Auto ISO or Fixed ISO-- Opinions needed

[jbylake]

This is all new to me, coming from a film background. How do I know that my camera, a D610, has this capability or not? Thanks,
J.

 

[Derrel]

This is all new to me, coming from a film background. How do I know that my camera, a D610, has this capability or not? Thanks,
J.

The demonstration photos above done by braineack were shot with the Nikon D610. So, you're good on that score.

ISO invariant cameras are becoming more common among some camera brands. A Google search reveals some good stuff. ISO invariant cameras - Google Search

Back to the issue of noise: I think many people make way too big a fuss about noise in digital images. I grew up on film, and newsprint, and plain old 1950's-spec NTSC television images, and 16mm movies in school, and 35mm film images in the theater...I am totally FINE with seeing a bit of the "signature" of the recording medium that was used to make a photographic or cinematic image. I would rather see MORE DETAIL and a little bit of noise in a digital image than a smooth, noise-free, lower-acutance image that has had a lot of noise reduction done to it. By the same token, I can watch a YouTube video in 480, and not whine like my seventh grade son does that, "But it's not in HD!" I can watch "regular TV", and not piss and moan that it is not 4k HD, and so on. I can deal with an image that's not been artificially enhanced to within an inch of its life....some people cannot.

Some people are very,very sensitive to noise. There are still many people out there, shooting with cameras that have fairly substantial noise, both color noise, and luminance noise, in the shadow areas of their images. For those people, under-exposing, and then lifting the shadows and brightening the picture in software, is just not a very good thing, because the noise that their sensor records in dark areas becomes utterly objectionable. So, how much noise images have depends on the camera that made the image and the software used, and the lighting, and the way each person responds to the image. I dunno...I've seen some danged good images at 6,400 ISO from multiple newer cameras!

The simple fact is that newer, modern-era sensors found in Sony, Nikon, Samsung, Pentax, and Fuji cameras have sensors that produce very low noise levels--and those newer cameras allow the user to deliberately under-expose a shot, leading to a dark image on the camera's LCD screen, and a dark-looking raw image file, but that raw data can be adjusted/manipulated/developed with a number of **modern** software apps that can create an image that doesn't show objectionable noise, OR a serious, ruinous loss of color richness, nor a serious, ruinous loss of overall dynamic range rendering capability.

This August, 2015 dPreview article shows and explains what's going on with a modern Sony-sensor camera: Sony Alpha 7R II: Real-world ISO invariance study

 

[DarkShadow]

Both depending on what I am doing.

 

[jbylake]

This is all new to me, coming from a film background. How do I know that my camera, a D610, has this capability or not? Thanks,
J.

The demonstration photos above done by braineack were shot with the Nikon D610. So, you're good on that score.

ISO invariant cameras are becoming more common among some camera brands. A Google search reveals some good stuff. ISO invariant cameras - Google Search

Back to the issue of noise: I think many people make way too big a fuss about noise in digital images. I grew up on film, and newsprint, and plain old 1950's-spec NTSC television images, and 16mm movies in school, and 35mm film images in the theater...

Thanks for the reply. I guess the fact that his is a photography forum and not an audiophile forum is why you left out the wonderful warbling and clicking audio of a 16mm film in a classroom.

On a serious note, I don't think this old body has enough miles on it to learn all of this new age stuff, and how it does/does not relate to film. I'm already cramming like a college kid, trying to get up to speed.

 

[Derrel]

Well, let me just say that the Nikon D610 is a good camera. It has a good imager in it. I have seen many,many fine images made by the D610. I personally think that at this point in time, the 24-megapixel Sony sensor paired with the Nikon company's electronics, and the Nikon brand's type of 3-D Matrix,evaluative, RGB-color, and distance-aware light metering ought to give pretty darned good exposures with continuous lighting, and also with a Nikon-branded TTL speedlight flash. I am very favorably impressed by what the D610 can do.

I dunno...in Aperture-priority automatic mode, using Matrix pattern metering ought to produce good shots. In semi-slow, deliberate working conditions in Manual metering, I would (I do) generally use Center-weighted light metering. The camera ought to be, generally, producing good, well-exposed images which can be adjusted brighter or darker, in software, and make good pictures.

Since the camera shoots only positive images (not negatives, not B&W,etc) and has its very own brand of "Nikon film", I think the average user ought to be able to get pretty good images without worrying about the camera itself too much. I would go here and scroll most of the way down, and see how one guy sets his D610 up for everyday uses. Nikon D610 Review

 

[jbylake]

Great. I'll read that link. I'm still having issues with setting mine up. Not fully understanding some of the more complex issues of digital photography, that frankly, I don't know (blank) about, and a camera that's more complex than a stealth bomber.

J.

 

[beachrat]

This is a great thread with a lot of info.
Good stuff.