[joachim]

Hi



I like to discuss a couple of trends here. One is the latest in screen resolution. With the new retina screen on the iPad one now requires multi megapixel files for screen viewing. This is a clear change from a few years bag when it was said that screen viewing was undemanding. I expect monitors and perhaps even TVs to go up in pixel density as well and image defects to show up more than they used to.



In that context I noticed that even on a 21" iMac I notice soft corners and CA in Fullscreen view (not 100%) to a level I am not used to. So for monitor viewing demands are definitely increasing.



The other trend is the 24mp sensor of the Nikon 3200. This is Nikon's value offer for Joe Average. So Nikon believes that everyone will now like to deal with the large file sizes that come with this. I admire their confidence in their lenses and the accuracy of the PD-AF for that price- point.



Curious on your comments.



Joachim who still lives on a 12mp diet

[popo]

At a high level overview, rarely do we have an ideal mapping between camera output and screen resolution, whatever either of them are. Some rescaling will be required. In that sense, it doesn't matter too much what each end is, as long as the rescaling is done well.



Is 24MP too far? For obsessive pixel peepers who want every pixel to be perfect, then maybe. But I would treat this case like a DSP engineer would. If you know what to do with them, and have the ability to do it (processing capacity, storage cost), then a higher sampling rate (more MP) will give you more options at noise control. The big point here is that each sample (pixel) is not important by itself. As you get more of them, the role each one plays in a scene is proportionately less. It's what you do with all of them that matters. On that note, at DSLR/mirrorless level, I feel MP counts are still far lower than they could usefully be.



As for displays, in short I think TVs will stick to HD resolutions until next generation HD comes a lot closer. Monitors may well increase but for significantly higher densities than we currently have, the operating systems would need to get smarter too.

[PuxaVida]

Well, Joachim, you know my concerns about the iPad already <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />... High resolution on tablets -as long as they come with a high quality screen-, are very wellcome for me. That thing is a joy to use when it comes to viewing images... But I personally think that iPad is rather poor when it comes to hardware interfaces. Simply I don't like their apprroach there. Anyways, I think the new retina screen will be very temping for me.



On the photography side of these things, I believe the sensor resolution will be contributing to the other drivers of the system with regard to:



- being a customer puller-in (a better German word maybe would be "vertrieben" <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...)

- related hardware demands (screens, hard disks, memory, CPU)

- related software demands (better operating systems, faster raw decoders etc...)



I see it as a supply & demand relationship. But not like the classic one, in which we the consumers demand and the producers supply... I see it in a way that some producers make a demand from other producers, so that we the comsumers can buy all related producs on the market <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



Serkan

[Guest]

[quote name='popo' timestamp='1334995894' post='17665']

At a high level overview, rarely do we have an ideal mapping between camera output and screen resolution, whatever either of them are. Some rescaling will be required. In that sense, it doesn't matter too much what each end is, as long as the rescaling is done well.



Is 24MP too far? For obsessive pixel peepers who want every pixel to be perfect, then maybe. But I would treat this case like a DSP engineer would. If you know what to do with them, and have the ability to do it (processing capacity, storage cost), then a higher sampling rate (more MP) will give you more options at noise control. The big point here is that each sample (pixel) is not important by itself. As you get more of them, the role each one plays in a scene is proportionately less. It's what you do with all of them that matters. On that note, at DSLR/mirrorless level, I feel MP counts are still far lower than they could usefully be.



As for displays, in short I think TVs will stick to HD resolutions until next generation HD comes a lot closer. Monitors may well increase but for significantly higher densities than we currently have, the operating systems would need to get smarter too.









(Reply....sorry!)



Yes, I certainly agree - particularly about the effect of increased sampling rate and the diminishing role of each sample as the rate increases



A bit like using a finer-grained film - don't look at each grain, just the overall effect.

[/quote]