Q2M vs Q3M …

[M11 for me]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 21 Minuten schrieb SrMi:

A 5.75M EVF has 5'750'000 dots, not pixels (one pixel contains three dots). Most manufacturers specify the resolution in dots, not in pixels.

That is how Leica does.

That means then, according to you, that a dot and a pixel on a monitor are not the same thing. Or in other words: Whereas on a sensor a pixel is always either red or green or blue on a monitor a pixel would be 3 dots representing r or g or b.

A bit confusing . . .

In Wikipedia you find articles with terms as pixels and subpixels instead. Each subpixel of a pixel contains either r or g or b. Therefore  a pixel has 3 subpixels. 

A "dot" in the explanations above would then be equal to a subpixel . . .

Edited December 6 by M11 for me

[SrMi]

50 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

So, is it correct, that according to this the Sony EVF has 9'473'184 divided by 3 equals 3'158'000 pixels containing each a red a green and a blue dot?

That would contradict what I wrote above.

Up to now I believed that each single "element" on a monitor is an electronic unity that contains the 3 colours rgb. 

Yes, but nobody specifies EVFs in pixels.

[Matt Stevens]

On 11/25/2025 at 8:46 AM, jaapv said:

I must confess that these discussions about EVF quality puzzle me somewhat. It is just a tool for viewing the image and other information. So what does a minor aesthetic improvement bring? 

I agree with this; I shoot a lot with a Nikon Z8, which has a somewhat lower EVF resolution than the current industry standard. I don't notice or care much because I'm not focused on image quality when framing a shot; I'm concentrating on the creative act of making a photograph.