ISO question

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ockham's Razor, Apr 12, 2007.

  1. Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    equivalent for a given increase in ISO?

    --
    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
    carrying a cross."
    Sinclair Lewis
     
    Ockham's Razor, Apr 12, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ockham's Razor

    Jim Guest

    "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    news:-sjc.supernews.net...
    > Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    > opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    > equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >
    > --
    > "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
    > carrying a cross."
    > Sinclair Lewis


    A camera is a camera is a camera....

    Figure it out for yourself. The exposure time is:

    T = N*N/(S * B)
    Where T = shutter speed in seconds
    N = focal ratio (i. e. f stop)
    S = ISO speed
    B = Bightness of illumination in candelas per square foot.

    You will find this equation lots of places. A couple are Michael
    Covington's bool "Astrophotograpy for Amateurs" and Rudolf Kingslake's book
    "Lenses in Photography".
    Kingslake's book is long out of print.

    Note: A candela is merely a closely specified version of a candle. If you
    search the internet for "candela", you will find more information than you
    ever imagined.

    Jim
     
    Jim, Apr 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ockham's Razor

    Marvin Guest

    Ockham's Razor wrote:
    > Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    > opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    > equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >

    In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    reading the image pixels.
     
    Marvin, Apr 12, 2007
    #3
  4. Ockham's Razor

    Matt Ion Guest

    Ockham's Razor wrote:
    > Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    > opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    > equivalent for a given increase in ISO?


    The ISO setting in digital cameras affects how sensitive the camera is to light
    (or more technically, it adjusts how much the signal from the sensor is
    boosted). It's intended to correspond to the ISO rating of film, which is a
    rating of how sensitive a film is to light (higher ISO = more sesitivity).

    In both digital and film, there are always trade-offs: higher ISO means you need
    less light, but you get more "noise" in the image and less contrast; wider
    aperture allows more light, but reduces depth of focus; slower shutter allows
    more light, but increases the chance of motion blur.

    There is a direct correlation when calculating the effect of the three. Each
    doubling of ISO doubles the sensitivity to light (ISO 200 to 400, for example).
    One full "stop" on the aperture also means a doubling or halving of the light
    allowed (f/4 passes twice as much light as f/5.6 - you'll note that every
    doubling or halving of the aperture number is actually two stops of exposure,
    eg. f/4 to f/8). So at a given shutter speed, 200 ISO at f/4 will give the same
    exposure as 400 ISO at f/5.6, as will 800 ISO at f/8, or 100 ISO at f/2.8.
     
    Matt Ion, Apr 12, 2007
    #4
  5. Ockham's Razor

    M-M Guest

    In article <sBuTh.64610$6m4.5332@pd7urf1no>,
    Matt Ion <> wrote:

    > So at a given shutter speed, 200 ISO at f/4 will give the same
    > exposure as 400 ISO at f/5.6, as will 800 ISO at f/8, or 100 ISO at f/2.8.


    That was a good explanation.

    But what do the aperture numbers represent? 2.8-what? Or is it
    1/2.8-something? And what is the relationship between the numbers?

    I believe f/64 represents one millimeter of aperture. Is there a way to
    measure the diameter of the opening to determine the f/#?

    I've always wondered.

    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Apr 12, 2007
    #5
  6. Ockham's Razor

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:17:06 -0400, in rec.photo.digital M-M
    <> wrote:


    >But what do the aperture numbers represent? 2.8-what? Or is it
    >1/2.8-something? And what is the relationship between the numbers?
    >
    >I believe f/64 represents one millimeter of aperture. Is there a way to
    >measure the diameter of the opening to determine the f/#?


    f is the focal length of the specific lens you are considering. So
    consider the 70or 80-200mm f/2.8 lenses. The max aperture of the lens
    is then 200mm / 2.8 = 71.4mm.
    -
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Apr 12, 2007
    #6
  7. Ockham's Razor

    Ken Lucke Guest

    In article <>, M-M
    <> wrote:

    > In article <sBuTh.64610$6m4.5332@pd7urf1no>,
    > Matt Ion <> wrote:
    >
    > > So at a given shutter speed, 200 ISO at f/4 will give the same
    > > exposure as 400 ISO at f/5.6, as will 800 ISO at f/8, or 100 ISO at f/2.8.

    >
    > That was a good explanation.
    >
    > But what do the aperture numbers represent? 2.8-what? Or is it
    > 1/2.8-something? And what is the relationship between the numbers?
    >
    > I believe f/64 represents one millimeter of aperture. Is there a way to
    > measure the diameter of the opening to determine the f/#?


    f/# == (focal length) / (diameter of entrance pupil)

    --
    You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
    reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
    the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
    independence.
    -- Charles A. Beard
     
    Ken Lucke, Apr 12, 2007
    #7
  8. M-M wrote:
    > In article <sBuTh.64610$6m4.5332@pd7urf1no>,
    > Matt Ion <> wrote:
    >
    >> So at a given shutter speed, 200 ISO at f/4 will give the same
    >> exposure as 400 ISO at f/5.6, as will 800 ISO at f/8, or 100 ISO at f/2.8.

    >
    > That was a good explanation.
    >
    > But what do the aperture numbers represent? 2.8-what? Or is it
    > 1/2.8-something? And what is the relationship between the numbers?


    It's a pure number, no units -- a ratio, in fact. It's the focal length
    of the lens over the aperture size (in complex modern designs it's a
    *bit* more complicated than that, but for the simplest case, a
    single-element lens, that's accurate). That's why it's most correctly
    written as f/2.8.

    The "standard" sequence of f-numbers, which are all one stop apart, have
    the ratio sqrt(2) between any two adjacent values, which makes sense
    (given the formula for the area of a circle). There are some rounding
    glitches, though :).

    1.4 2 2.8 4 5.6 8 11 16 22 32 45 64
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Ockham's Razor

    Westy Guest

    On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 07:58:34 -0700, Ockham's Razor <>
    wrote:

    >Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >equivalent for a given increase in ISO?


    ISO 200 is 1 stop greater than ISO100

    ISO 400 is 1 stop greater than ISO200

    ISO 800 is 1 stop greater than ISO400

    You get the picture?
     
    Westy, Apr 12, 2007
    #9
  10. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:20:56 -0400, Marvin <>
    wrote:

    >Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >> Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >> opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >> equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >>

    >In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    >settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    >reading the image pixels.


    Well, it *should* affect the exposure.
    Doubling the ISO means half the light is needed for proper exposure.
    Thus, if proper exposure at ISO 100 is f/4 @ 1/100 sec shutter speed,
    doubling the ISO to 200 would let you go up one f/stop or halve the
    shutter speed (or a proper combination of the two).

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    Hillary Clinton visited a veteran's hospital
    in Syracuse Tuesday and promised better care
    for wounded veterans. She's wounded her share.
    Whenever the Commander-in-Chief used to walk
    into the Rose Garden with a black eye, you
    knew he was having a good week.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 12, 2007
    #10
  11. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:17:06 -0400, M-M <> wrote:

    >In article <sBuTh.64610$6m4.5332@pd7urf1no>,
    > Matt Ion <> wrote:
    >
    >> So at a given shutter speed, 200 ISO at f/4 will give the same
    >> exposure as 400 ISO at f/5.6, as will 800 ISO at f/8, or 100 ISO at f/2.8.

    >
    >That was a good explanation.
    >
    >But what do the aperture numbers represent? 2.8-what? Or is it
    >1/2.8-something? And what is the relationship between the numbers?
    >
    >I believe f/64 represents one millimeter of aperture. Is there a way to
    >measure the diameter of the opening to determine the f/#?
    >
    >I've always wondered.


    The best thing for you to do is get a book on basic photography; and
    *read* it several times. Practice; shots with a digital camera are
    free.
    The inter-relationships of aperture, shutter speed and ISO are too
    much to be explained in a forum such as this. Trust me on this: a book
    is far better than the multitude of explanations you'll get here.
    :)

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    Hillary Clinton visited a veteran's hospital
    in Syracuse Tuesday and promised better care
    for wounded veterans. She's wounded her share.
    Whenever the Commander-in-Chief used to walk
    into the Rose Garden with a black eye, you
    knew he was having a good week.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 12, 2007
    #11
  12. Ockham's Razor

    John Sheehy Guest

    Ockham's Razor <> wrote in news:Mencken-
    -sjc.supernews.net:

    > Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    > opening the shutter?


    I assume you mean opening the shutter *longer*.

    Only as far as relative exposure level is concerned (exposure in the
    recording format, as opposed to absolute exposure). In many ways, they are
    different. The longer exposure will give more absolute exposure, and will
    have less noise, relative to signal. The higher ISO will have the same
    absolute exposure as the low ISO, and will have more noise, relative to
    signal. I assume that all other things (f-stops) remain equal.

    > If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    > equivalent for a given increase in ISO?


    To get the same relative exposure, ISO and the denominator of the ex[posure
    time can change proportionately. IOW, double the shutter speed, and double
    the ISO, and you get the same relative exposure.

    ISO 200 and 1/100, ISO 400 and 1/200, ISO 800 and 1/400 all give the same
    relative exposure. ISO 800 gives the most noise. ISO 200 can give the
    most motion blur.

    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    John Sheehy, Apr 12, 2007
    #12
  13. Ockham's Razor

    Marvin Guest

    Bill Funk wrote:
    > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:20:56 -0400, Marvin <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >>> Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >>> opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >>> equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >>>

    >> In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    >> settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    >> reading the image pixels.

    >
    > Well, it *should* affect the exposure.
    > Doubling the ISO means half the light is needed for proper exposure.
    > Thus, if proper exposure at ISO 100 is f/4 @ 1/100 sec shutter speed,
    > doubling the ISO to 200 would let you go up one f/stop or halve the
    > shutter speed (or a proper combination of the two).
    >

    I could have been more specific. In a digicam, changing the
    ISO setting changes the amplification in the readout of the
    image pixels. If the camera is set for automatic exposure,
    it will change the the aperture setting or the exposure time
    accordingly. It is analogous to how automatic exposure works
    in a film camera, when a new roll of film is loaded. But in
    a film camera, the ISO number refers to the sensitivity of
    the film. In a digicam, a higher ISO number does not mean
    that the sensor is more sensitive. Changing the readout
    amplification is more like "pushing" the film development.
     
    Marvin, Apr 13, 2007
    #13
  14. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:27:17 -0400, Marvin <>
    wrote:

    >Bill Funk wrote:
    >> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:20:56 -0400, Marvin <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >>>> Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >>>> opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >>>> equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >>>>
    >>> In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    >>> settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    >>> reading the image pixels.

    >>
    >> Well, it *should* affect the exposure.
    >> Doubling the ISO means half the light is needed for proper exposure.
    >> Thus, if proper exposure at ISO 100 is f/4 @ 1/100 sec shutter speed,
    >> doubling the ISO to 200 would let you go up one f/stop or halve the
    >> shutter speed (or a proper combination of the two).
    >>

    >I could have been more specific. In a digicam, changing the
    >ISO setting changes the amplification in the readout of the
    >image pixels. If the camera is set for automatic exposure,
    >it will change the the aperture setting or the exposure time
    >accordingly. It is analogous to how automatic exposure works
    >in a film camera, when a new roll of film is loaded. But in
    >a film camera, the ISO number refers to the sensitivity of
    >the film. In a digicam, a higher ISO number does not mean
    >that the sensor is more sensitive. Changing the readout
    >amplification is more like "pushing" the film development.


    Changing the ISO in a digital camera is the same as changing the ISO
    in a film camera - the shutter speed and aperture must be changed to
    correctly expose the "film".
    'Pushing' in digital terms is increasing brightness or gamma in
    post-processing.
    That increasing the ISO in a digital camera is achieved by increasing
    the amplification of the signal from the sensor is immaterial; in
    effect, it is the same as increasing the ISO in film. In both digital
    and film, raising the ISO requires the exposure to be adjusted to
    properly expose the shot.
    I don't think it really matters if the sensor is actually more
    sensitive or not; the end result is the same. It's transparent to the
    user. It's not analogous to pushing in film.

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    The White House admitted on Wednesday that
    e-mails about official business in Karl Rove's
    office were erased. The deleted e-mails were
    sent on Republican Party accounts instead of
    White House accounts to avoid a law that
    requires preservation of government records.
    It doesn't clog up the landfills like Hillary's
    shredder did for eight years.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 14, 2007
    #14
  15. Ockham's Razor

    Marvin Guest

    Bill Funk wrote:
    > On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:27:17 -0400, Marvin <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Bill Funk wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:20:56 -0400, Marvin <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >>>>> Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >>>>> opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >>>>> equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >>>>>
    >>>> In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    >>>> settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    >>>> reading the image pixels.
    >>> Well, it *should* affect the exposure.
    >>> Doubling the ISO means half the light is needed for proper exposure.
    >>> Thus, if proper exposure at ISO 100 is f/4 @ 1/100 sec shutter speed,
    >>> doubling the ISO to 200 would let you go up one f/stop or halve the
    >>> shutter speed (or a proper combination of the two).
    >>>

    >> I could have been more specific. In a digicam, changing the
    >> ISO setting changes the amplification in the readout of the
    >> image pixels. If the camera is set for automatic exposure,
    >> it will change the the aperture setting or the exposure time
    >> accordingly. It is analogous to how automatic exposure works
    >> in a film camera, when a new roll of film is loaded. But in
    >> a film camera, the ISO number refers to the sensitivity of
    >> the film. In a digicam, a higher ISO number does not mean
    >> that the sensor is more sensitive. Changing the readout
    >> amplification is more like "pushing" the film development.

    >
    > Changing the ISO in a digital camera is the same as changing the ISO
    > in a film camera - the shutter speed and aperture must be changed to
    > correctly expose the "film".


    But in a digicam, thee sensitivity of the sensor doesn't
    change when the ISO is changed. The change is thta the
    signal is amplified more in the readout after the exposure.
    That is why I compared it to "pushing" the film in
    development.

    > 'Pushing' in digital terms is increasing brightness or gamma in
    > post-processing.


    I hope you know that gamma isn't a measure of brightness in
    either film or digital photography. It has to do with contrast.
     
    Marvin, Apr 14, 2007
    #15
  16. Marvin wrote:

    > But in a digicam, thee sensitivity of the sensor doesn't change when the
    > ISO is changed. The change is thta the signal is amplified more in the
    > readout after the exposure. That is why I compared it to "pushing" the
    > film in development.


    But it shows new shadow detail, which pushing film doesn't.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 14, 2007
    #16
  17. Ockham's Razor

    Marvin Guest

    David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    > Marvin wrote:
    >
    >> But in a digicam, thee sensitivity of the sensor doesn't change when
    >> the ISO is changed. The change is thta the signal is amplified more
    >> in the readout after the exposure. That is why I compared it to
    >> "pushing" the film in development.

    >
    > But it shows new shadow detail, which pushing film doesn't.


    The comparison is not literal. Film and digital are
    different technologies, and it one should understand the
    differences to get the most of either one. What I initially
    wrote on this subject was meant to help readers who haven't
    yet learned the details. This following discussion is
    interesting for those who do know at least some of the details.
     
    Marvin, Apr 15, 2007
    #17
  18. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:02:40 -0400, Marvin <>
    wrote:

    >Bill Funk wrote:
    >> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:27:17 -0400, Marvin <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Bill Funk wrote:
    >>>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:20:56 -0400, Marvin <>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Ockham's Razor wrote:
    >>>>>> Does increasing the ISO setting on a digital camera do the same thing as
    >>>>>> opening the shutter? If so, is there any info on the shutter stop
    >>>>>> equivalent for a given increase in ISO?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> In digicams, the ISO setting does not affect the exposure
    >>>>> settings. It changes the amplification (i.e., gain) in
    >>>>> reading the image pixels.
    >>>> Well, it *should* affect the exposure.
    >>>> Doubling the ISO means half the light is needed for proper exposure.
    >>>> Thus, if proper exposure at ISO 100 is f/4 @ 1/100 sec shutter speed,
    >>>> doubling the ISO to 200 would let you go up one f/stop or halve the
    >>>> shutter speed (or a proper combination of the two).
    >>>>
    >>> I could have been more specific. In a digicam, changing the
    >>> ISO setting changes the amplification in the readout of the
    >>> image pixels. If the camera is set for automatic exposure,
    >>> it will change the the aperture setting or the exposure time
    >>> accordingly. It is analogous to how automatic exposure works
    >>> in a film camera, when a new roll of film is loaded. But in
    >>> a film camera, the ISO number refers to the sensitivity of
    >>> the film. In a digicam, a higher ISO number does not mean
    >>> that the sensor is more sensitive. Changing the readout
    >>> amplification is more like "pushing" the film development.

    >>
    >> Changing the ISO in a digital camera is the same as changing the ISO
    >> in a film camera - the shutter speed and aperture must be changed to
    >> correctly expose the "film".

    >
    >But in a digicam, thee sensitivity of the sensor doesn't
    >change when the ISO is changed. The change is thta the
    >signal is amplified more in the readout after the exposure.
    > That is why I compared it to "pushing" the film in
    >development.


    In a digital camera, the adjustment is done by adjusting the exposure
    directly during the shot, unlike pushing, which is done *after* the
    pic is shot.
    >
    >> 'Pushing' in digital terms is increasing brightness or gamma in
    >> post-processing.

    >
    >I hope you know that gamma isn't a measure of brightness in
    >either film or digital photography. It has to do with contrast.


    No, I'm not aware of that.
    And even after a Google search, I'm still not.
    If I get what you're saying, then you're saying all brightness
    adjustments are contrast adjustments. Even adjusting overall
    brightness will affect the overall contrast.
    Gamma, OTOH, is different from contrast; it controls the overall
    brightness of an image, especially as seen on a monitor. Changing the
    gamma not only controls brightness, but also the ratios of green to
    blue to red.

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    The White House admitted on Wednesday that
    e-mails about official business in Karl Rove's
    office were erased. The deleted e-mails were
    sent on Republican Party accounts instead of
    White House accounts to avoid a law that
    requires preservation of government records.
    It doesn't clog up the landfills like Hillary's
    shredder did for eight years.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 15, 2007
    #18
  19. Ockham's Razor

    Marvin Guest

    Bill Funk wrote:
    > On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:02:40 -0400, Marvin <>
    > wrote:


    > No, I'm not aware of that.
    > And even after a Google search, I'm still not.
    > If I get what you're saying, then you're saying all brightness
    > adjustments are contrast adjustments. Even adjusting overall
    > brightness will affect the overall contrast.
    > Gamma, OTOH, is different from contrast; it controls the overall
    > brightness of an image, especially as seen on a monitor. Changing the
    > gamma not only controls brightness, but also the ratios of green to
    > blue to red.
    >


    You still don't understand what gamma means. Here is a link
    that may help you.
    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/Gamma_01.htm
     
    Marvin, Apr 16, 2007
    #19
  20. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:36:45 -0400, Marvin <>
    wrote:

    >Bill Funk wrote:
    >> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:02:40 -0400, Marvin <>
    >> wrote:

    >
    >> No, I'm not aware of that.
    >> And even after a Google search, I'm still not.
    >> If I get what you're saying, then you're saying all brightness
    >> adjustments are contrast adjustments. Even adjusting overall
    >> brightness will affect the overall contrast.
    >> Gamma, OTOH, is different from contrast; it controls the overall
    >> brightness of an image, especially as seen on a monitor. Changing the
    >> gamma not only controls brightness, but also the ratios of green to
    >> blue to red.
    >>

    >
    >You still don't understand what gamma means. Here is a link
    >that may help you.
    >http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/Gamma_01.htm


    This does not say Gamma is about contrast.
    In fact, it seems to be saying what I said; Gamma is about the
    brightness of the image, especiually ass een on a monitor.
    Taking a washed-out image, and adjusting Gamma will make it look more
    contrasy, but you do it by adjusting brightness, not contrast.

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    Hillary Clinton told New Hampshire voters
    Sunday that President Bush's refusal to change
    course in Iraq is a tragedy of historic proportion.
    That's fine with her. The more unforgivable the
    president, the more Hillary Clinton seems to get
    out of it.
     
    Bill Funk, Apr 17, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. JD

    How do you convert a CD ISO to DVD ISO?

    JD, Aug 20, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    29,312
  2. Bill Smith
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    858
    DaveJ
    Aug 1, 2003
  3. Salem Derisavi

    Figuring out ISO settings in Auto ISO mode

    Salem Derisavi, Sep 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,550
    Andrew McDonald
    Sep 29, 2003
  4. Georgette Preddy

    Is Sigma's SD10 at ISO 1600 better than Canon's 1Ds at ISO 100?

    Georgette Preddy, Jul 11, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    709
    Randall Ainsworth
    Jul 15, 2004
  5. cohibakid

    rebel 300d iso 100 vs nikon d70 iso 200

    cohibakid, Jul 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    593
    David J. Littleboy
    Jul 15, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page