Irrational views on SLT part duex

Started Jan 22, 2014 | Discussions thread
TrojMacReady Veteran Member • Posts: 8,724
I wish you would read first.

Shield3 wrote:

This is for Nord/Troj:

You are both saying a "properly exposed" shot at ISO 6400 will look the same as one properly exposed at ISO 100.

You omitted the important part in Nord's statement, one that I even repeated and highlighted: using the samy physical exposure (and obviously same light).

And neither of us claimed it would be exactly the same, noise will be similar, but the low ISO shot will have far more highlight headroom, which (depending on scene and DR of the scene), may or may not be a visible benefit.

I disagree, due to the increased noise, lowered dynamic range, banding, etc introduced at higher ISO's.

I just took 2 shots handheld. These are heavy, heavy crops. In both shots the camera was set to Auto ISO and I adjusted the shutter speed until shot 1 hit 6400. Shot 2 was at ISO 100. Both are at F/8. Neither shot was focused very well so please ignore that.

Shot 1: 1/8000, ISO 6400, F/8. Camera metering was dead center for exposure.

Shot 2: 1/100, ISO 100, F/8. Camera metering was dead center for exposure.

Does anyone think these shots look identical?

I'll repeat my last post, since for unknown reasons, you failed to read it.

My first first post on the matter, which is basically quoting Nord:

He wrote:

"If you first shoot a well exposed frame at ISO 6400 and then shoot at ISO 100 with exactly the same exposure settings,"

That answers that.

Then my second post after you ignored the important bit the first time

Not sure if serious or just trolling, but how does comparing differnt light scenes and thus different exposure settings (see his comment about that) make any sense here?

Note that we're talking about exposure settings, not metering settings.

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