Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Finally explain 800 vs 100 etc

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 1:12:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

For years, I always heard that with a film camera, you use 100 film for
sunny outdoors, and if you're inside you use 200 or 400.
....okay, here's my "novice newbie" type questions:

1.) How do I "mimic" the "100, 200, 400, and 800" when using a digital
camera? Is that the same as adjusting the shutter speed?
2.) Is changing the shutter speed (how fast it opens and shuts) another
way of saying, "adjusting the exposure time?"
3.) Is 100 "fast" and 800 "slow?" or is it the other way around?
4.) With film camera, I heard that 800 or 1600 grit (just kidding) film
is best for low light... but you get grainyness.... is that true? If so,
is that the same for a digital camera?

Thanks!
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 1:12:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Westcoast Sheri <sheri_deb88@nospamun8nospam.com> writes:

> For years, I always heard that with a film camera, you use 100 film for
> sunny outdoors, and if you're inside you use 200 or 400.
> ...okay, here's my "novice newbie" type questions:
>
> 1.) How do I "mimic" the "100, 200, 400, and 800" when using a digital
> camera? Is that the same as adjusting the shutter speed?

On digital cameras, there is a menu, button, or some other control to change
the ISO speed. Typically there are several descrete values (100, 200, 400 on
my camera) and auto. If you have good enough light, it generally is best to
use the lowest ISO on your camera (the higher the ISO, the higher the noise is
apparent in the image, much like grain in film).

> 2.) Is changing the shutter speed (how fast it opens and shuts) another
> way of saying, "adjusting the exposure time?"

Yes.

> 3.) Is 100 "fast" and 800 "slow?" or is it the other way around?

Typically ISO 800 is fast, and 100 slow.

In terms of exposure, there are 3 things you can control: ISO (how receptive
the sensor is to light), speed (how long the sensor records the light), and
aperture (how wide the lens is opened letting in light).

ISO 1600 is 5 times faster than ISO 100 (ISO 800 is 4 times faster, ISO 400 is
3 times faster, and ISO 200 is 2 times faster). For example if you shot an
image at aperture ISO 100, f/4, and 1/30 second and it was exposed correctly,
you could double the ISO and halve the speed (ie, ISO 200, f/4, 1/60 second)
and it would be exposed correctly as well.

> 4.) With film camera, I heard that 800 or 1600 grit (just kidding) film
> is best for low light... but you get grainyness.... is that true? If so,
> is that the same for a digital camera?

Pretty much so. Note, most point&shoot and prosumer cameras only go to ISO
400, while DSLRs can go to ISO 1600, 3200, or possibly higher.

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 1:48:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <41C74E56.7634194E@nospamun8nospam.com>, sheri_deb88
@nospamun8nospam.com says...
> For years, I always heard that with a film camera, you use 100 film for
> sunny outdoors, and if you're inside you use 200 or 400.
> ...okay, here's my "novice newbie" type questions:
>
> 1.) How do I "mimic" the "100, 200, 400, and 800" when using a digital
> camera? Is that the same as adjusting the shutter speed?

Most digicams have selectable ISO settings, and the effects are
very similar to film ISO ratings (I.e. higher ISO allows faster
shutter speeds for a given aperture, but has more noise/grain).
Adjusting the shutter speed is not the same thing, but the
correct exposure is based on the ISO, aperture and shutter
speed together.

> 2.) Is changing the shutter speed (how fast it opens and shuts) another
> way of saying, "adjusting the exposure time?"

Yes.

> 3.) Is 100 "fast" and 800 "slow?" or is it the other way around?

Traditionally, 800 ISO is regarded as a 'faster' film than 100.

> 4.) With film camera, I heard that 800 or 1600 grit (just kidding) film
> is best for low light... but you get grainyness.... is that true? If so,
> is that the same for a digital camera?
>

Yes and yes.

> Thanks!
>
>

No problem :) 
Related resources
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 2:46:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Westcoast Sheri" <sheri_deb88@nospamun8nospam.com> wrote in message
news:41C74E56.7634194E@nospamun8nospam.com...
> For years, I always heard that with a film camera, you use 100 film for
> sunny outdoors, and if you're inside you use 200 or 400.
> ...okay, here's my "novice newbie" type questions:
>
> 1.) How do I "mimic" the "100, 200, 400, and 800" when using a digital
> camera? Is that the same as adjusting the shutter speed?
No, by changing the sensor sensivity just like using film with different
sensitivities (100, 200, 400 etc ISO/ASA)

> 2.) Is changing the shutter speed (how fast it opens and shuts) another
> way of saying, "adjusting the exposure time?"
Yes

> 3.) Is 100 "fast" and 800 "slow?" or is it the other way around?
Other way, 800 is faster, you can set a faster shutter speed

> 4.) With film camera, I heard that 800 or 1600 grit (just kidding) film
> is best for low light... but you get grainyness.... is that true? If so,
> is that the same for a digital camera?
Yes, same effect



Georg

_________
Professionelle Spracherkennung gibt es bei www.linguaconsult.de
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 12:29:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Michael Meissner wrote:

> <snip>

> ISO 1600 is 5 times faster than ISO 100 (ISO 800 is 4 times faster, ISO 400 is
> 3 times faster, and ISO 200 is 2 times faster). For example if you shot an
> image at aperture ISO 100, f/4, and 1/30 second and it was exposed correctly,
> you could double the ISO and halve the speed (ie, ISO 200, f/4, 1/60 second)
> and it would be exposed correctly as well.
>

Ahhh, error there, Michael. ASA/ISO is a *linear* scale. Ergo, 800 ISO is 8
times faster than 100 ISO, and 1600 ISO is - wait for it {:-) - 16 times faster.

Colin
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 12:29:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Colin D wrote:
>
> Michael Meissner wrote:
>
>
>><snip>
>
>
>>ISO 1600 is 5 times faster than ISO 100 (ISO 800 is 4 times faster, ISO 400 is
>>3 times faster, and ISO 200 is 2 times faster). For example if you shot an
>>image at aperture ISO 100, f/4, and 1/30 second and it was exposed correctly,
>>you could double the ISO and halve the speed (ie, ISO 200, f/4, 1/60 second)
>>and it would be exposed correctly as well.
>>
>
>
> Ahhh, error there, Michael. ASA/ISO is a *linear* scale. Ergo, 800 ISO is 8
> times faster than 100 ISO, and 1600 ISO is - wait for it {:-) - 16 times faster.
>
> Colin

Yes I think he meant 5 stops faster, not 5 times faster.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 12:29:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

fortknight <nobody@home.com> writes:

> Colin D wrote:
> > Michael Meissner wrote:
> >
> >><snip>
> >
> >>ISO 1600 is 5 times faster than ISO 100 (ISO 800 is 4 times faster, ISO 400
> >>is 3 times faster, and ISO 200 is 2 times faster). For example if you shot
> >>an image at aperture ISO 100, f/4, and 1/30 second and it was exposed
> >>correctly, you could double the ISO and halve the speed (ie, ISO 200, f/4,
> >>1/60 second) and it would be exposed correctly as well.
> >>
> > Ahhh, error there, Michael. ASA/ISO is a *linear* scale. Ergo, 800 ISO is
> > 8 times faster than 100 ISO, and 1600 ISO is - wait for it {:-) - 16 times
> > faster. Colin
>
> Yes I think he meant 5 stops faster, not 5 times faster.

Yes, I was thinking in f/stops. I mean doesn't everybody count 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6,
8 :-)

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
!