Subject | Re: ISO value names are becoming ridiculous |
From | nospam |
Date | 01/09/2016 07:15 (01/09/2016 01:15) |
Message-ID | <090120160115319287%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Sandman |
Followups | Sandman (3h & 19m) > nospam |
it definitely is.SandmanSandman
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Current_system:_ISO>"The ISO system defines both an arithmetic and a logarithmic scale. The arithmetic ISO scale corresponds to the arithmetic ASA system, where a doubling of film sensitivity is represented by a doubling of the numerical film speed value. In the logarithmic ISO scale, which corresponds to the DIN scale, adding 3° to the numerical value constitutes a doubling of sensitivity. For example, a film rated ISO 200/24° is twice as sensitive as one rated ISO 100/21°"That part is rarely used these days, however.nospam
it's misuse of terminology.
Nope.
nope.nospam
f/stops are also a logarithmic scale, with each step 1.4x the previous one (f/1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6...), versus 2x for iso (100, 200, 400, 800, 1600...).if you're going to call iso an arithmetic scale, then you must also call f/stops an arithmetic scale.Sandman
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arithmetic%20scale "a scale on which the value of a point corresponds to the number of graduations the point is from the scale's zero"
I.e, a doubling of the value (ISO 100 ->200 ->400) is related to a doubling of the scale (for instance).
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/logarithmic+scale "a scale on which the actual distance of a point from the scale's zero is proportional to the logarithm of the corresponding scale number rather than to the number itself"that *perfectly* describes iso and f/stops.
I.e. a step in the value (DIN 1 ->2 ->3) corresponds to a percentage of the scale.it's 1/3rd stop for each step.
And yes, f-stops are logarithmic and adheres to this, where each step (f1.4 -> f2 ->f2.8) corresponds to a percentage of the scale.if f/stops are logarithmic, then so is iso.