Lee Jones wrote:
> Your examples show up your film background... Image sensor's
> native speed may not be in the 100 / 200 / 400 sequence.  Higher
> & lower speeds are created by applying gain & anti-gain via the
> electronics to match common & expected ISO speeds.

Yes, I understand that.  However, I was measuring the camera to learn how t=
o
use it most effectively in different circumstances.  For that purpose the
whole process is a black box.  It really doesn't matter *how* the camera
achieves what it does, only *what* it can be counted on to achieve in
various conditions.

Also, setting the ISO a little off from whatever the native value is isn't
going to make a whole lot of difference.  The further off you get, the more
post processing is applied.  If the native value is 160 and I set it to 200=
,
I seriously doubt I'll be able to see the difference in quality the 1/3
F-stop post processing correction will add.

Did you look at the pictures I posted?  You can see the quality changes ver=
y
little for whole F-stop increments in the 200 to 1600 range.  It's not goin=
g
to suddenly have a spike of different characteristics in there that's not
caught by one of the adjacent tests no more than 1/2 F-stop away.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.