Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

ISO is a fake standard in cameras


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1
mikew

mikew

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNorth East Lincs

I understood totally the ISO invariance thing but chose to ignore it as i like to chimp my images, what surprised me was the inconsistency of the ISO values between different manufacturers, we know now why one ISO 100 is better than another.

 

https://www.youtube....1&v=QVuI89YWAsw



#2
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,041 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe


It is NOT A FAKE but it is of as little interest as the rest of the exif
information nowadays.

Anyone beginning may need the triangle's reference values but it
is getting the more relative as the mastery kicks in until it ends up
totally useless.

 

Improvements in terms of DR and low lights recording are some of
the reasons behind the recent appreciation.

ETTR was THE thing 20 years ago and I have been teaching for so
many years that the ETTL approach is better when considering that
one should protect the whites at ALL costs.



#3
mikew

mikew

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNorth East Lincs

It is NOT A FAKE but it is of as little interest as the rest of the exif
information nowadays.

Anyone beginning may need the triangle's reference values but it
is getting the more relative as the mastery kicks in until it ends up
totally useless.

 

Improvements in terms of DR and low lights recording are some of
the reasons behind the recent appreciation.

ETTR was THE thing 20 years ago and I have been teaching for so
many years that the ETTL approach is better when considering that
one should protect the whites at ALL costs.

 

I took the main thrust of the video to be saying because different manufacturers assigned different amounts of gain to given iso values it made the values pointless when comparing one make/model to another.

If i was looking to upgrade a camera body one aspect i may look at is how the sensor handles noise at a given iso, now if camera A gives certain results at iso 3200 and i see camera tests and forum posted images from camera B that match it for noise but at 6400 then i may be tempted to buy B.

He was saying if you stop talking iso and use gain from the sensor's base iso  the fudging of facts may not be as easy to hide, it only makes sense if you accept the light sensitivity of a sensor never changes, the increase only comes from manipulation of the original exposure.

 

I do agree with you about the exposure bias and trying to protect whites.



#4
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,041 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe

I took the main thrust of the video …

Even in film time 35mm, 120, 220 and 4X5 film was bought in
large quantities to make sure that each format shared the same
batch production number — when tested to establish the "real"
ASA value, I was sure then that the whole lots had the same.

Then, since the emulsions were made to given specifications, it

was important to know the ASA.

This subject is worth more discussion than I am patient to type.

Have a good one, Mike… maybe later. :P



#5
ScottinPollock

ScottinPollock

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 648 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationWest Slope Northern Sierra Nevada
One thing Tony doesn't mention is the lenses used, and it appears they we're all different. Some lenses transmit more light than others and can be 1/3 to a half stop or more different.

#6
TheGlobalCitizen

TheGlobalCitizen

    Active Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationColorado

Here is Lee Morris of FStoppers responding to Tony's claims
 

https://www.youtube....h?v=EvJ-H_xl3zE



#7
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,588 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

What Lee Morris is seeing are in the first case a metering bias to protect the highlights in modern bodies and in the second a result of the analog gain that is used to boost the signal before the A/D converter. This will change the S/N ratio compared to boosting the already converted raw file.