Iso 800???

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

The good thing about cameras incorporating ISO 800 is that it makes ISO 400 that much better :D

I moved from a Canon A75 w/max ISO of 400 to an A510 w/max ISO of 800. ISO 400 on the A510 is as clean as ISO 200 on the A75.
 
jonnythan:
The good thing about cameras incorporating ISO 800 is that it makes ISO 400 that much better :D

I moved from a Canon A75 w/max ISO of 400 to an A510 w/max ISO of 800. ISO 400 on the A510 is as clean as ISO 200 on the A75.

Imagine what ISO 800 on this is like :wink:.
 
Thanks Grajan!
That didn't quite do it for me though. I know how ISO works on conventional cameras. With higher ASA film the grains get bigger and less light is needed to illuminate them. But since with digital cameras there's no film and the ccd (the camera's "film") is not changeable wouldn't one get pretty much same results photoshopping picture afterwards? Ofcourse if you shoot in jpeg mode you loose some info as the picture is compressed. Basically is ISO changes done programmably by adjusting ccd's pixels bigger?

Grajan:
This is a brief but useful explanation.

The degree of compromise needed for higher ISO's is reducing all the time.
 
kapula:
Thanks Grajan!
That didn't quite do it for me though. I know how ISO works on conventional cameras. With higher ASA film the grains get bigger and less light is needed to illuminate them. But since with digital cameras there's no film and the ccd (the camera's "film") is not changeable wouldn't one get pretty much same results photoshopping picture afterwards? Ofcourse if you shoot in jpeg mode you loose some info as the picture is compressed. Basically is ISO changes done programmably by adjusting ccd's pixels bigger?

Actually you are correct kapula, if you look at the example on the link, on the digital pictures of the ISO 100 and ISO 800.

With film the only differences between ISO 100 and 800 films (2 separate films) is that the grain size or resolution on the 100 is much finer than the blocky ISO 800 here is the important issue: The colors stayed the same.

Look back on the pictures from the link: The digital ISO 800 is not only grainy but colors had really SHIFTED Badly (red dots)!

This is because, as you stated in the beginning, the digital camera never replaced the CCD sensor with a true ISO 800 sensor like in Film, with pixels that are MORE sensitive to lower light levels. The pixels in the CDD sensor is still rated for an ISO of 100 not 800. What they are doing is amplifying the signal, the problem with this is had the noise is also amplified!

Here is an example:

Let’s say for example a 1mm square silver crystal in film and a 1mm square pixel in digital needs 200 photons to properly get the correct exposure rating of ISO 100.

So we need at least 200 photons to make this work. What happens when we only have 25 photons such as in low light conditions? Well with film they made the silver crystal much larger so the film will be more sensitive to the lower amount of photons coming in and calling it ISO 800, the grain gets bigger but the color is still as true as the ISO 100.

Shifting to digital the 1mm square pixel is still the same size and is still rated at ISO 100! So now with only 25 photons are hitting a pixel that is rate for 200, what the camera manufacturers did is to increase the electrical signal. This is fine but since the pixel is not receiving the minimum amount of 200 photons the pixel is now GUESSING at the correct colors. Just like your eyes at night or in dimly lit rooms your eyes and your brain are guessing at the correct color.

This guessing maybe correct or maybe not, this is what the noise in digital is all about.
 
These higher iso shot can be just as good as the lower iso. Iso is just a feature set in a tool to allow you to get THE SHOT. The 5D iso quality @ iso 800 is GREAT. Yes you can see it on a screen @ 100%. But that like complaining a seeing too much grain on a Ansel Adams Full Format wall size print [the negative is like an 8x11] when your 2 inches away with a magnifying glass.
 
mrtremere:
These higher iso shot can be just as good as the lower iso. Iso is just a feature set in a tool to allow you to get THE SHOT. The 5D iso quality @ iso 800 is GREAT. Yes you can see it on a screen @ 100%. But that like complaining a seeing too much grain on a Ansel Adams Full Format wall size print [the negative is like an 8x11] when your 2 inches away with a magnifying glass.

Whatever floats your boat mrtremere, shoot all your shots at ISO 800 or ISO 8,000,000. I'll leave mine to the lowest ISO ratings.

Ansel Adams used black and white film, I was talking about color shifting not the grain.

More power to you.
 
Remember newer DSLRs and the Fuji F30 blow the quality away. That example is like from a old nikon 995. Look at the 5D iso 800. It make my 10D look like a toy and everyone elses point and shoots look like junk. Rememer higher quality iso are the new megapixals. Not to be snide but anything other than a DSLR is still a toy. Nice one but a toy none the less. http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/photo.aspx?gallery=canoneos30d_samples&photo=13

Kapula, I hope your a pro photography cause the 5d is a power tool. I wish I had one with a whole lotta primes.
 
Again iso is just a tool to get a shot, like a brush for a painter. It is all subjective. Plus lower isnt always better. Some of the newer DSLR like the Sony A100 have iso ~50. You lose some dynamic range. I like shooting ISO 400 most of the time on the 10D. You cant tell the diff on prints smaller than 11x13.
 
mrtremere:
Remember newer DSLRs and the Fuji F30 blow the quality away. That example is like from a old nikon 995. Look at the 5D iso 800. It make my 10D look like a toy and everyone elses point and shoots look like junk. Rememer higher quality iso are the new megapixals. Not to be snide but anything other than a DSLR is still a toy. Nice one but a toy none the less. http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/photo.aspx?gallery=canoneos30d_samples&photo=13

Kapula, I hope your a pro photography cause the 5d is a power tool. I wish I had one with a whole lotta primes.

Lol! Nice one but look at the camera's settings on the Canon 30D... 1/8 of a second at f5.6 at that speed you can bet the author was using a tripod! Not exactly what I call a fast sensor! And as Leesa pointed out U/W, most photographers will be using a Strobe to freeze the action, so why go for higher ISOs!

And check this out, from the same author, comparing the Nikon D200 to the Canon 30D:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos30d/page20.asp

Don't tell me you cannot see any difference between ISO 100 and ISO 3200! Because our 83 year old neighbor who is legally blind can even tell the difference.
 
f3nikon:
Don't tell me you cannot see any difference between ISO 100 and ISO 3200! Because our 83 year old neighbor who is legally blind can even tell the difference.

lol...
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom