[squarerigger]

When I first got into photography, I used a Nikon FM and used to load my own ASA200 B&W film. I shot miles of the stuff. No problem shooting 200 on my K10. I usually leave it in set for 100-400 ISO.

[FHPhotographer]

Well, I don't even shoot Pentax so referencing the body likely wouldn't do any good.

My mistake for assuming that somebody posting on pentaxforums.com in the General Pentax Photography group would be talking about a Pentax camera and Pentax-related issues,
Brian

[cardinal43]

My mistake for assuming that somebody posting on pentaxforums.com in the General Pentax Photography group would be talking about a Pentax camera and Pentax-related issues,
Brian

Why make a comment like this? The OP asked about ISO, not about a particular brand of camera. I would think an ISO discussion would be basically the same regardless of the camera. If my fading memory serves me correctly, pingflood is an ex-Pentax shooter -- if that makes a difference.

[pingflood]

Why make a comment like this? The OP asked about ISO, not about a particular brand of camera. I would think an ISO discussion would be basically the same regardless of the camera. If my fading memory serves me correctly, pingflood is an ex-Pentax shooter -- if that makes a difference.

Yes, ex-Pentax-digital, but I still have some Pentax film bodies and glass, so there.

[FHPhotographer]

Why make a comment like this? The OP asked about ISO, not about a particular brand of camera. I would think an ISO discussion would be basically the same regardless of the camera. If my fading memory serves me correctly, pingflood is an ex-Pentax shooter -- if that makes a difference.

Here's a suggestion, go back to page two and read my original post and the OP's somewhat-dismissive comment on my post. Then reconsider your comment ,
Brian

[cardinal43]

Here's a suggestion, go back to page two and read my original post and the OP's somewhat-dismissive comment on my post. Then reconsider your comment ,
Brian

OK, I went back and read you original post and the OP's comment. I still don't see the reason for your comment. I was commenting about your post heading "oh, I thought this was a Pentax issue". it appeared (to me) to be rather sarcastic, and I was wondering why you felt the need to post it. Could be I just misread it. You also made the comment that not everyone has access to ISO 100. I don't, as I shoot a K100D, and it starts at 200. That doesn't change the fact that people are interested in an ISO discussion, regardless of what camera they use.

[RioRico]

Back in the day, I loaded my Oly Pen-FT SLR, and Canon Dial-35 and other half-frame squirts, with Plus-X pushed from ASA 100 to 200, developed in an Acufine+Microdol soup. Properly done, grain was minimal, detail and contrast were superb. I've even pushed Pan-X from ASA 32 to 200, just for perverted fun.

Now, my K20D usually has Expand Dynamic Range ON, giving me ISO 200 as the base speed, and I usually stay at 200 unless circumstances dictate otherwise. Ah, ISO/ASA 200 - feels like old times, without the chemical fumes...

[defiant]

From all these comments it looks like a lot of ppl manually set their digital camera's ISO to something higher than the lowest ISO (100 for my K20D), and almost always a multiple of 100. Is that only because it's something we're used to from the film days, or is there a technical benefit to do this for particular situations that isn't obvious to me?

For example, i almost always leave my camera at ISO 100, and the only time i go higher is when i need to maintain shutter speed. I rarely do it to maintain depth of field as i'm often after quality first. But if i ever do go higher it is always done automatically by the camera, e.g. TAv mode, and that sometimes results in uncommon ISOs like 125 or 320 (or something like that). I never increase ISO manually. Does anyone else operate like this?

[Ratmagiclady]

From all these comments it looks like a lot of ppl manually set their digital camera's ISO to something higher than the lowest ISO (100 for my K20D), and almost always a multiple of 100. Is that only because it's something we're used to from the film days, or is there a technical benefit to do this for particular situations that isn't obvious to me?

Actually, 'film days' would mean you would have a *lot* of films rated to the third-of-a-stop, lots of 32 and 64 and 160 ASA-rated films, (And TXP at 320, while TX would be at 400,) Plus-X at 125, ...the early fast color films were 1000, not to mention you'd often choose to rate a film bit under or over, ... lots of use for those thirds-and-half-stops on the dial. (You could as easily say the *round* numbers are the ones that are a third of a stop away from whatever your 'standard' is, really,)

I've been wondering if there's really any practical use in digital, ...apart from consistency with meters or films, where it's convenient to keep everything in full-stop multiples of each other, particularly when dealing with elaborate lighting, (like mixing Vericolor II and TXP, for instance)

Is there a hidden 'sweet spot' at, say, ISO 640 on a given camera? No idea. Something I've sort of wondered about.

[atnbirdie]

Marc,

Saw a thread a few days ago that I can't find again where you discussed your ISO settings on thee K200D. You said you had yours set to give 1/3 EV steps so you got 125, 160, 320, etc. inserted between the default 100, 200, 400, etc.

What advantage do you see in that much choice in ISO if your have your F/ increments set to 1/3 stops?

Thanks for your insights,
Steve

[Marc Sabatella]

Saw a thread a few days ago that I can't find again where you discussed your ISO settings on thee K200D. You said you had yours set to give 1/3 EV steps so you got 125, 160, 320, etc. inserted between the default 100, 200, 400, etc.

Actually, no I have mine set in half stops. The choices are either full stops or else to follow whatever your regular exposure step setting is - so if you have your camera set for 1/2 steps in shutter speed / aperture / EV compensation, you'll get half steps in ISO, and ditto with 1/3 steps. The advantage being that all three exposure parameters then step the same way, so you can increase ISO half a stop to get half stop of shutter speed, etc.

In practice, I don't use the ISO half stops much. I'm most often at 100, 200, 400, or 1600.

[PDL]

I shoot at the lowest ISO I can.
*ist Ds - 200
K10D/K20D 100
I am just starting to get used to "pushing" up to ISO 800 when required.

Call me old school - grew up on Kodachrome 25/64 - Plus-X 125 (purchased in 100ft rolls). Used Ektachrome 160 when Kodachrome was not around and felt uncomfortable with shooting with that level ASA (yup I am that old).

Towards the end of my film days (circumstances not desire) I used Plus-X and POTA developer which pushed the ASA to 400 (cooked the film at 80 degrees F instead of 68 degrees for Microdol-x). I began shooting Fujichrome 100 towards the "end times" too. Now with digital old habits die hard. I still try to use the lowest ISO I can set the camera to. I do not enjoy shooting in the dark, although it does work sometimes --- shooting in near darkness I mean.
PENTAX Photo Gallery

The Elitist - formerly known as PDL

[atnbirdie]

Marc,
Ah, I see now how the aperture and ISO settings link. I like the additional options that provides for some more latitude on how to get to the perfect exposure for any given shot by adding ISO tweaks to the shutter speed-aperture trade off equation.

Phillip,
I too prefer to stay at lowest ISO possible. I kept my K100D set to ISO 200 and intend to keep my new K200D at ISO 100 for most shots. Using the partial steps in ISO will help me adjust things without taking huge ISO leaps.
What amazes me is that I too remember things like ASA and microdol-x!! Sounds like we also shot similar films back in the day.

Thanks guys,
Steve

[StevenVH]

Back in the day, ....

For me bulk Tri-X was the answer. While in college and working the streets and shows @DC trying to get published, I would push or pull from ASA 100-1600 as needed. The right combo of exposure, developer, temp, etc usually yielded good to ex results. Used a lot of Plus-X and Ektachrome but neither had the range of good ole Tri-X.

Now, my K20D usually has Expand Dynamic Range ON, giving me ISO 200 as the base speed, and I usually stay at 200 unless circumstances dictate otherwise. Ah, ISO/ASA 200 - feels like old times, without the chemical fumes...

I've recently turned Expand Dynamic Range on and am looking for a noticeable result. IQ is definitely improving with use, but nothing obvious from this setting yet. I haven't really done any critical testing, just shooting daily and pixel-peeping.
In general I use ISO200 when I can, 400 as necessary and grudgingly higher if I have to.

Another informative thread, thanks all.

cheers

[Marc Sabatella]

I should add that I use 1/2 stops rather than 1/3 for one simple reason - my MF lenses are that way. One of the things that makes using MF lenses easy for me if that I have minimized the number of things that work differently. MF lenses don't allow multisegment metering? So I don't use multisegment metering even with DA lenses. MF lenses provide focus confirmation with the center point only? So I use center point only with all lenses. MF lenses require "M" mode? So I use "M" mode exclusively.

If not for this foolish desire for consistency (the hobgoblin of little minds, I know :-) I might well use 1/3 stops across the board. But I want one click of the aperture ring to mean the same thing as one click of the dial.