Prev: Security Guards Love the D3!!
Next: Armani Sunglasses SG_AR043 - www.luxury-gift.org
From: simon steel on 3 Jul 2008 15:23
Ok...
Higher ISO means more noise - we all know that...

But why don't cameras come with an ISO lower than 100?
Is there some trade off in image quality below the benchmark ISO100 figure?

not all of us want higher shutter speeds... some of us would like to slow
down the the shutter speeds..

SS


From: user on 3 Jul 2008 15:34
simon steel wrote:
> Ok...
> Higher ISO means more noise - we all know that...
>
> But why don't cameras come with an ISO lower than 100?

Because in a digital sensor there is a maximum number of electrons
a pixel can handle. If there is too much light you get too many
electrons, and they either get lost (and thus clip highlights) or
spill over into adjacent pixels (even worse!). This problem
is the cause of the 100 speed limit. The only cure is neutral
density filters.

Doug McDonald
From: Jake on 3 Jul 2008 15:39
Some cameras come with ISO 50, but sometimes it needs to be activated.
There is a reason for reduced image quality over ISO 100-200, but I can't
remember the facts off hand, because it's not something that I use very
often. I will look it up again when I get time.

Of course, you can always put a ND filter in front of the lens to get
slower shutter speeds, or of course select a smaller aperture (depending on
the final image you are looking for).



"simon steel" <simon(a)srsteel.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9vCdnb9AMcimuvDVRVnyggA(a)pipex.net...
> Ok...
> Higher ISO means more noise - we all know that...
>
> But why don't cameras come with an ISO lower than 100?
> Is there some trade off in image quality below the benchmark ISO100
> figure?
>
> not all of us want higher shutter speeds... some of us would like to slow
> down the the shutter speeds..
>
> SS
>

From: ransley on 3 Jul 2008 15:40
On Jul 3, 2:23 pm, "simon steel" <si...(a)srsteel.co.uk> wrote:
> Ok...
> Higher ISO means more noise - we all know that...
>
> But why don't cameras come with an ISO lower than 100?
> Is there some trade off in image quality below the benchmark ISO100 figure?
>
> not all of us want higher shutter speeds... some of us would like to slow
> down the the shutter speeds..
>
> SS

I will guess its just a benchmark of what is easily usable handheld, I
used to shoot 25 asa- iso Kodachrome and very often a tripod was
needed with a slower lens, Kodachrome was once 15 asa - iso so it was
even more demanding, they could rate-make the sensor slower but I will
guess they make the sensor optimal at 100 for ease of use.
From: Frank ess on 3 Jul 2008 16:48
My guess it the OP wants to trade of ISO "speed" for less noise.
Someone will be able to tell him the technical reason this is a neat-o
plan but doesn't always work.

A practical example is the Panasonic Lumix LX1. It has an ISO 80
setting, and I always use it, but with too little light it produces
noisy images, just like the 100 setting, only not quite.

Yeah, on the Kodachrome 25 and 15 (?). Some real potential there, in
the right circumstances. Must be a reason they are no longer part of
the photographer's repertoire.

--
Frank ess


ransley wrote:
> On Jul 3, 2:23 pm, "simon steel" <si...(a)srsteel.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ok...
>> Higher ISO means more noise - we all know that...
>>
>> But why don't cameras come with an ISO lower than 100?
>> Is there some trade off in image quality below the benchmark
>> ISO100 figure?
>>
>> not all of us want higher shutter speeds... some of us would like
>> to slow down the the shutter speeds..
>>
>> SS
>
> I will guess its just a benchmark of what is easily usable
> handheld, I used to shoot 25 asa- iso Kodachrome and very often a
> tripod was needed with a slower lens, Kodachrome was once 15 asa -
> iso so it was even more demanding, they could rate-make the sensor
> slower but I will guess they make the sensor optimal at 100 for
> ease of use.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Security Guards Love the D3!!
Next: Armani Sunglasses SG_AR043 - www.luxury-gift.org