ISO and actual sensitivity in DSLR's (D70, *istD, 20D, S3...)

Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Roland Karlsson wrote:

"Pete D" wrote in
:


And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long as the photos come out right.


You are not of the old school I see

It does matter.
- if you use an external meter.

I do that.

- when comparing the sensitivity of camera systems.

One of the roles of this NG.

- when using external flash.

I do that too.

- etc

But - if you just take pictures and like them - then
the technicalities behind the making of the photo is
of course uninteresting.

er, this is an equipment group. This *is* one of the things we discuss
here.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Roland Karlsson wrote:

"Pete D" wrote in
:


And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long as the photos come out right.


You are not of the old school I see

It does matter.
- if you use an external meter.

I do that.

- when comparing the sensitivity of camera systems.

One of the roles of this NG.

- when using external flash.

I do that too.

- etc

But - if you just take pictures and like them - then
the technicalities behind the making of the photo is
of course uninteresting.

er, this is an equipment group. This *is* one of the things we discuss
here.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Owamanga wrote:

The D70 they used, is it the same as my D70? What's the consistency of
metering within each model like? If it's bad for any particular model,
their table becomes fairly irrelevant.

They don't mention if they're using samples of one or more.

If one were talking about lens variations (sharpness) I would agree.
But metering in electronic cameras and shutter speeds have become quite
precise and consistent over the past 10+ years.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Owamanga wrote:

The D70 they used, is it the same as my D70? What's the consistency of
metering within each model like? If it's bad for any particular model,
their table becomes fairly irrelevant.

They don't mention if they're using samples of one or more.

If one were talking about lens variations (sharpness) I would agree.
But metering in electronic cameras and shutter speeds have become quite
precise and consistent over the past 10+ years.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

"Alan Browne" wrote:
Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

Not really. You have to calibrate your meter against the histograms that
result in your camera.

And I suspect that the results are simply random, since presumably they used
matrix/evaluative metering which is, in principle, completely random and
unpredictable (assuming it does what they say it doesg).

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"Alan Browne" wrote:
Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

Not really. You have to calibrate your meter against the histograms that
result in your camera.

And I suspect that the results are simply random, since presumably they used
matrix/evaluative metering which is, in principle, completely random and
unpredictable (assuming it does what they say it doesg).

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:42:43 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:


"Alan Browne" wrote:
Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

Not really. You have to calibrate your meter against the histograms that
result in your camera.

And I suspect that the results are simply random, since presumably they used
matrix/evaluative metering which is, in principle, completely random and
unpredictable (assuming it does what they say it doesg).

So, the database of 30,000 images is a big lie, it's just a
pseudo-random number generator.

That actually explains a lot.

I've done some tests with the D70, if my daughter (caucasian), pulls
her face to make her eyes to look more asian, the matrix metering is a
lot more accurate. I guess she suddenly matches some of the faces in
the database.

g

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:42:43 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:


"Alan Browne" wrote:
Pete D wrote:

And as has been said before, it does not matter one tiny little jot as
long
as the photos come out right.

For those who use an incident meter or seperate spot meters (including
myself), such information is useful.

Not really. You have to calibrate your meter against the histograms that
result in your camera.

And I suspect that the results are simply random, since presumably they used
matrix/evaluative metering which is, in principle, completely random and
unpredictable (assuming it does what they say it doesg).

So, the database of 30,000 images is a big lie, it's just a
pseudo-random number generator.

That actually explains a lot.

I've done some tests with the D70, if my daughter (caucasian), pulls
her face to make her eyes to look more asian, the matrix metering is a
lot more accurate. I guess she suddenly matches some of the faces in
the database.

g

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga