Google| Subject | Re: ISO value names are becoming ridiculous |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 01/07/2016 07:21 (01/07/2016 07:21) |
| Message-ID | <sandman-a22da6acfb68cb3fa8d16092088aec9f@individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
In article <8jjr8b5edi8vvg4v39qrg6v83q9cn2akgl@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
Not necessarily. At most, the base EV could be up for discussion.Sandman
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.Eric Stevens
But first it will be necessary to agree on a reference EV
APEX used ISO 3 as its base, and I used ISO 100.
For obvious reason, a sensor with a base ISO of ISO 200 will only apply amplification when at "ISO EV+2" and above.
Otherwise, ISO stops are equivalent to EV stops so its analogous by nature.
-- Sandman
01/06/2016-
