| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/24/2007 06:11:44 PM · #26 |
i tend the to like the look of ISO200 over 100 on the 10d, plus it gives me an extra stop of light = faster shutter speed.
i tend to, in most cases if possible, avoid using above ISO400. but have in certain situations. over the past year or so i have found that i tend to try to work with the 'right' light rather than try to make 'less than' right light work. that all depends on how and what you shoot though. i tend to take fewer photos, but the ones i do take tend to be more satisfying, and of higher quality than when i try to push the envelope - so to speak.
if i had ISO50 i'd still likely leave the camera set at ISO200... that would give me 2 stops ;}
Message edited by author 2007-08-24 18:11:58.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2007 06:19:16 PM · #27 |
Forget ISO50 I'd like ISO25. It would save me buying ND filters for all my lenses. I would have thought extending the ISO range lower would be much easier to achieve than higher settings.
Anyone remember Kodachrome 25? |
|
|
|
08/24/2007 06:22:36 PM · #28 |
| Sorry, Brad, I got your name right the first time, then sort of panicked, cause Gordon's message interposed whilst I was writing. (Wish we had a fridge too. Kidding). Liked the sparkly texture on Katy 1. |
|
|
|
08/24/2007 06:27:27 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Brad:
Originally posted by tnun:
Argh, Gordon, wish I hadn't seen those grasshoppers. Guess you really need a good camera to get one to land on your arm. |
Close.
That's a Katydid, and a few hours in the refrigerator slows them down quite a bit.
They get pretty tame while basking in the sun, warming up, then away they go! |
I went for many years with insects of all kinds (even birds) being stored in my deep freeze. That really slowed them down (especially after 6 months)..lol!! BTW...don't ask!
|
|
|
|
08/24/2007 06:55:25 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Judi:
I went for many years with insects of all kinds (even birds) being stored in my deep freeze. |
That may explain a few things...
"Suppertime kids!" "What's for dinner Mum?"
"Skillet surprise" (silence in the house as the kids exit quietly and head to the neighbors for supper) |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 05:03:49 PM · #31 |
| How clean is an image at iso 800 off of a Canon 20d, Not by noise artifact definition but by enlargement quality? Can it still create clean 8x10 and 11x14 prints or are noise artifacts present? |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 05:18:52 PM · #32 |
Speaking of ISO 3200. I've used ISO 3200 on my Pentax, with success.
I have ordered a Canon EOS 40D and the specs say it goes to ISO 100 to 1600. For ISO 3200, it states that it is "Enhanced H". What does that mean?
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 05:21:10 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by AperturePriority:
I have ordered a Canon EOS 40D and the specs say it goes to ISO 100 to 1600. For ISO 3200, it states that it is "Enhanced H". What does that mean? |
It's available, but only if you turn the option on in the preferences. It's easy to do and you only have to do it once. After that, dial in 3200 anytime you want. |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 05:29:20 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
Originally posted by AperturePriority:
I have ordered a Canon EOS 40D and the specs say it goes to ISO 100 to 1600. For ISO 3200, it states that it is "Enhanced H". What does that mean? |
It's available, but only if you turn the option on in the preferences. It's easy to do and you only have to do it once. After that, dial in 3200 anytime you want. |
So, is that what "Enhanced H" means?...that you have to consciously turn it on? What does he "H" stand for, and how is an enhanced "H" different from a "regular" one? I wonder if that means that it takes a subsequent capture of just black and merges the two together?
Message edited by author 2007-09-06 17:29:43.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 06:39:18 PM · #35 |
My camera doesn't do ISO 50 or 3200. I rarely use 1600 but on the times I have used it I'm usually surprised at how un-grainy the photo turns out. For example, this photo, my only blue ribbon winning shot was shot at 1600.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 06:50:06 PM · #36 |
well that's a pretty busy example to be able to discern the noise to begin with. not to say it's a bad photo, but maybe a bad example of the 300d's ISO800 performance.
Message edited by author 2007-09-06 18:50:16.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 07:49:18 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by soup:
well that's a pretty busy example to be able to discern the noise to begin with. not to say it's a bad photo, but maybe a bad example of the 300d's ISO800 performance. |
It's a good example of how proper exposure minimizes the noise (or visibility of noise) in a shot though. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 11:15:36 AM EST.
