On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 17:34:57 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On Jun 15, 2018, Jim-P wrote
(in article ):

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 13:46:46 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On Jun 15, 2018, Jim-P wrote
(in article ):

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 19:47:36 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On Jun 14, 2018, Ken Hart wrote
(in article ):

On 06/14/2018 08:05 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Jim-P wrote
(in article ):

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:26:40 -0400, PeterN wrote:

On 6/14/2018 1:48 PM, Jim-P wrote:
In film cameras, ISO referrs to the sensitivity to light of the
emulsion.
Manufacturers formulate different film emulsions with different
sensitivites tarding increased grain with increased ISO speed.

In a digital camera, presumably the sensor does not adjust itself to
have
greater sensitivity. Or does it?

So what is happening in a digital camera when I choose a greater ISO
setting? Is more amplification being used?

I tried to understand this page but it got far too technical....

https://photography.tutsplus.com/art...-technical-exp
lo
ration--photo-11963

I am going to try to give you a simplified, non-technical explanation.
As with most generalities it is not 100% technically accurate, but
should serve as a guideline.
ISO is a measurement of the light sensitivity of the sensor. Digital
ISO
is adjustable in many cameras. And yes, it is a matter of adjusting
the
amplification. If you are using a wider lens opening, and slower
shutter
speed, you will be able to use a lower ISO.
Digital noise is one of the undesired artifacts in the image. Higher
ISO
will result in more digital noise, and lessor image quality. Many of
the
newer high quality sensors are designed to work at a higher ISO, with
less noticeable noise, and reduction in image quality.
There are some of us here who do not object to noise, while others
have
serious objections. The point at which noise becomes objectionable
often
comes down to a matter of taste and personal preferences.

Thanks. This makes me wonder what ISO I should set, if I don't leave it
on
auto.

In the film days, we used the "Sunny-16" rule: Set the shutter speed
equal to the ISO (then "ASA"). In bright sunshine, use f/16. Slightly
cloudy- use f/11, open shade- f/8, full shade- f/5.6. This technique
would usually give a good exposure.

Combine that with the "focal length equals shutter speed" rule: The
longer the focal length, the faster the shutter speed to give acceptable
hand-held images. For a 200mm lens, you use a shutter speed of 1/250
second.

Example: 100mm lens calls for 1/100 second minimum. Set the ISO also at
100, and use the "Sunny-16" rule. Then refer to SD's exposure triangle,
three paragraphs down...

Let us start by asking, what camera are you using?

It would still be good to know what camera the OP is using.

I am using a smartphone camera. Although it is not as high quality as a
DSLR the principles should be the same and I am interested in understanding
them before taking my photography further.

The smartphone model is a Moto G5 Plus with a Sony IMX362 Exmor RS camera
module which is also used in the Nokia 7 and Samsung S7 Edge

https://phoneproscons.com/794/moto-g...y-imx362-rear-
camera-same-amazing-sensor-as-in-xplay-6-and-zenfone-3-zoom/

There is nothing wrong in using a smartphone camera. However, you are going
to have limitations which you will not find in modern DSLR, or mirrorless
digital cameras (MILC). Even with third party photo apps for your smartphone
you are going to have limitations of physical sensor size, and adjustability
of the exposure triangle.

The next question is; are you intending to add a modern digital camera to
your current photography kit?

I need to work out how to get the best from my smartphone first.

I'm new to smartphones but they take surprisingly good pictures which are
almost as good as my point and shoot. They are aso very forgiving and
don't need lots of setting up.

If it meets your needs there is little point looking for something else, but
if you want more you should consider something other than a compact/P&S
camera.

I wonder what the cost is for a point and shoot giving pictures a notch
above a smartphone.

There are some excellent compact, or P&S cameras from most of the
manufacturers such as Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, etc, prices, and
performance vary. The big issue with the P&S cameras is, they are being
killed off by smartphones. The big advantage to a dedicated camera rather
than a phone camera is ergonomics. No matter how much one might argue, a
smartphone is awkward to use as a camera due to its unavoidable phone shape.

Personally, if one is only considering a compact/P&S camera as an upgrade
from a smartphone, consider what you are going to be doing with your
photography, it might be better to stick with the smartphone. Otherwise, I
would suggest moving to a mirrorless camera with, or without interchangeable
lenses. They can be more expensive than a smartphone, but your photographic
experience will be more enjoyable.

I an unabashed fan of the Fujifilm mirrorless cameras, and for somebody
wanting something reminiscent of the analog days, a great fixed focal length
camera is the Fujifilm X100F.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100f
https://www.techradar.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100f-review

I currently own several Fujifilm bodies and a bag full of lenses.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5yeyllbh2jd8g0a/IMG_2527e.jpg

To get some idea of what is out there in the compact camera range check out
dpreview:

https://www.dpreview.com

That's some serious looking gear in the camera bag!

The Fuji X100F camera is a fancier than I was considering. I was thinking
of something more along the lines of a Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70 but not for
some time yet.