Suppose you fixed the exposure (light, aperture, shutter speed) in such a way that the histogram touches the right edge at ISO 12800. How much quality is lost if you shoot at the same exposure with the camera set to ISO 1600?
When exposure is already maximized, and you are above ISO 1600, how much does it matter if the histogram doesn't touch the right edge?
will do that test .
Area doesn't have to be specified in MKS units. You could specify it in square mm, square um, or even square nm, as well as acres, sections, and square furlongs.
My lighting could only range from 1600 to 8000 just clipping both hisograms. in reallity its that close it doesnt really matter . the 1600 image shows a fraction less noise in the shadows but thats looking a 2000%.
Some may find it useful to look at the tonal distribution presented as a histogram but really, don't most of us just want our cameras to reliably tell us when our raws, not jpegs, are blown. Why is it so hard?
Fix the exposure (including lights) so that at ISO 8000 the histogram touches the right edge. Shoot at ISO 8000, ISO 1600, ISO 800 changing nothing but ISO setting.
Quite so! Back in the day, I greatly preferred slugs which tended to get rid of the dreaded gravitational constant.
And it's good to see someone expressing his lighting in what can only be foot candles 😋
That is because the camera's meter is actually an image lightness and not exposure* meter. Image lightness and exposure* are two different things.
Camera meters are calibrated to output an average 18% grey image lightness for the exposure* that is set.
In manual mode with a fixed aperture and shutter speed raising iso by 1 stop after the meter needle was centred will shift the needle 1 stop to the right because you are lightening the image by 1 stop without altering the exposure*.
* exposure - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
well that showed my eye af works to -3.5 ev 😁 going to resend fixed focus images .
well that showed my eye af works to -3.5 ev 😁 going to resend fixed focus images .
Awesome test, they all look identical processed to the same brightness. DPR test subject hasnt a patch on my doll 😁
That was true of the Weston Master meters. It may still be true of the separate meters from Sekonic and others. However, most camera meters that I know of are calibrated to expose a less reflective surface to middle gray.
I must ask this question. where is everyone getting the idea that incamera histograms are not acurate ? because i just shot some test
shots with my 12 yold olympus xz1 raw file incamera RGB histogram then took the file into FRV and it again matched the clipping EXACTLY
so im very suspect that its not true that incamera histograms are not acurate. or maybe its because i buy good quality cameras .
They can still be helpful to detect and prevent clipping in certain situations.
In my case, from testing. Here are a few of the cameras I've tested: Sony a7, a7II, a7III, a7R, a7RII, a7RIII, a7RIV, a7S, a7SII, a9, a9II. Nikon D3, D4, D5, D800, D810, D850, Z6, Z7, Z9. Fuji GFX 50S, GFX 50R, GFX 100, GFX 100S.
Agree, but they don't need to be particularly accurate for that. You can leave extra room on the right in high ISO situations an not suffer IQ loss.
