Z7 auto ISO seems seriously flawed

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 26,085
Re: Professional target group
4

Alex Permit wrote:

Iliah Borg wrote:

Alex Permit wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

Alex Permit wrote:

j2scriba wrote:

...This may be an acceptable design paradigm for a point-and-shoot, but for a presumably professional target group this seems bizarre....

There are three parameters that determine exposure:

Yes, but ISO isn't one of them. The third is scene luminance.

I'm not following you. Properly exposing for a given scene luminance is what you are solving for. The three parameters you change to accomplish this goal are shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. It's called the exposure triangle.

Are you saying 1/30 f/8 ISO 100 is the same exposure as 1/120 f/8 ISO 400? If you do, it contradicts the definition of photographic exposure. ISO speed is applied to scale the signal obtained as the result of the exposure, and it is applied after exposure is over. All those thousands and thousands of articles explaining exposure triangle got it wrong.

The triad is indeed formed by the light, coming from the scene and hitting the front element of the lens, reduced by the aperture opening, and acting during the exposure time.

Since each point of a natural scene emits/reflects light differently, proper exposure for a given scene can't be defined by one abstract figure, one needs to take dynamic range of the scene and of the camera into account and place highlights and shadows in correspondence with technical limitations and one's artistic priorities.

I understand you disagree with the thousands of articles explaining the exposure triangle,

Yes, they are wrong. Brainwashed authors continue with brainwashing the audience.

I assume you understand the colloquial meaning of exposure as outlined in those thousands of articles which indeed would say 1/30 f/8 ISO 100 is the same "exposure" as 1/120 f/8 ISO 400.

Yes, I understand that words mean what they want them to mean, the point already made by Humpty Dumpty

Would you acknowledge we are using the colloquial meaning

I doubt "colloquial meaning" is to be used as it forces confusion.

when discussing "auto exposure" such as "auto iso",

Explanation of auto ISO doesn't depend on incorrect meaning of exposure or on exposure triangle, or on any other kind of mythology.

If so, we are arguing semantics.

I disagree with your colloquial use of the word "semantics".

If not, could you elaborate.

I did, many times.

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