Google| Subject | Re: ISO value names are becoming ridiculous |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 01/06/2016 23:31 (01/06/2016 23:31) |
| Message-ID | <sandman-1ed4fc0480c3877970eb46527a4d38e2@individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Peter Irwin |
In article <n6jeaq$del$1@dont-email.me>, Peter Irwin wrote:
Just that 0 at ISO 100 makes more sense, since that's the base ISO for many or most digital sensors. It would have made sense back then as well of course.SandmanPeter Irwin
Absolutely, and it made perfect sense, only it had a value of 0 at ISO 3, far below any used film and sensors used today.
In the early 60s an EI of 3 (Sv=0) would be used for a 25 speed B&W film with a red #25 filter or 10 speed Kodachrome with a conversion filter for 3200K lamps. This is very slow, but since the standard already exists, what is the sense of changing the value by 5? - it makes better sense to resurrect the existing APEX system than to arbitrarily create a new one.
-- Sandman
01/06/2016-
