2.8 ED, 200/4Q/AIS, 300/4.5H-AI, ++ Tamron 70-210/3.8-4, Vivitar/Kiron 28/2, ser.1 70-210/3.5, ser.1 28-90; Vivitar/Komine and Samyang 28/2.8; 35mm Nikon F/FM/FE2, Rebel 2K...HTC RE UWA camera
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdodd Goldmember 3,733 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Essex, UK More info | Mar 16, 2009 14:40 | #30 50D : 88" x 59" on my HDTV; 36" x 24" on my 17" laptop; 38" x 25" on my 12.1" laptop.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ANebinger 1215 guests, 145 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||