Nikon D 100-lowest ASA 200??

kowen · Aug 29, 2002

Does any Nikon D100 owner wish there were a 50 or 100 ASA setting for this camera? Could dpreview show more examples of shadow detail / color gradations in future photos where the light might not be as bright as afternoon sun?

Say, for example, early mornig shots of nature, where there might be trees with shadows, etc. ??

Any comments on this minimal ASA 200 setting? Just does not seem low enough for situations needing to capture shadow detail or tonal gradations in low light situations.

Bimthecat · Aug 29, 2002

Hello kowen,

I agree, lower ISO is desireable. To limit depth-of-field and so forth.

Years back....When I all used B&W film for reportage/photojounalism etc, I was always chasing a HIGHER ISO...with weird developer/film combos.

Now we all want a lower Digital ISO.

Curious.

The D1X is 125 ISO...and combined with its 500th X sync...is what makes it stand out from everything else.

Carl Snyder · Aug 29, 2002

When looking at the incredibly smooth, noise-free D60's 100 ISO shots (on phil's review), I question why Nikon didn't do everything possible to produce the same. Take a look at the D60's 100 ISO shots of the the black Macbeth Color Chart on phil's review, and then look at the D100's 200 ISO shots. D60's noise is considerably less, IMHO. I hope that an upcoming firmware change from Nikon will ad ISO 100 to the D100, if this is possible.

I think the D100 is still a great camera.

Gabriele Sartori · Aug 29, 2002

to introduce ISO 100 if they want to. Worst case they make a "fake" iso100 but it would better than nothing.

What I would like to see would be a serious noise reduction (switchable on/off) in the camera. It shouldn't be lame like the NC3 noise reduction though. I'm pretty sure that Canon has low noise due to some kind of noise reduction.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

Gary Franklin · Aug 29, 2002

Have you tried the noise reduction in the D100? I think it works great !! But it is designed for exposures 2 seconds or longer and it does cut your buffer to 3 frames so be sure to cut it back off when you aren't using long shutter speeds. You can't use the buffer in long shutter speeds with noise reduction, so I guess that memory is used for the noise reduction.

Gabriele Sartori said:
to introduce ISO 100 if they want to. Worst case they make a "fake"
iso100 but it would better than nothing.

What I would like to see would be a serious noise reduction
(switchable on/off) in the camera. It shouldn't be lame like the
NC3 noise reduction though. I'm pretty sure that Canon has low
noise due to some kind of noise reduction.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

Joe Hoddinott · Aug 29, 2002

I think that for all that they D100 offers ISO-wise - why the hell didn't Nikon add all the flexability of lower ISO's? Why not a 50, 80, 100, 125...?

I'm not complaining, but I wouldn't mind seeing the ISO flexability expanded a little bit further.

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com

(Sarcasm Included - some assembly required.)

Berg Na · Aug 29, 2002

What the hell would a lower equivalent ISO figure (read lower sensitivity) buy you? Not much! With film, you had to accept low speed if you wanted low grain, there are just no other choices. But this is not the case with solid state imagers where the ugly emulsion grain does not exist. The CCD in the D100 is equipped with a special microlens array which boosts the sensitivity of the chip, so its baseline sensitivity is equivalent to ISO 200. Future cameras will undoubtedly be even more sensitive so that more available light photography can be done without the obnoxious and cumbersome flash.

Joe Hoddinott said:
I think that for all that they D100 offers ISO-wise - why the hell
didn't Nikon add all the flexability of lower ISO's? Why not a 50,
80, 100, 125...?

Joe Hoddinott · Aug 30, 2002

Berg Na said:
What the hell would a lower equivalent ISO figure (read lower
sensitivity) buy you?

More flexable studio light options: It would keep me from using high f-stops (where I don't always want to be) while trying to maintain the camera's slow flash sync.

If the tech is there... why not use it?

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com

(Sarcasm Included - some assembly required.)

Ken Mai · Aug 30, 2002

Berg Na said:
What the hell would a lower equivalent ISO figure (read lower
sensitivity) buy you? Not much!

The ability to shoot with a wide aperature and slow shutter in bright conditions.

Berg Na said:
Future cameras will undoubtedly be even more sensitive so that more
available light photography can be done without the obnoxious and
cumbersome flash.

Yes, good high-ISO capability is desirable. No one is disputing this. But if we could only shoot at ISO 1600 all the time, it would be quite limiting in terms of aperature and shutter choices.

rick decker · Aug 30, 2002

You know the definition of "but"...If that which proceeds "but" is true then that which follow "but" is false!!

Sounds like you are complaining to me....and you have every right to!!
Heck if Fuji could make ISO 100 then why couldn't have Nikon?

The other thought though is that as Digital progresses with less noise and less artifacts (hopefully)..are these lower ISO's a thing of the past? Only needed for special cases where you want to force long exposures (water etc). I can tell you on the S1 that it was nice picking up an extra stop and a half with ISO 320.

Joe Hoddinott said:
I think that for all that they D100 offers ISO-wise - why the hell
didn't Nikon add all the flexability of lower ISO's? Why not a 50,
80, 100, 125...?

I'm not complaining, but I wouldn't mind seeing the ISO flexability
expanded a little bit further.

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com

(Sarcasm Included - some assembly required.)

rick decker · Aug 30, 2002

Actually, I have it turned around. If that which follows "But" is true, then that which proceeds "But" is false (probably same difference).

rick decker said:
Sounds like you are complaining to me....and you have every right to!!
Heck if Fuji could make ISO 100 then why couldn't have Nikon?

The other thought though is that as Digital progresses with less
noise and less artifacts (hopefully)..are these lower ISO's a
thing of the past? Only needed for special cases where you want to
force long exposures (water etc). I can tell you on the S1 that it
was nice picking up an extra stop and a half with ISO 320.

Joe Hoddinott said:

I think that for all that they D100 offers ISO-wise - why the hell
didn't Nikon add all the flexability of lower ISO's? Why not a 50,
80, 100, 125...?

I'm not complaining, but I wouldn't mind seeing the ISO flexability
expanded a little bit further.

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.biggerboatstudios.com

(Sarcasm Included - some assembly required.)

Click to expand...

--

SongMi · Aug 30, 2002

Consider the S2?

Nikon couldnt produce the d100 to out perform their flag ship digital - the d1x, so the d100 is really the the compromised d1x in order to scoop the prosumer market. Canon d60 is the same - comprised 1d.

What I like about Nikon is that they allowed fujifilm to develop their own prosumer line with their "ok" body in order to broaden their market - nikon system - and really put foward in an indirect way a camera superior to their d1x in terms of sharpness and tonal accuracy.

I really believe that their d100 is a parenthesis to their new digital history.

--
Have a good day!

DavidMillier · Aug 30, 2002

I suspect the CCD has an inherent sensitivity.

Higher sensitivity is achieved at the cost of reduced dynamic range and greater noise through boosting amplifier gain but this possibly wouldn't work in reverse because the greater exposure times as ISO 100 will probably overload the photosites...

kowen said:
Does any Nikon D100 owner wish there were a 50 or 100 ASA setting
for this camera? Could dpreview show more examples of shadow
detail / color gradations in future photos where the light might
not be as bright as afternoon sun?

Say, for example, early mornig shots of nature, where there might
be trees with shadows, etc. ??

Any comments on this minimal ASA 200 setting? Just does not seem
low enough for situations needing to capture shadow detail or tonal
gradations in low light situations.

Joseph S Wisniewski · Aug 30, 2002

Berg Na said:
What the hell would a lower equivalent ISO figure (read lower
sensitivity) buy you? Not much!

It would buy me the ability to set the D100 to match the ISO 100 or ISO 50 slide film in the F100, so I could neter the scene, set both cameras, and not have to keep remembering to sonvert settings from one to the other.

Ciao!

Joe

Duncan C · Aug 30, 2002

DMillier said:
I suspect the CCD has an inherent sensitivity.

Like others have said in this thread, I'm not sure what real benifits you get with lower ASA on a digital camera.

With film, lower ASA gives finer grain, which is a good thing. Not true with digital

If you need slower ASA with a D100, why not use a neutral density filter? That should give you what you're after. You should be able to come up with a filter (or combination of filters) that lets you get a lower effective "filmspeed."

For Studio work, I've had decent luck using faster shutterspeeds to limit the light and let me use wider apetures. Note that you'll have to figure out what shutterspeed yeilds a given reduction in light experimentally, since light output from a flash is NOT linear over time, and the duration of the flash varies with the power setting. (Using my D1x, I found that that up to about 1/500th of a second, faster shutterspeeds had almost no effect on exposure. At 1/3200th of a second, I was cutting about 2 stops from the exposure.)

Duncan C

Mario Burgos · Aug 30, 2002

Using studio flash units?

Gabriele Sartori · Aug 30, 2002

gfranklin said:
Have you tried the noise reduction in the D100? I think it works
great !! But it is designed for exposures 2 seconds or longer and
it does cut your buffer to 3 frames so be sure to cut it back off
when you aren't using long shutter speeds. You can't use the
buffer in long shutter speeds with noise reduction, so I guess that
memory is used for the noise reduction.

It is great, that is the reason why I'm asking for a NR method that I can insert or esclude on any photo. I use neatimage and I do clean photos up to ISO6400 with very good result. It would be nice to have a similar option in the camera for any photo at any speed.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

Doug Boutwell · Aug 30, 2002

I sometimes wish that there was a lower ASA too, just because there would be even lower grain and better saturation. But I am very impressed with the dynamic range of the D100 sensor at ISO 200, and I have found the noise to be either unobtrusive or easily removable for real world subjects. Sure there's a difference shooting test charts and the like, but the only people that will be bothered by the D100's noise at ISO 200 (or 400 for that matter) are people that aren't looking at the photograph, and are instead checking obsessively to see that there it absolusely no noise. And for those freaks there's always post-processing noise reduction. But for the real world, the 200 ISO is more than amazing on the D100.

kowen said:
Does any Nikon D100 owner wish there were a 50 or 100 ASA setting
for this camera? Could dpreview show more examples of shadow
detail / color gradations in future photos where the light might
not be as bright as afternoon sun?

Say, for example, early mornig shots of nature, where there might
be trees with shadows, etc. ??

Any comments on this minimal ASA 200 setting? Just does not seem
low enough for situations needing to capture shadow detail or tonal
gradations in low light situations.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/dougboutwell/d100_images

Rick Wallace · Aug 30, 2002

Berg,

It would buy a lot, if you ever need to shoot in certain kinds of situations. Your comment seems to refer to low (available) light situations. However, as you know, there are many circumstances where low light is not the issue and there's too much light, or a very wide range of light values.

I'll give one example that I encounter quite a lot. Documenting a village meeting in the shade of a tree, with full force African sun blowing out all the surrounding background. The range of EV can be very wide in that situation, compounded by the need to achieve a proper exposure for the dark skin of the village residents. I typically set a compromise exposure for the background (still blown out but distinguishable) and then use fill flash through a diffuser. A lower ISO gives you flexibility in a tough situation like that, especially if you want to utilize selective focus.

Rick

Berg Na said:
Joe Hoddinott said:

I think that for all that they D100 offers ISO-wise - why the hell
didn't Nikon add all the flexability of lower ISO's? Why not a 50,
80, 100, 125...?

Click to expand...

Cribbage · Aug 30, 2002

If ISO 200 give you the clearest picture available from the D100's CCD by specification, then ND filters give you the same benefits as lower ISO.

The only drawback to an ND filter is some darkening of the image in the viewfinder w/r/t composition.

Ken Mai said:
Berg Na said:

What the hell would a lower equivalent ISO figure (read lower
sensitivity) buy you? Not much!

Click to expand...

The ability to shoot with a wide aperature and slow shutter in
bright conditions.

Ken Mai said:

Future cameras will undoubtedly be even more sensitive so that more
available light photography can be done without the obnoxious and
cumbersome flash.

Click to expand...

Yes, good high-ISO capability is desirable. No one is disputing
this. But if we could only shoot at ISO 1600 all the time, it would
be quite limiting in terms of aperature and shutter choices.

Nikon D 100-lowest ASA 200??

New member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts