Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Official announcement soon.

Unfortunately current popular 4:3 and 3:2 aspect ratio 3" viewfinders do not fit onto 3.2" LCD widescreens. Even a 3" 16:9 screen will have some compromises.
As we get close to the official announcement we just had to lock down on sub 400 PPI 24 bit 3" LCD.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

3" ish LCD modules and existing LCD viewfinders?

My concern is that obviously we can not use all the native 800x480 pixels of a 3-3.2" LCD widescreen.
For example on a 3" widescreen (3.2" actual) LCD with 800x480 resolution the viewable area measures 67-68mm wide (depending on manufacturer and model). Now if we measure the inner width of the "Finder" mounting frame - it is 62mm. So if the width of view of a mounted finder is 62mm and even a 3.2" screen is 67mm we lose 5mm total on sides that translates to 740 pixels of usable horizontal resolution even on this 3.2"ish screen.

It's a tricky question as 5D MKII and 550D/T2i output during recording is quite far from using the actual width of the screen and when re-scaled to that you lose some on-screen readings, nothing cruicial but still...

BTW the Z-Finder without mounting frame measures 67mm inside and can be used on 3.2" screen but then you lose the elegant way of mounting it.

Update: 3" sample screens we got measure almost 3.2" and these have visible area of 67mm X 42mm.

Friday, August 6, 2010

Power consumption

Notes on power consumption:
  • The system will consume less power if no features are used. The more DSP needed the more the device consumes power. 
  • Should all the features enabled at the same time or not? 
  • Zoom and Peaking at the same time could be quite a good feature but is there enough power, "CPU" wise?
  • What is the minimum image quality DSP wise? 
  • How should the average/overall power consumption be evaluated for product specification?