S
Son of Daguerre
Guest
Rocky said:You really have a never admit mistake and never say die attitude. Take another look on page 11 of this thread. My calculation is right after your wrong result and 2 position above your quoted reference. Either you cannot read or you just will not admit it. Your pixel count is wrong. If you were right, why canon put a 0.925 M and 1.02M LCD display on the 50D and the T2i? Your pixel count come up to be only 0.272 M total. Too much for a guy that claim to be full of knowledge that do not even own the camera..Son of Daguerre said:Rocky said:Take another look, the post in front is done by me. I am the only one that have done the calculation after your wrong calculation. Your Algebric formula needed o be correcrted too. The formula should bea+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2
If your are so good, would you like to calcaulate the pixel count onthe width of the displayed picture on both the 3:2 and 4:3 LCD
Pardon, but this post was certainly written by moi.
The 3:2 width is obviously 720 pixels. The 4:3 is 639x426, I'm assuming?
And I'm aware that (a+b)2=a2+b2+2ab, but my formula works as well. Don't knock it 'till you try it, Rocky.
As for Your agebra, what you have shown is an equation that has been made up by you, not a formula.
You're kidding. 1,040k does not mean 1.04MP! It is 3x the actual number of pixels.
Upvote
0