Google| Subject | ISO value names are becoming ridiculous |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 01/06/2016 13:21 (01/06/2016 13:21) |
| Message-ID | <sandman-2443bd849b334e98149abd0e6b003060@individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Followups | trolling tone (55m) Whisky-dave (1h & 23m) > Sandman Peter Irwin (1h & 43m) > Sandman nospam (2h & 49m) Rich A (5h & 7m) Eric Stevens (14h & 13m) > Sandman |
So with the D5, it can boost its ISO to ISO 3,280,000, and suddenly how ISO is named is becoming just stupid. We should use EV steps instead:
ISO 50 : ISO EV-1 ISO 100 : ISO EV 0 ISO 200 : ISO EV+1 ISO 400 : ISO EV+2 ISO 800 : ISO EV+3 ISO 1,600 : ISO EV+4 ISO 3,200 : ISO EV+5 ISO 6,400 : ISO EV+6 ISO 12,800 : ISO EV+7 ISO 25,600 : ISO EV+8 ISO 51,200 : ISO EV+9 ISO 102,400 : ISO EV+10 ISO 204,800 : ISO EV+11 ISO 409,600 : ISO EV+12 ISO 819,200 : ISO EV+13 ISO 1,638,400 : ISO EV+14 ISO 3,276,800 : ISO EV+15
That would put more normal values to these numbers. The Hi5 setting of the D5 sounds unbelievably high, which of course it also is, but it's "only" twice as "sensitive" as ISO 12,800, but the way ISO is named makes it look stupid as fuck.
And, when talking about ISO, you'd just say "it was shot at ISO 3" instead of ISO 800.
And the new D5 would have a max ISO value of "ISO EV+10" which can be pushed in-camera to "ISO EV+15", which would still be equally impressive.
-- Sandman
Whisky-dave (1h & 23m) > Sandman
Peter Irwin (1h & 43m) > Sandman
nospam (2h & 49m)
Rich A (5h & 7m)
Eric Stevens (14h & 13m) > Sandman
01/06/2016-
