A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mechanical/film camera legacy



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 5th 05, 01:31 PM
Siddhartha Jain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mechanical/film camera legacy

Hi,

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?

Same goes for other parameters that are no longer governed by worms,
gears and cogs.

- Siddhartha

  #2  
Old January 5th 05, 08:42 PM
David Dyer-Bennet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Siddhartha Jain" writes:

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?


Well, some of those divisions are small enough to hardly matter. For
ISO I don't think it's a big deal. But there's a certain *why not*
factor since, as you say, it's not governed by worms, gears, and
cogs.

Same goes for other parameters that are no longer governed by worms,
gears and cogs.


And in fact you'll find that starting in the 1970s cameras with
electronic shutters started picking shutter speeds that weren't
exactly one of the usual suspects. They didn't necessarily let you
set them *by hand*, though, only in auto mode, at first. And not
*too* long after that they did the same for aperture. Lenses often
had half-stop clicks on the aperture ring, and regardless of clicks
photographers often tried to approximate intermediate settings (and
with built-in light meters could do this fairly accurately).

Zoom and focus were generally continuous on older equipment; though
one of the complaints about some consumer digitals is that they
claimed "manual focus" where they actually just let you set to one of
a small list of focus distances. But I think that was a short-term
stupidity.

The other one I'd like is having a "super-program" mode where altering
the ISO enters into the camera's calculations (I know some of the
consumer models do auto-iso selection). There are times where I'd
rather bump up to ISO 1600 than risk the camera shake of 1/10 second
exposure, and I'm already shooting at f1.4.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/
  #3  
Old January 5th 05, 08:42 PM
David Dyer-Bennet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Siddhartha Jain" writes:

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?


Well, some of those divisions are small enough to hardly matter. For
ISO I don't think it's a big deal. But there's a certain *why not*
factor since, as you say, it's not governed by worms, gears, and
cogs.

Same goes for other parameters that are no longer governed by worms,
gears and cogs.


And in fact you'll find that starting in the 1970s cameras with
electronic shutters started picking shutter speeds that weren't
exactly one of the usual suspects. They didn't necessarily let you
set them *by hand*, though, only in auto mode, at first. And not
*too* long after that they did the same for aperture. Lenses often
had half-stop clicks on the aperture ring, and regardless of clicks
photographers often tried to approximate intermediate settings (and
with built-in light meters could do this fairly accurately).

Zoom and focus were generally continuous on older equipment; though
one of the complaints about some consumer digitals is that they
claimed "manual focus" where they actually just let you set to one of
a small list of focus distances. But I think that was a short-term
stupidity.

The other one I'd like is having a "super-program" mode where altering
the ISO enters into the camera's calculations (I know some of the
consumer models do auto-iso selection). There are times where I'd
rather bump up to ISO 1600 than risk the camera shake of 1/10 second
exposure, and I'm already shooting at f1.4.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/
  #4  
Old January 6th 05, 02:20 AM
Roland Karlsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Dyer-Bennet wrote in :

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?


Well, some of those divisions are small enough to hardly matter. For
ISO I don't think it's a big deal. But there's a certain *why not*
factor since, as you say, it's not governed by worms, gears, and
cogs.


To make a tool useful you must make some simplifications.
If you can vary anything anyway you like it is simply
too much work to use the camera.

For manual settings you need steps for ISO, shutter speed
and aperture. All those are best to adjust in logarithmic
steps - usually you use full stops, 1/2 stops or 1/3 stops.

When it comes to fully automatic settings you could
change ISO, shutter speed and aperture any way you like.
But - to simplify programming - and also simplify
understanding what the camera really did when looking
at the EXIF data - you do also here introduce some
constraints. As far as I have seen you then use ISO
in full stops, shutter time in e.g. 1/3 stops and
a floating point number for aperture. All three
could be floating point numbers, but that would be confusing.
It is also unneccessary as high accuracy is only
needed in one of the variables.


/Roland

  #5  
Old January 6th 05, 02:20 AM
Roland Karlsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Dyer-Bennet wrote in :

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?


Well, some of those divisions are small enough to hardly matter. For
ISO I don't think it's a big deal. But there's a certain *why not*
factor since, as you say, it's not governed by worms, gears, and
cogs.


To make a tool useful you must make some simplifications.
If you can vary anything anyway you like it is simply
too much work to use the camera.

For manual settings you need steps for ISO, shutter speed
and aperture. All those are best to adjust in logarithmic
steps - usually you use full stops, 1/2 stops or 1/3 stops.

When it comes to fully automatic settings you could
change ISO, shutter speed and aperture any way you like.
But - to simplify programming - and also simplify
understanding what the camera really did when looking
at the EXIF data - you do also here introduce some
constraints. As far as I have seen you then use ISO
in full stops, shutter time in e.g. 1/3 stops and
a floating point number for aperture. All three
could be floating point numbers, but that would be confusing.
It is also unneccessary as high accuracy is only
needed in one of the variables.


/Roland

  #6  
Old January 6th 05, 03:55 AM
Mark B.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Siddhartha Jain" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi,

ISO is 50,100, 200 ...... 3200. Now that ISO is your sensor's gain,
would it make sense to make vary at 50, 60, 70 .... 3200?


Not really, since the steps in use are in stops just like shutter speed &
apertures. I'm not sure much would be gained by making steps smaller than
1/3 stop.

Mark


  #7  
Old January 6th 05, 04:40 AM
bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Dyer-Bennet wrote in :

And in fact you'll find that starting in the 1970s cameras with
electronic shutters started picking shutter speeds that weren't
exactly one of the usual suspects. They didn't necessarily let you


I have a Yashica Electro 35, which was introduced in 1966. It features a
stepless electronic shutter. It is functional from 30 seconds to 1/500
second. Great camera. My understanding is that Polaroid used the technology
a few years earlier.

I learned photography with the Electro 35. Great camera. It represents one
of three film cameras I still own, the other two being an Olympus Stylus
Epic, and an Omega 4x5.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
  #8  
Old January 6th 05, 06:03 AM
Ken
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"bob" wrote in message . ..
David Dyer-Bennet wrote in :

And in fact you'll find that starting in the 1970s cameras with
electronic shutters started picking shutter speeds that weren't
exactly one of the usual suspects. They didn't necessarily let you


I have a Yashica Electro 35, which was introduced in 1966. It features a
stepless electronic shutter. It is functional from 30 seconds to 1/500
second. Great camera. My understanding is that Polaroid used the technology
a few years earlier.

I learned photography with the Electro 35. Great camera. It represents one
of three film cameras I still own, the other two being an Olympus Stylus
Epic, and an Omega 4x5.


I, too, have a Yashica Electro 35. Great camera but has suffered the ravishes of time
and use. It was the my first 35mm SLR and I still keep it around for sentimental
reasons but doubt I can ever use it again without some serious restoration.


  #9  
Old January 6th 05, 06:03 AM
Ken
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"bob" wrote in message . ..
David Dyer-Bennet wrote in :

And in fact you'll find that starting in the 1970s cameras with
electronic shutters started picking shutter speeds that weren't
exactly one of the usual suspects. They didn't necessarily let you


I have a Yashica Electro 35, which was introduced in 1966. It features a
stepless electronic shutter. It is functional from 30 seconds to 1/500
second. Great camera. My understanding is that Polaroid used the technology
a few years earlier.

I learned photography with the Electro 35. Great camera. It represents one
of three film cameras I still own, the other two being an Olympus Stylus
Epic, and an Omega 4x5.


I, too, have a Yashica Electro 35. Great camera but has suffered the ravishes of time
and use. It was the my first 35mm SLR and I still keep it around for sentimental
reasons but doubt I can ever use it again without some serious restoration.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Digital zoom camera & lots of selection questions Lou Digital Photography 5 November 12th 04 01:43 AM
coolpix 5700 and speed of writing to cf card JS Digital Photography 12 September 15th 04 11:17 PM
Neat Items for a Camera Bag... Thom Tapp Digital Photography 3 September 7th 04 06:28 PM
Another nail in the view camera coffin? Robert Feinman Large Format Photography Equipment 108 August 4th 04 03:37 PM
Batteries for Kodak DX3600 Camera Dock Larry R Harrison Jr Digital Photography 10 July 24th 04 05:49 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.