Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
@Ysarex Not as up on this as you guys, but part of my understanding of the Higher ISOs was that they included an upgrade to the sensitivity of the sensor. As a lot of the downstream noise is generated by variance in the light being captured, wouldn't shortened exposure times decrease the amount of shot noise, but the DR remain the same due to the increased sensitivity?
you can research all you want but until you make the jump you'll never really find out.A lot of shooters hold ideas that are four,three,two camera generations behind what is possible with TODAY'S sensors, camera's and their internal electronics, and today's software
Think you nailed It!
More exposure = less noise and vice versa. It really is just that simple.
More exposure = less noise and vice versa. It really is just that simple.
Don't you mean "LESS" Exposure time = less noise. As in the less time the shutter is open the less chance there is for light variations to hit the sensor????
It all comes down to what do *you* consider acceptable based upon the type of photography that *you* do.@astroNikon my research was more in understanding what I already have. The K3ii has a max ISO of 51200, but frankly it's not that usable. The new KP with 819,200 Max brings the bar up on the low end, making 51200 usable but sacrifices some of the things I like about the K3ii. Supposedly there's one in the works to replace the K3ii that will stretch the ISO limit higher yet, so that's the one I'm waiting on.
More exposure = less noise and vice versa. It really is just that simple.
Don't you mean "LESS" Exposure time = less noise. As in the less time the shutter is open the less chance there is for light variations to hit the sensor????
Very well explained. At the end, it all boils down to what you like to do with it.It all comes down to what do *you* consider acceptable based upon the type of photography that *you* do.@astroNikon my research was more in understanding what I already have. The K3ii has a max ISO of 51200, but frankly it's not that usable. The new KP with 819,200 Max brings the bar up on the low end, making 51200 usable but sacrifices some of the things I like about the K3ii. Supposedly there's one in the works to replace the K3ii that will stretch the ISO limit higher yet, so that's the one I'm waiting on.
Do you need fast shutter speed, shallow DOF and high ISOs
or slower shutter speeds, deep DOF and high ISOs?
or fast shutter, deep DOF and high ISOs?
I went to BestBuy probably 4 times taking shots comparing the D500 to various cameras.
In all my tests and doing the exposure math I came to the conclusion that it would *not* be able to do the indoor sports scenario that I shot in, but it would be fine in other situations. Looking on paper it should have done just fine.
So I bought it (twice actually). And when I tested it my math proved correct. It could not.
But that doesn't mean it's a bad camera, just not able to do what my d600 and d750 can do in low & bad light.
My D7000 (from several years ago) was only good up to 1600 ISO, based on my preferences. But it went higher.
For instance, the D500 can go to 1Million ISO.
At 1/8000, f/32 at 1M ISO do you find this image acceptable ?
D500_ISO_Tests (28 of 28)
..
..
51200
..
..
25600
or this
other at 25600
..
btw, the last one was the D5500 at 25600
It all comes down to what do *you* consider acceptable based upon the type of photography that *you* do.
I think you are thinking about long exposure noise, and say the associated Long Exposure Noise Reduction setting that most d-slr manufacturers offer as an in-camera setting,
Noise is not caused by random variations in the light hitting the sensor. Such variations are so small compared to the general level of light hitting the sensor they will remain invisible.I think you are thinking about long exposure noise, and say the associated Long Exposure Noise Reduction setting that most d-slr manufacturers offer as an in-camera setting,
Negative. Referring to the length of time the shutter is open. The longer it's open the more chance for random variations of light to strike the sensor.
Noise is not caused by random variations in the light hitting the sensor. Such variations are so small compared to the general level of light hitting the sensor they will remain invisible.I think you are thinking about long exposure noise, and say the associated Long Exposure Noise Reduction setting that most d-slr manufacturers offer as an in-camera setting,
Negative. Referring to the length of time the shutter is open. The longer it's open the more chance for random variations of light to strike the sensor.
This depends on the sensor. Some sensors don't do any (or at least not much) "upstream" amplification and rely entirely on "downstream" amplification. Downstream amplification results in a loss of DR (1 stop of DR is lost for every 1 stop of ISO boost).
If the sensor does "upstream" amplification, then that happens before the analog to digital conversion (ADC) and you can get some ISO gain without much of a loss in DR.
This has me a little concerned. DR is a function of exposure period. The engineering implementation in the camera that processes the sensor signal can employ a boost to the analog signal prior to ADC, digital scaling in the ADC and/or a hybrid combination of both. Regardless of implementation the method used to process the signal will do a better or worse job of retaining the sensor data but not create data. Exposure creates data. The light sensitivity of the sensor is in no way altered by the methodology engineered into the system to process the sensor output. A full sensor exposure = maximum DR. Any reduction in exposure = reduction in DR.
Joe
Pass the popcorn.