attomole

Is it your experience that processing is always best done outside the camera  DM following exposure as base/optimal ISO settings?

@ Hugo fist, who also could referred to as prey, in the predatory sense.
;-)

"the communities smartest eggheads" hmm...

Wonder how it compares to SIgma 1.4 DG on a D800, anyone done the math!
;-)

So the choice of 6400 ASA and the exposure are wrong, given that the highlights are blown, so you would expose to keep the highlights under control at base ISO settings and let the shadows fall...

In that sense are you equating an AM radio to ISO control on a digital camera bob2 or the whole digital camera?

Didn't really say amplifying electrons those words are your own

I dont think I ever thought that implementing ISO was sample a simple linear gain control, but clearly an amplification either electronic or via a digital filter is being applied when you spin that...

Thanks gollywop. it does seem that some will resist in there practices without apparent heed to contrary opinions I do sense the glimmer of agreement, as you do have to adapt your teaching as...

But choosing to ignore or gloss over, the technicalities of what is going on under the hood when setting ISO or post processing on a computer (which depends on the vendor in each case respectively)...

In Science we teach and follow Newtonian physics even though we now know as you approach the speed of light Newtonian laws of motion break down, we don't launch straight into relativistic physics...

With you on this. The meaning of the language we use is dynamic it changes with use over time, its become common to say a photograph that is a bit dark is underexposed, when "a bit dark" is...

@ ppastoris
The thing is I don't think this is really true (Not Yabokkie with certain caveats he is correct) but the extent to which image quality is compromised doesn't matter in normal lighting...

@ ppastoris
The thing is I don't think this is really true (Not Yabokkie with certain caveats he is correct) but the extent to which image quality is compromised doesn't matter, in normal...

Opening up the aperture wont make the sensor bigger Yabokkie

"f-number is a convenient (but no accurate) tool for
same format, different FoVs (it's not focal lengths)

aperture (diameter or area) is a useful tool for
different formats, same FoV,

FoV and...

Good for Leica. Always look on the Leica cabinet in Airport retailers and whatever camera its wrapped over. the re-branding makes great looking cameras, in terms of design no other camera maker...

"so you know very well where is the problem which has nothing to do with the equivalency calculation right?"

Well it has everything to do with the equivilancy calculation Yabbokie. For me it it...

58mm f/3.5 for 645 film,
35mm f/2.1 for 35mm format,
18mm f/1.1 for 4/3", and
13mm f/0.8 for Nikon 1.

If your at base ISO and set exposure at f3.5. 250th on your 645. Cranking your 13mm Nikon...

Your doing photography by maths Yabokkie. What the heck size sensor is big enough? Those tiny sensor p&s are capable of great looking pictures if the light is reasonable the exposure is set...