Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/03/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I shoot at iso 6400 all the time as that's where my out iso tops off at and I shoot at night a lot so that's where many of my shots end up when I'm not near a street light or shop window. In the 90's my location film was Neopan 1600 and in low light or night But that's surprisingly only a two stop difference between Iso 1600 - 3200 - 6400. My camera for several years now is a Nikon D700 and is an almost 8 years old camera technology.. So in digital years Lorne Greene would tell us I'm shooting Plus x with a Speed Graphic and no flash bulbs. Say cheese! Nikon has introduced a couple of generations of cameras since and neither they nor Leica nor Canon nor any of these camera companies are sitting around on their haunches when it comes to this kind of stuff. Or whoever is designing the sensors I guess someone else. Its a bourgeoning technology. Its a chip eat chip world. I'd expect from all I've read to not be shooting at iso 1,000,000 when I get my next camera body very often if ever. I'd expect it to have jumped another couple of stops, not ten. So that's iso 6400 to 12,800 to 25,600. That's a stop faster than the photojournalists you mention but these new bodies just came out or are about to so I'm giving them a stop for all their efforts and thinking it might even be two. I'd expect to be getting totally viable iso 25,600 shots at night or indoors. (like in my closet). As in able to blow them up a bit without too much noise or funny color. But the idea of not only being able to get viable shots at night not near street lamps but also be able to capture action there and stop down a few stops greatly appeals to me. I'm already able to do a bit of that already... As in not shoot my night shots at slow iso's and wide open. 2.8's are the standard speed of pro grade zooms now a configuration that has never appealed to me because of the bulk and weight. I've recently lens wise made a commitment to the new Nikon 1.8's. Its not fast, not slow not expensive not cheap. Great if not the best optical specs. Light weight compact durable. I've got the 35, 50 and 85 over the past couple of years. Next I get the 20 or the brand new cutting edge 24 and I'll feel like I have a complete lens system of 1.8's. Zoom free. Not shooting zooms makes me feel ever so slightly Leica like. So f iso 25,600 and be there. And f8 is the new f 1.4. 125th is the new 15th. On 3/5/16 10:07 AM, "Jack Milton" <jmilton2 at maine.rr.com> wrote: > 3 million ISO may not be really useful because of noise but what has > happened > is the quality at ?lower? ISOs, like, 6400, or 12,800, get?s a slight bump. > When I was shooting film we jumped through darkroom hoops to get ASA 1600 > or > 3200 from B&W and color neg film. Photojournalists now think nothing of > shooting at 3200, 6400, 8,000, or 12,800. In my estimation, on say, a Nikon > D4, ISO 6400 looks like ASA 400 color negative film. For several years now > these cameras can see in the dark and appear more sensitive to light than > the > human eye. Not so long ago, sports photographers had to light arenas with > expensive, heavy strobes to shoot basketball or hockey. Now we take high > quality available light indoor or night sports photos for granted. The other > thing that?s happened is an f/2.8 lens is now considered to be fast. F/2.8 > telephotos and zooms are now normal lenses?double or quadruple the ISO and > f/2.8 does seem fast. A lot of younger photographers are separating their > work > with truly fast lenses at f/1.4 or f/1.2 and shooting wide open in all > lighting. Jack Milton > On Feb 9, 2016, at 7:46 AM, Mark Rabiner > <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > > I heard the guy say it and I was not sure > if I was hearing things. > Last night at a Nikon D5/ D500 introduction they > were giving at a secret > high tech B&H room upstairs. > "1 point 6 4 million" > he said. > And he was talking about the D500 which is DX cropped but cost two > grand. > He'd already talked about the D5 full frame flagship about out and > cost 6.5 > grand. Who pays that kind of money for a camera body? :) > I > didn't hear him say the word "million" when giving out the specks on that> > one. But looked it up just now and found it. ISO Three Million! > (Great for > shooting the dark side of the moon at midnight without a rocket > ship.) > > > You numbers guys: how many f stops more is 3,000,ooo than the measly 6400> > cruising speed iso I'm topped off at now but which I do a good amount of my > > shooting walking home from movies at night. And can shoot anything I can > > see. No street lights have to be anywhere near. > Inquiring Rabs wants to > know. > > I'm guessing I can shoot a black cat in a coal mine at midnight > springing > through the air at an imaginary moth frozen solid mid leap in near > total > darkness. That's my guess. Stopped down to 5.6. Every hair on its > back > frozen. > Its the future folks. > Star Trek rules and Star Wars is > Mickey Mouse. > > > In the past years the flagship Nikon camera went up to > around a half a > million. So that's what kind of leap has been made. > > "At > iso 1.64 million you get plenty of noise" the guy said. > "as it is 1.64 > million what do you want? > I'd like to know what iso I could be shooting with > to get the same kind of > results I'm getting now at 6400. Which is 2 stops > more than the 1600 I'd > been shooting at with film. Neopan 1600. No longer > made. > > > > -- > Mark William Rabiner > Photographer > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/