Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > General photography discussion

General photography discussion Please look for a specific board to start your thread but if you can't find an appropriate one, post it here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 15th March 2019
wornish's Avatar
wornish wornish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,043
Thanks: 341
Thanked 548 Times in 428 Posts
Likes: 2,850
Liked 1,594 Times in 787 Posts
ISO is Fake - Seriously

Very interesting video from Tony Northrop. OK perhaps its clickbait but nevertheless he does make a point and Oly come out as one of the worst offenders.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=QVuI89YWAsw
__________________
Dave

My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 15th March 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,888
Thanks: 404
Thanked 569 Times in 482 Posts
Likes: 3,416
Liked 2,405 Times in 1,585 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

There is nothing new in that. Compact cameras in particular have often reported wildly optimistic ISO speeds to help keep noise down.

Unlike film a digital camera is effectively a closed system so it can report whatever ISO it likes as long as the exposure is about right.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15th March 2019
Petrochemist Petrochemist is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: N Essex
Posts: 739
Thanks: 36
Thanked 83 Times in 76 Posts
Likes: 217
Liked 129 Times in 94 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

The ISO values many of today's cameras reach are above any defined in any ISO standards. I suspect the problem is the length of time it takes to approve ISO methods, which is generally many years.
__________________
Mike
Compulsive photographic Dabbler.
Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15th March 2019
Ian's Avatar
Ian Ian is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK
Posts: 11,654
Thanks: 427
Thanked 2,545 Times in 1,279 Posts
Likes: 882
Liked 1,756 Times in 792 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

There are two different industry standard interpretations of ISO calibration (at least).

Ian
__________________
Founder and editor of:
Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net)
Four Thirds User (http://fourthirds-user.com)
Digital Photography Now (http://dpnow.com)
Olympus camera, lens, and accessory hire (http://e-group.uk.net/hire)

Twitter: www.twitter.com/ian_burley
Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/dpnow/
Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/ianburley/
NEW: My personal BLOG ianburley.com
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 15th March 2019
Graham_of_Rainham's Avatar
Graham_of_Rainham Graham_of_Rainham is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rainham
Posts: 8,185
Thanks: 647
Thanked 945 Times in 733 Posts
Likes: 2,298
Liked 1,602 Times in 925 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

https://www.dxomark.com/About/In-dep...SO-sensitivity
__________________
Graham

We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 15th March 2019
Tram Tram is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 430
Thanks: 21
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Likes: 37
Liked 146 Times in 101 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Shouldn't ISO be a standardised unit?
Can see problems for those who need it to be such as metering in a studio type setting.

Not much of a problem for the likes of myself who uses it in a less measured way.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 15th March 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,888
Thanks: 404
Thanked 569 Times in 482 Posts
Likes: 3,416
Liked 2,405 Times in 1,585 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petrochemist View Post
The ISO values many of today's cameras reach are above any defined in any ISO standards. I suspect the problem is the length of time it takes to approve ISO methods, which is generally many years.
Surely the ISO sensitivity of a film or digital camera is a logarithmic function, so it is simply calculated from a standard of (say) 100?
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 15th March 2019
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 5,710
Thanks: 370
Thanked 1,257 Times in 942 Posts
Likes: 150
Liked 6,007 Times in 1,955 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

It's a nonsense video. Measuring ISO on digital cameras is highly open to interpretation, and as Ian says there are at least two "standard" ways of doing it. Honestly, TN is just a click-bait merchant. Avoid him.
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 15th March 2019
wornish's Avatar
wornish wornish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,043
Thanks: 341
Thanked 548 Times in 428 Posts
Likes: 2,850
Liked 1,594 Times in 787 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdk42 View Post
It's a nonsense video. Measuring ISO on digital cameras is highly open to interpretation, and as Ian says there are at least two "standard" ways of doing it. Honestly, TN is just a click-bait merchant. Avoid him.

What does he say that is nonsense? Please share, I genuinely don't know where you get that from? Did you actually watch it?

The basic point is that ISO on a digital camera is not a standard despite what manufacturers try and convince us it is. On Astro cameras they are honest and simply call it Gain.

Yes, Tony does create clickbait but at least if you are going to be critical have some facts that prove he is wrong.
__________________
Dave

My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 15th March 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,888
Thanks: 404
Thanked 569 Times in 482 Posts
Likes: 3,416
Liked 2,405 Times in 1,585 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by wornish View Post
The basic point is that ISO on a digital camera is not a standard despite what manufacturers try and convince us it is. On Astro cameras they are honest and simply call it Gain.
That is exactly what I said.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 15th March 2019
Bassman51's Avatar
Bassman51 Bassman51 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 50
Thanks: 2
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 5
Liked 18 Times in 14 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

ISO is indeed a standard for digital camera jpgs, just as it was for negative and positive film. And just as happened in film days, different manufacturers’ ISO assignments for their products is a matter of judgement that is and was open to dispute by users.

Back in the day, some serious photogs would buy a brick of film (a bunch of rolls from one manufacturing lot) and use the first roll to carefully test and determine what the “real” ISO they would use for the rest of the brick.

Today, many digital cameras give us the opportunity to tune our view of their ISO to our liking by setting a permanent offset in the menu.
__________________
Instagram: TheBassmanBlog
My Blog: TheBassmanBlog.com
My Pictures: abbeyworks.smugmug.com
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Liked This Post:
Jim Ford (16th March 2019), MJ224 (15th March 2019)
  #12  
Old 15th March 2019
MJ224's Avatar
MJ224 MJ224 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Carmarthenshire
Posts: 13,819
Thanks: 946
Thanked 749 Times in 695 Posts
Likes: 6,951
Liked 3,816 Times in 1,762 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

As a not very techie in the camera world, I think you get used to what your camera does. In the old days, ISO 200 was good for sunshine, and 400 was good for something a bit duller and expected grain. ISO 25600 was beyond my comprehension, as it is today...ÖÖ...
__________________
Mark Johnson

My Sailing Page

My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 15th March 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,888
Thanks: 404
Thanked 569 Times in 482 Posts
Likes: 3,416
Liked 2,405 Times in 1,585 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassman51 View Post
ISO is indeed a standard for digital camera jpgs, just as it was for negative and positive film. And just as happened in film days, different manufacturers’ ISO assignments for their products is a matter of judgement that is and was open to dispute by users.

Back in the day, some serious photogs would buy a brick of film (a bunch of rolls from one manufacturing lot) and use the first roll to carefully test and determine what the “real” ISO they would use for the rest of the brick.

Today, many digital cameras give us the opportunity to tune our view of their ISO to our liking by setting a permanent offset in the menu.
You are correct that the ISO standard applies to digital cameras (and not just Jpeg images) just as it does to film. However, the difference is that digital cameras often deviate wildly from that standard whereas better quality film cameras and light meters had to be within half a stop or so; especially if transparency films were being used.

In my experience any deviation in film cameras was fairly linear, so setting the film speed a third of a stop faster than rated was all that was needed to ensure perfect exposure and saturation when using transparencies. Even using consumer films I didn't find much variation from the clamed speed. (Negatives have massive exposure latitude so a stop either way didn't matter too much.)

However, in my experience once again, the true ISO sensitivity of digital cameras tends to be fairly close to the ISO standard at lower speeds, but falls a long way short at higher speeds; therefore providing much cleaner images than would be possible if ISO sensitivity was somewhere near what is should have been. That fact that current digital cameras provide a much wider range of ISO sensitivities only exacerbates this effect.

In my view this is little different to motor manufacturers who make false claims about fuel consumption or CO2/NOX emissions. In every case the deviation benefits the manufacturer more than the consumer, and is used as a selling tool.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 16th March 2019
Ross the fiddler's Avatar
Ross the fiddler Ross the fiddler is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Blue Mtns, NSW Australia
Posts: 14,231
Thanks: 2,090
Thanked 1,339 Times in 1,044 Posts
Likes: 5,535
Liked 2,181 Times in 1,163 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdk42 View Post
It's a nonsense video. Measuring ISO on digital cameras is highly open to interpretation, and as Ian says there are at least two "standard" ways of doing it. Honestly, TN is just a click-bait merchant. Avoid him.
And that is totally why I won't even make an appropriate comment on the video, since I would only be adding to his 'click-bait' count.
__________________
Ross
I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ross-the-fiddler/
Cameras: OM-D E-M1 & Mk II, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5.
Lenses: M.ZD7-14mm f2.8 PRO Lens, M.ZD12-40mm f2.8 PRO Lens, M.ZD40-150mm f2.8 PRO Lens, MC-14, MC-20, M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-54 II, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG HSM.
Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50.
Software: Capture One Pro 10 (& Olympus Viewer 3).
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 16th March 2019
Bassman51's Avatar
Bassman51 Bassman51 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 50
Thanks: 2
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 5
Liked 18 Times in 14 Posts
Re: ISO is Fake - Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
You are correct that the ISO standard applies to digital cameras (and not just Jpeg images) just as it does to film. However, the difference is that digital cameras often deviate wildly from that standard whereas better quality film cameras and light meters had to be within half a stop or so; especially if transparency films were being used.

In my experience any deviation in film cameras was fairly linear, so setting the film speed a third of a stop faster than rated was all that was needed to ensure perfect exposure and saturation when using transparencies. Even using consumer films I didn't find much variation from the clamed speed. (Negatives have massive exposure latitude so a stop either way didn't matter too much.)

However, in my experience once again, the true ISO sensitivity of digital cameras tends to be fairly close to the ISO standard at lower speeds, but falls a long way short at higher speeds; therefore providing much cleaner images than would be possible if ISO sensitivity was somewhere near what is should have been. That fact that current digital cameras provide a much wider range of ISO sensitivities only exacerbates this effect.

In my view this is little different to motor manufacturers who make false claims about fuel consumption or CO2/NOX emissions. In every case the deviation benefits the manufacturer more than the consumer, and is used as a selling tool.
Iím never in favor of manufacturers (or others) lying about their products and services. At the same time, I expect a bit of sales hyperbole much of the time and donít rely on their claims, especially if they are about above-average performance compared to competing products.

I think the critical issue for us as users is rarely what the absolute ISO number is for a given camera/image, but rather whether the camera is capable of being used to produce images that we find properly exposed. All the digital cameras Iíve had in the last (say) 10 years meet that test. Sadly, I canít say the same for all the C-AF systems (Iím looking at you, Olympus). On the other hand, my recent cameras (E-M1, E-M1.2) significantly exceed the battery shot count in real life. Hereís a case where the testing protocol yields a number which is worse than I ever experience by more than a factor of two.

So my bottom line is: trust, but verify.
__________________
Instagram: TheBassmanBlog
My Blog: TheBassmanBlog.com
My Pictures: abbeyworks.smugmug.com
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Liked This Post:
Jim Ford (16th March 2019), Ross the fiddler (16th March 2019)
Reply

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fake Email Alert Naughty Nigel The lounge 10 21st June 2017 07:32 PM
Fake batteries on tv tonight Olybirder The lounge 10 17th November 2015 10:59 AM
Fabulous or fake? Olybirder The lounge 17 26th May 2015 07:58 AM
Fake Infra Red In Lightroom OlyPaul Foto Fair 4 5th July 2014 11:41 AM
Is your camera a fake? Zuiko The lounge 2 26th August 2011 10:38 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:20 AM.


© The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger