Why such High ISO?

[480sparky]

Well, Kodak's patents are all up for grabs now, so who knows...?

What does that have to do with low ISOs? Is Kodak the only one capable of creating a digital sensor with a native ISO of 6?

 

[480sparky]

......

If that happens then you wouldn't need ISO 25600 because ISO 800 would also look that much better. If it that dark out that you need that high of a ISO then focusing with todays focus screens wouldn't be easy right.
Well at least with my camera focusing is very hard in low light. .........

Focus systems and screens will most likely be better by then as well.

I'm looking forward to the 5-1000mm f/1.4 pancake.

 

[rexbobcat]

If that happens then you wouldn't need ISO 25600 because ISO 800 would also look that much better. If it that dark out that you need that high of a ISO then focusing with todays focus screens wouldn't be easy right.
Well at least with my camera focusing is very hard in low light.

From what I read about this case is that Apple, Google, and that Chinese company Huewei are the top three companies trying to buy them up. I don't remember seeing any camera companies in the mix. They would be smart to take notice if they aren't. I'm happy if Huawei walks away with nothing to be honest. Also what would Apple and Google do with camera and other photography tech? They don't make cameras(yet?).

RIP Kodak! I hope they can save themselves.

I've...used ISO 12,500 when shooting sports. And that's on a less-than-competent APS-C camera. Sometimes the high shutter speed is worth it.

It's also pretty easy to get up to that high ISO in situations that are much within the focusing latitude of the camera.

 

[TonysTouch]

......

If that happens then you wouldn't need ISO 25600 because ISO 800 would also look that much better. If it that dark out that you need that high of a ISO then focusing with todays focus screens wouldn't be easy right.
Well at least with my camera focusing is very hard in low light. .........

Focus systems and screens will most likely be better by then as well.

I'm looking forward to the 5-1000mm f/1.4 pancake.

For the price of a Maserati I'm sure.

 

[480sparky]

I'm looking forward to the 5-1000mm f/1.4 pancake.

For the price of a Maserati I'm sure.

Yes, but that will be in 2025 dollars, not 2013.

 

[Josh66]

Well, Kodak's patents are all up for grabs now, so who knows...?

What does that have to do with low ISOs? Is Kodak the only one capable of creating a digital sensor with a native ISO of 6?

I'm sure that Kodak didn't forget to file patents on whatever technology the cameras Derrel mentioned used.

Kodak really was an innovator in the early days of digital technology - at least some of those patents have got to still be protected.


If there really is nothing stopping everyone else from doing it, why haven't they?

 

[480sparky]

I'm sure that Kodak didn't forget to file patents on whatever technology the cameras Derrel mentioned used.

Kodak really was an innovator in the early days of digital technology - at least some of those patents have got to still be protected.

Yet everyone can makes sensors with HIGH ISOs.... more than one way to skin a cat, I'm sure.

If there really is nothing stopping everyone else from doing it, why haven't they?

Marketing just keeps hearing, "We want higher ISO!", "We want higher ISO!". Those of use who want lower ISOs get drowned out.

 

[Josh66]

I don't know if I would agree with that. Clearly, the people in charge of marketing are out of touch with the target audience. (Look at Kodak, lol.) How long have people been screaming for more dynamic range? You're still waiting for that, aren't you?

If they just delivered what the market wanted, we would have had low ISO and high DR years ago. Instead they just do the same thing over and over and convince you that you need it.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

If that happens then you wouldn't need ISO 25600 because ISO 800 would also look that much better. If it that dark out that you need that high of a ISO then focusing with todays focus screens wouldn't be easy right.
Well at least with my camera focusing is very hard in low light.

You are not making any sense. If ISO gets better, then you can shoot high ISO with a macro lens, set the aperture to f/11 for good depth of field, high shutter speed to minimize hand shake.

You can also shoot with a long ass lens with super fast shutter.

 

[480sparky]

I don't know if I would agree with that. Clearly, the people in charge of marketing are out of touch with the target audience. (Look at Kodak, lol.) How long have people been screaming for more dynamic range? You're still waiting for that, aren't you?

If they just delivered what the market wanted, we would have had low ISO and high DR years ago. Instead they just do the same thing over and over and convince you that you need it.

It's not a matter of just 'deliver what the market wanted'. It's a matter of MORE people screaming for higher ISO. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[Josh66]

I don't know if I would agree with that. Clearly, the people in charge of marketing are out of touch with the target audience. (Look at Kodak, lol.) How long have people been screaming for more dynamic range? You're still waiting for that, aren't you?

If they just delivered what the market wanted, we would have had low ISO and high DR years ago. Instead they just do the same thing over and over and convince you that you need it.

It's not a matter of just 'deliver what the market wanted'. It's a matter of MORE people screaming for higher ISO. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Well, sooner or later, maybe they'll learn that the squeaky wheel doesn't pay the bills, lol.

Or do they?

 

[480sparky]

Well, sooner or later, maybe they'll learn that the squeaky wheel doesn't pay the bills, lol.

Or do they?

So, maybe the lesson is... Don't cater to the minority..... you'll be belly-up like Kodak.

 

[Josh66]

Well, sooner or later, maybe they'll learn that the squeaky wheel doesn't pay the bills, lol.

Or do they?

So, maybe the lesson is... Don't cater to the minority..... you'll be belly-up like Kodak.

At the very least, the lesson is 'don't abandon your core business and become a printer company'.


I know somebody (Derrel, maybe) is going to see a Canon joke in that, but Canon didn't 'abandon' their market quite the way Kodak did...

 

[spd]

I would have to say high ISO is useless for me, i do a few 1 minute or more long exposures at 100 with no problems, but anything even as fast as 1/125th at an ISO over 800 looks like crap...(that's on a 7D), the 40 was rubbish over 400...

When you get nicer, better performing cameras.. You'll really appreciate the high ISO range.

Yeah, cause a brand new 7D is a lump of crap...:er:

 

[BrianV]

Kodak's sensor Division is now "Truesense". They just came out with a new u43 CMOS sensor that is available in color and in monochrome. I've dealt with that Division for a long time, over 25 years.

The CMOS sensor used in the DCS14 was not made by Kodak, it was made by "Fillfactor" (?), which was bought by Cypruss Semiconductor. I think it changed names again.

I am sure Truesense holds the Kodak developed sensor patents.