Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/01/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marty, ISO rules - its taught on the first day of Marketing 101 - BIGGER IS BETTER (especially for the average consumer)! (-: Cheers Jayanand On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> wrote: > The DIN standard is still part of the ISO standard for film, it's just > that it has become normal to cite the arithmetic number from the ASA > standard alone. For instance it's ISO 100/21. > > I don't have a copy of ISO 12232:2006 to be sure if this is the case > for digital ISO determination, but I do note that the ISO standard for > digital cameras is even more confusing than the film standard because > there are five different "standard" techniques for determining the > exposure index rating at each sensitivity setting provided by a > particular camera model. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Digital_camera_ISO_speed_and_exposure_index > > Marty > > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Colin Baker <colin at colinbaker.org> > wrote: > > On Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:16:13 -0600, Mark Rabiner <mark at > > rabinergroup.com> > > wrote: > > > >> But we have to be up on our logarithmics. I'm not. > >> I thought iso 64,000 was going to be a world away from 16,ooo. > >> Its only two stops! Which is tri x instead of plus x. big deal! > >> Sounded to me at first like the difference between Pan F and pushed Tmax > >> 3200! > >> But it just ain't true. > >> > > > > I've always wondered if we'll ever switch back to the DIN standard. > These > > crazy ISOs are a mouthful! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >