Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > ISO and actual sensitivity in DSLR's (D70, *istD, 20D, S3...)

Reply
Thread Tools

ISO and actual sensitivity in DSLR's (D70, *istD, 20D, S3...)

 
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005

We've seen the occasional postings about the ISO setting and the actual
sensitivity.

I picked up Casseur D'Images (No. 271, March 2005) and among other
things they did tests on a variety of DSLR's and one ZLR. (p. 169)

They rounded the results when close to the standard 1/3. But where a
little less clear cut, they put a +/- to indicate not quite in the 1/3 zone.

They describe, in punishing detail, the test method, references, math,
etc. Unfortunately, the 7D is not part of the grouping, but I'll take
sollace in the A200 results. Minolta have long been known for their
consistency in metering and exposure.

[There is also an article on the S3 and I'll summarize tomorrow]

Cheers,
Alan.

D70:
Setting: 200 400 800 1600
Actual: 160 320 640 1250


A200 (Minolta ZLR):
Setting: 50 100 200 400 800
Actual: 50+ 100 200 400 800


*istD:
Setting: 200 400 800 1600 3200
Actual: 250 500 1250- 2000 4000-


20D:
Setting: 100 200 400 800 1600 3200
Actual: 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000


S3:
Setting: 100 160 200 400 800 1600
Actual: 80 160 160+ 320 640+ 1250


1D Mk II
Setting: (L)50 100 200 400 800 1600 (H) 3200
Actual 64 160 320 640 1250 2500 4000


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
Alan Browne wrote:

> I picked up Casseur D'Images (No. 271, March 2005) and among other

Chasseur D'Images
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pete D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as long
as the photos come out right.

"Alan Browne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d202ab$rmr$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> We've seen the occasional postings about the ISO setting and the actual
> sensitivity.
>
> I picked up Casseur D'Images (No. 271, March 2005) and among other things
> they did tests on a variety of DSLR's and one ZLR. (p. 169)
>
> They rounded the results when close to the standard 1/3. But where a
> little less clear cut, they put a +/- to indicate not quite in the 1/3
> zone.
>
> They describe, in punishing detail, the test method, references, math,
> etc. Unfortunately, the 7D is not part of the grouping, but I'll take
> sollace in the A200 results. Minolta have long been known for their
> consistency in metering and exposure.
>
> [There is also an article on the S3 and I'll summarize tomorrow]
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
> D70:
> Setting: 200 400 800 1600
> Actual: 160 320 640 1250
>
>
> A200 (Minolta ZLR):
> Setting: 50 100 200 400 800
> Actual: 50+ 100 200 400 800
>
>
> *istD:
> Setting: 200 400 800 1600 3200
> Actual: 250 500 1250- 2000 4000-
>
>
> 20D:
> Setting: 100 200 400 800 1600 3200
> Actual: 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000
>
>
> S3:
> Setting: 100 160 200 400 800 1600
> Actual: 80 160 160+ 320 640+ 1250
>
>
> 1D Mk II
> Setting: (L)50 100 200 400 800 1600 (H) 3200
> Actual 64 160 320 640 1250 2500 4000
>
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Kevin McMurtrie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
In article <MdO0e.11056$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"Pete D" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as long
> as the photos come out right.
>


The table shouldn't be interpreted as good or bad, but informational.
Built-in exposure meters can't be used for all conditions.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Karlsson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
"Pete D" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:MdO0e.11056$(E-Mail Removed):

> And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
> long as the photos come out right.


You are not of the old school I see

It does matter.
- if you use an external meter.
- when comparing the sensitivity of camera systems.
- when using external flash.
- etc

But - if you just take pictures and like them - then
the technicalities behind the making of the photo is
of course uninteresting.

But - it does matter - even if you don't care


/Roland
 
Reply With Quote
 
Owamanga
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
On 25 Mar 2005 10:54:52 GMT, Roland Karlsson
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Pete D" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>news:MdO0e.11056$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
>> long as the photos come out right.

>
>You are not of the old school I see
>
>It does matter.
>- if you use an external meter.
>- when comparing the sensitivity of camera systems.
>- when using external flash.
>- etc


Okay, but whether it be by table or experience, if you find your
camera to consistently meter under or over, you'd just adjust the
exposure accordingly wouldn't you?

....annoying if you switch between brands all the time, but for a
single DSLR body owner, no biggie.

And the report (or Alan) missed another significant angle here:

The D70 they used, is it the same as my D70? What's the consistency of
metering within each model like? If it's bad for any particular model,
their table becomes fairly irrelevant.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
Pete D wrote:

> And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as long
> as the photos come out right.


For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
Roland Karlsson wrote:

> "Pete D" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:MdO0e.11056$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>
>>And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
>>long as the photos come out right.

>
>
> You are not of the old school I see
>
> It does matter.
> - if you use an external meter.


I do that.

> - when comparing the sensitivity of camera systems.


One of the roles of this NG.

> - when using external flash.


I do that too.

> - etc
>
> But - if you just take pictures and like them - then
> the technicalities behind the making of the photo is
> of course uninteresting.


er, this is an equipment group. This *is* one of the things we discuss
here.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005
Owamanga wrote:

> The D70 they used, is it the same as my D70? What's the consistency of
> metering within each model like? If it's bad for any particular model,
> their table becomes fairly irrelevant.


They don't mention if they're using samples of one or more.

If one were talking about lens variations (sharpness) I would agree.
But metering in electronic cameras and shutter speeds have become quite
precise and consistent over the past 10+ years.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
David J. Littleboy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2005

"Alan Browne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Pete D wrote:
>
> > And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as

long
> > as the photos come out right.

>
> For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
> myself), such information is useful.


Not really. You have to calibrate your meter against the histograms that
result in your camera.

And I suspect that the results are simply random, since presumably they used
matrix/evaluative metering which is, in principle, completely random and
unpredictable (assuming it does what they say it does<g>).

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ISO C89 and ISO C99 jrefactors@hotmail.com C++ 13 12-20-2004 06:29 AM
ISO C89 and ISO C99 jrefactors@hotmail.com C Programming 18 12-20-2004 06:29 AM
D2X Iso Sensitivity A. L. Shaw Digital Photography 16 11-03-2004 10:58 AM



Advertisments