ISOless sensors, read noise and photography - many questions!

Started Oct 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
RussellInCincinnati Veteran Member • Posts: 3,201
try before you cry

RussellInCincinnati wrote: But in paragraph 3 of 3 of that 21st post, in a summary, I did not mention that my experience was only with a Nex C3 or Lightroom.

WilbaW wrote: Right, and that's the bit of the whole discussion that a zealot would quote to justify telling everyone to do it. I often see that happen, hence my addition.

Finally get what you are saying. You (a) found some years ago (as did I) that raw post-processing brightening does not work as well as firmware high-ISO settings in your camera, and thus (b) you speculate, without providing evidence, that my easily-done-in-2013 brightening of low-ISO images in post-processing (with examples) will not easily be duplicated with other cameras,

$200 dollar Nex C3 and 25 year old $50 dollar Minolta 50/1.7 lens.
ISO 800, 1/10th second at F/2.2, apparently quite dim light...a classic in-the-trenches professional photography situation. Here's the ruggedly handsome chairman of the board, he has no time for foolishness, we're at a posh fundraiser reception with the night's talent. We're only pressing the shutter button once, before this scene melts back into the social we trust the camera's high ISO setting to not burn out highlights, or do we underexpose the image and take our chances with raw post-processing in Lightroom?...

...and we end up with a thank-you note from Mr. Big.

...thus (c) you post a warning that everyone should test limited-ISO first. You are concerned a zealot will take my summarizing workflow sentence that didn't mention the Nex C3 out of context, and publicize the mistaken idea that I had tested brightening underexposed raw images on all cameras.

As if there is some way highly technical readers of this thread could tragically "buy" this hazardous workflow without testing it--the way they might buy an $8000 dollar Leica lens from a street vendor's cart in Istanbul, without return privileges.

Where's some evidence, where's your low-ISO raw file from some reasonably modern camera? That shows that today's raw file software...can't easily work as about as well as in-camera high-ISO settings, to brighten dim images?

...But the shooting, processing, and IQ penalties of limiting ISO are not acceptable to me,

In some way that you are not going to show us.

for the way I shoot and process images, using my camera.

I beg to differ with you. You will not have any trouble limiting ISO to 800, and then brightening in post-processing with your Canon EOS60D (that you list as your camera), if you follow my repeated recommendations to try a $50 dollar copy of Lightroom 4. Because thanks to we know your '60D has less ISO 800 read noise than my Nex C3 (3.2 vs 3.4), and almost the same dynamic range as my Nex C3 (10.2 vs 10.6 EV), at ISO 800.

If I were to provide two files, you would produce a brightened image from the dark one and claim that it's acceptable in comparison with the bright one...

It is just so silly to publicize doubt about a workflow that is supported with examples, when you are so worried that you will not able to provide a counter-example that you can't bring yourself to post one.

...the individual photographer and only they can know their truth.

WilbaW, try before you cry. Hey the point is for us to help each other, the way Boardsy helped me in this thread, I will be fascinated if you can show us a camera where pushing ISO in Lightroom doesn't work so well.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow