Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Question about Nikon and reviews

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:23:21 AM

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

Some reviewers criticize the Nikon's for not having a
100 ISO setting, they start at 200. This is supposedly
because Nikon sensors in the cameras that feature this
are more sensitive so that a Nikon at f4 and 1/250 of a
second has an ISO of 200 while another camera will be at
100. Is this true? IF so, there should be less noise and
more dynamic range in the Nikon set at 200 ISO than another
DSLR set at 200 ISO.
-Rich


"Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
never gave us refunds for in the past"

More about : question nikon reviews

Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:23:22 AM

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

RichA wrote:

> Some reviewers criticize the Nikon's for not having a
> 100 ISO setting, they start at 200. This is supposedly
> because Nikon sensors in the cameras that feature this
> are more sensitive so that a Nikon at f4 and 1/250 of a
> second has an ISO of 200 while another camera will be at
> 100. Is this true? IF so, there should be less noise and
> more dynamic range in the Nikon set at 200 ISO than another
> DSLR set at 200 ISO.

ISO is constant*standard_effect/necessary_exposure, and this is
directly tied to the signal-to-noise ratio.

www.google.com: ISO 12232

http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/digital/...

Yer a shithead FUDster, RichA, and you don't even know it.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 5:03:34 AM

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

In article <jvt9h1hh7fcqb5n5mfjqia4il4nus82e1s@4ax.com>, none@none.com
says...
> Is this true?

No.

Nothing you say/hear/think is ever true. You're a hack troll.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Related resources
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:28:33 AM

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

In message <jvt9h1hh7fcqb5n5mfjqia4il4nus82e1s@4ax.com>,
RichA <none@none.com> wrote:

>Some reviewers criticize the Nikon's for not having a
>100 ISO setting, they start at 200. This is supposedly
>because Nikon sensors in the cameras that feature this
>are more sensitive so that a Nikon at f4 and 1/250 of a
>second has an ISO of 200 while another camera will be at
>100. Is this true? IF so, there should be less noise and
>more dynamic range in the Nikon set at 200 ISO than another
>DSLR set at 200 ISO.

Take the same shot with the same lens; a t-mount with manual aperture,
mounted on a tripod (in non-changing lighting), set multiple cameras to
"ISO 200" with he same shutter speed, and fire away!
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:33:54 AM

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

In message <1125449818.226770.111020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"eawckyegcy@yahoo.com" <eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote:

>RichA wrote:
>
>> Some reviewers criticize the Nikon's for not having a
>> 100 ISO setting, they start at 200. This is supposedly
>> because Nikon sensors in the cameras that feature this
>> are more sensitive so that a Nikon at f4 and 1/250 of a
>> second has an ISO of 200 while another camera will be at
>> 100. Is this true? IF so, there should be less noise and
>> more dynamic range in the Nikon set at 200 ISO than another
>> DSLR set at 200 ISO.
>
>ISO is constant*standard_effect/necessary_exposure, and this is
>directly tied to the signal-to-noise ratio.

Funny; my 10D has lower RAW values with the same subject, lens,
aperture, and shutter speed than my 20D, and has a bell-curve of noise
3x as wide at "ISO 800", giving a S/N ratio about 4x as high for the 20D
at the same ISO. ISO 100 has a slightly narrower bell-curve of noise on
the 10D.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
!