Friday, March 6, 2015

Stupid High ISOs

The new cameras are coming out with ever more stupid ISO figures. 1600 became not good enough then 3200 became not good enough then 6400. The latest seen today is 256000 ISO. This is getting so retarded that its not even funny.

In favor of the high ISOs is increasing light sensitivity. This means photographs can now be taken without flash that would before have needed a tremendously powerful flash. As an example, if I shot candle flame and it needed 1/30th exposure under 100ISO then under 256000ISO the exposure would be 1/8000th of a second. Consequently for a candle flame there is no advantage other than the entire room could be photographed by the light of a single candle and a handheld camera - no tripod needed.

Doing away with tripods is a very good idea. They're bulky, heavy and cumbersome. Only the right royal pain in the ass type of photographer will carry a tripod on holiday. I have a tripod. I use it solely for high-speed photography though it was intended also for landscape photography. I honestly never use it and did consider selling it when I sold all my redundant camera gear to a dealer. The fact I would have barely got $20 for it made me stop and wonder if it was worth even taking to the dealer. There is an off chance that I might do more high-speed photography - even though I sold all my flashes. There's even a chance I might do some Schlieren photography too. There were enough chances equally countered by alternatives to give me cause to stop and think. As can be seen though, my use of a tripod is extremely specialized and way beyond what most amateurs (and professionals) would consider doing. For them, high ISO does everything.

The problem with high ISO is not that they make flashes and tripods utterly redundant for most purposes. The problem comes when trying to read a camera display. Does it say 256000, 64000, 12800 or 512000? Its like looking at a list of telephone numbers! The German system of DIN numbers would seem far superior in this respect. 100ISO is 21DIN but 256000IS is 45DIN. How much easier is it to read 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 than 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1000, 1250, 1600, 2000, 3200, 4000, 5000, 6400, 8000, 10000, 12500, 16000, 20000, 32000, 40000, 50000, 64000, 80000 etc? My vision is not perfect but even with glasses, that just looks like a sea of zeroes. How many zeroes - whoops let me count. That's not an option in my opinion.

It is high time camera manufacturers offered the option of using DIN as opposed to ISO in order that we can see film speeds more easily. Is it 21DIN or 45DIN? It is also my opinion that photographers and the camera industry in general needs to pull their socks up over this issue. These retarded sets of zeroes need to be replaced pronto. In fact, it's reminiscent of the hyperspeed scale in the movie, Spaceballs where the speed indicator reads "ludicrous speed". Continuing to use ISO in preference to DIN is in my opinion ludicrous and people that prefer to see their cameras cluttered with references to 51200ISO as opposed to 48DIN need to be gently wrapped into a straightjacket and put into a padded cell for their own safety as they're clearly crazy.

No comments:

Post a Comment