I fail to see how the optics need to be much more resolving in resolution than the prescription glasses. If the prescription glasses were not capable of allowing me to see 1000-1100 line pairs then there is a problem.
Also, notice the 1440 instead of 1920 is on the horizontal, because this is the direction the human vision is less sensitive. Evidently, the common human isn't as sensitive to losing +25% resolution on one axis, but is very sensitive losing the same percentage on the other axis.
I don't think the optics on glasses and cameras are that comparable. For one, the optics in camcorders seem to use several lenses in succession, the errors seem to multiply at each step. At any rate, I see some irritating color fringing on most shots captured with the affordable HD camcorders. It's still far better than SD.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
GhostDoggy @ Aug 15th 2007 7:17PM
I fail to see how the optics need to be much more resolving in resolution than the prescription glasses. If the prescription glasses were not capable of allowing me to see 1000-1100 line pairs then there is a problem.
Also, notice the 1440 instead of 1920 is on the horizontal, because this is the direction the human vision is less sensitive. Evidently, the common human isn't as sensitive to losing +25% resolution on one axis, but is very sensitive losing the same percentage on the other axis.
JeffDM @ Aug 15th 2007 10:42PM
I don't think the optics on glasses and cameras are that comparable. For one, the optics in camcorders seem to use several lenses in succession, the errors seem to multiply at each step. At any rate, I see some irritating color fringing on most shots captured with the affordable HD camcorders. It's still far better than SD.