To ETTR or not to ETTR...?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
FingerPainter Senior Member • Posts: 7,801
Re: Am I missing something?

TomFid wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

The Ghost of Caravaggio wrote:

...

ISO Is An Important Parameter

Use the lowest practical ISO consistent with practical shutter times and or aperture settings. This maximizes sensor exposure. If your camera happens to use dual conversion-gain sensor technology there will be two minimum ISO settings. One for low gain (bright light) to optimize sensor analog dynamic range in bright light and another for high gain to maximize sensor sensitivity in low light.

I'm not sure what you are advising here.

Assume a dual conversion gain camera that switches at ISO 800 and has a base ISO of 100. Assume a scene luminance and highlights such that there are two stops of highlight headroom at the slowest shutter that won't give unwanted motion blur and the widest aperture of the lens.

Are you suggesting the user will get better results at ISO 100 than at ISO 400? Isn't ISO 100 "the lowest practical ISO consistent with practical shutter times and or aperture settings"?

There may be a couple of dual gain m43 cameras, but looking at http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

I don't see anything with enough of a step in performance to justify shooting above the base native ISO, unless you're short on light. Am I missing something?

Perhaps. Those charts may indicate that the E-M5 II and E-M10 II are dual gain with the switch occurring at ISO 400,

Now look at http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm

It shows a 1 stop increase in ISO above base gives a half stop improvement in PDR for the E-M5 II and a bit more for the E-MI II and the E-M10 II. Is a half stop of improvement negligible? It seems any other increase on these two cameras does not give enough improvement to be worth the effort.

The E-M1 II's sensor does not appear to be dual gain, yet it too shows > 1/2 stop improvement in PDR from ISO 200 to ISO 400, and another 1/2 stop available above ISO 2000.

I would have thought one should use the highest ISO consistent with not blowing desired highlight detail at the slowest practical shutter and widest practical aperture.

The theoretical benefit of this isn't normally visible on my EM5ii, but other bodies might differ.

Other than from ISO 200 to ISO 400, I'd be inclined to agree, for that particular camera.

There's no substitute for personal testing, I think.

I think that there's no substitute for properly conducted testing. Sadly, a lot of personal testing is not properly conducted.  Most people don't have the proper setup or knowledge to properly control the tests. Perhaps your situation differs from the norm.

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