Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
ISO Performance
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
May 18, 2021 14:10:15   #
bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada
 
User ID wrote:
They’ll wind up with 12MP plus excellent video capability. Nothing wrong with that ... but acoarst it will never generate very much envy here in Hogsville.

I have a Sony A7S and it is definitely enviable for its low light performance and video capability!

bwa

Reply
May 18, 2021 14:41:40   #
User ID
 
kenArchi wrote:
Were we this minutely critical during the SLR times?

The cameras that the OP is comparing may well be SLRs, but it didn’t matter and so he didn’t specify.

The waning of SLR dominance doesn’t seem to be affecting ISO performance expectations, and there are really no reasons that it should. But people do have mysterious beliefs !

Reply
May 18, 2021 14:43:25   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
amfoto1 wrote:
I suggest you spend some time looking at the info and charts at:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/

Much more detail and more easily comparable than DXO's numbers, in my opinion.

What's nice about that site is you can do comparisons of two or more cameras of your choice. For example, I shot for 5 years with a pair of the original Canon 7D. I knew from using them that, for my purposes, up to ISO 1600 was usable and that I could push it to ISO 3200 with some extra post-processing. By using this noise comparison chart https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_ADU.htm#Canon%20EOS%207D_14,Canon%20EOS%207D%20Mark%20II_14 I was able to predict that Canon 7D Mark II (black) under consideration would be able to produce images at ISO 6400 that were more noise free than the old 7D's (blue) at ISO 3200. Other charts there suggested I could expect a similar improvement in dynamic range performance (which is also effected by the ISO setting). There is lots and lots of additional info at that web site.
I suggest you spend some time looking at the info ... (show quote)


👍👍 PhotonstoPhotos is an excellent site and there are a dozen white papers available on their testing methodology. The writer of most of those and the creator is a member of UHH (bclaff).

It’s worth remembering that doubling the low light ISO number is 1 stop in performance, so the difference the OP mentions is trivial.

Reply
 
 
May 18, 2021 15:42:28   #
rbtree Loc: Shoreline, WA, United States
 
jeep_daddy wrote:
I never use it because it will double the length of time an exposure takes. So if you take a 30 sec exposure, the camera won't be ready to take another image for 60 seconds.


You are right. However, when I'm shooting the night skies, Milky Way, etc, I have to shoot at 1600-5000 ISO, so I always set the "high ISO NR" to on. Long exposure NR? Sometimes I set it for exposures of under 30s, but it has to be set when shooting much longer exposure times, say over 30 seconds up to several minutes.

Reply
May 18, 2021 17:58:54   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
How high of an ISO do you want to use? At that ISO level, how does your current camera look? Is using a flash a better approach than a new camera?

If the candidate cameras have been out for a while, there will be detailed reviews and example images from ISO-100 through their highest ISO. Compare those examples against each other and against your current camera's results. Look at the 1:1 pixel level details.

Make an informed decision using these freely available resources.



Reply
May 19, 2021 07:24:58   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
kenArchi wrote:
Were we this minutely critical during the SLR times?


No Internet - less criticism.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.