victor_ho2 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 I was wondering how the new LCD screen on the D300 is measured? For instance,the D200 is 2 inches wide x 1.75 inches tall. It's been marketed as a 2 inch LCDnot 2.65 inch [approx] diagonal. The new Canon G9 just announced has a 3 inchLCD screen. But, it is measured 3 inches diagonally like a TV screen. Applyingthe law of triangles: Pythagorean theorem - A right triangle has the square of both sides equal to the square of the hypotenuse. That makes it 2 inches by 2.25 inches approximately. How are they measuring theD300 LCD? There's not much room on the D200. Just wondering... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibargureni Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Hi, I don't think the LCD in the D200 was advertised as being 2 inches. My D70s screen was advertised as 2 inches and I think the D200 was said to have a 2,5 inches LCD, quite close to the 2,65 inches (diagonal) you measured. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_in_PA Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 the screen measurement is diagonal like a TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victor_ho2 Posted August 27, 2007 Author Share Posted August 27, 2007 Then it's really not that much larger over the current D200. I was wondering what the limit might be. Maybe we could get a virtual view like the glasses they sell now. Plug in and you could see a virtual 8x10 image. ...forget Hoodman and all that. It reminds me of the classic photo of the movie audience all wearing 3D glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Bigger is better. It is also supposed to be much higher resulution, and that will make it much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshall Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 The D200 is sold with a "2.5-inch screen", not a "2-inch" screen. I assume the new camera has a larger screen by the same measure, though the bigger (ha) difference may be the resolution. Won't know 'til I see it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawz Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Yep, diagonal measurements are used. And the D300 only adds 1/2" on the diagonal. More important are the 690,000 extra pixels. Those are a much bigger deal (especially when Canon's using 230,000 pixel 3" screens) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victor_ho2 Posted August 27, 2007 Author Share Posted August 27, 2007 At the end of the day the increase in the LCD size is just another upgrade feature but not a compelling argument to switch. I see the new multiple focus areas as much more interesting especially if you are involved in sports or action photography. But... no face recognition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mars790 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 The new LCD screen is one of the things that i'm most excited about. It has 4 times the pixels yielding TWICE the linear resolution. That is a jump that i never expected let alone hope for. The new screen has 7 times the pixel density of your computer screen (according to KR). For the first time on a DSLR - being able to see the exact focus points and sharpness in the field will bring a new level of sheer fun and productivity. This will undoubtedly help the live view too. I don't know about anyone else but i can never tire of eye-candy. I can't wait to zoom in all the way with my new loupe... Face recognition? Please. Some are never satisfied. The same AF system and the same super deluxe LCD at $3200 less than the Pro model isn't enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_lofquist Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 While it has generally been accepted by many, that this theorem was discovered by Greeks, in actuality it goes back to the American Indian. It seems as though there was a pregnant squaw who went to the local midwife to deliver. She was placed on a deer skin to await the birth. Later the same day, another squaw arrived with the same malady. She was given a bear skin for her comfort. Eventually a third female came with obvious imminent delivery. The only hide that was available was that of a hippo. (Bear with me on this.) The first woman gave birth to a boy. Then the second gave birth to a girl. Finally the third produced twins. So what does this show? Just this: Ths squaw of the hippopotamus is equal to the sum of the squaws of the other two hides! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now