Discussion:
D90 best at 100
(too old to reply)
Bertram Paul
2009-04-28 22:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none lab
testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two pictures
of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less artifacts at 100% and
the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a few
inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping mine at
100 ISO :D

At 100% the difference is quite visible.
--
---
Bertram Paul
http://atlantic-diesel.com
Digital Photography Forum
Paul Furman
2009-04-28 22:56:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none lab
testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two pictures
of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less artifacts at 100% and
the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a few
inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping mine at
100 ISO :D
At 100% the difference is quite visible.
That's a pushed ISO 100 so theoretically will have a bit less dynamic
range. Highlights might blow easier.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
Bertram Paul
2009-04-28 23:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Furman
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none
lab testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two
pictures of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less artifacts
at 100% and the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a few
inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping mine at
100 ISO :D
At 100% the difference is quite visible.
That's a pushed ISO 100 so theoretically will have a bit less dynamic
range. Highlights might blow easier.
I don't think so. There's more detail in whites and shadows, so I think that
would suggest better DR, right?
Take a look see at IR compometer, you can compare the 100 ISO versus the
200:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Pay close attention at the left upper white material, the right upper side
with the white strings; at 200 there's hardly any detail.

The salt shaker is another good example and the shadows.

I saw the same with my own pictures. The D300 has it in a lesser degree, but
still visible.
--
---
Bertram Paul
http://atlantic-diesel.com
Digital Photography Forum
Rich
2009-04-29 00:28:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bertram Paul
Post by Paul Furman
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some
none lab testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you
take two pictures of the same object, same light, the 100 has much
less artifacts at 100% and the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a
few inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping
mine at 100 ISO :D
At 100% the difference is quite visible.
That's a pushed ISO 100 so theoretically will have a bit less dynamic
range. Highlights might blow easier.
I don't think so. There's more detail in whites and shadows, so I
think that would suggest better DR, right?
Take a look see at IR compometer, you can compare the 100 ISO versus
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
Is this your "lab?"
Paul Furman
2009-04-29 05:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bertram Paul
Post by Paul Furman
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none
lab testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two
pictures of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less artifacts
at 100% and the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a few
inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping mine at
100 ISO :D
At 100% the difference is quite visible.
That's a pushed ISO 100 so theoretically will have a bit less dynamic
range. Highlights might blow easier.
I don't think so. There's more detail in whites and shadows, so I think that
would suggest better DR, right?
Take a look see at IR compometer, you can compare the 100 ISO versus the
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
That link lost your settings.
Post by Bertram Paul
Pay close attention at the left upper white material, the right upper side
with the white strings; at 200 there's hardly any detail.
The salt shaker is another good example and the shadows.
I saw the same with my own pictures. The D300 has it in a lesser degree, but
still visible.
I don't know the specifics but it's a pushed/faked ISO so there is going
to be something lost. The only reason to use that setting is for a
slower shutter speed.

Hmm, OK thinking more... if you use a slower shutter speed, that's going
to overexpose and the camera is going to do some highlight recovery for
you. Overexposing means less noise in the shadows so that makes sense
what you say about less noise but I'm pretty sure it's going to come at
a cost of more blown highlights. Sensors today are pretty damn good
though so you can recover quite a bit from raw.

If the highlights are not way over, that's not a big problem but where
you might see a difference is skies turning cyan when the (red?) blows out.

Nikon has a HDR type setting also (I'm forgetting what it's called...)
which underexposes a bit then adds fill light in the shadows. This gives
better saturation in bright yellows... theoretically that shouldn't be
but I've seen it and seen others comment on it. This also gives more
noise in the shadows and reduces blown highlights.

You should get better results at ISO 100 as long as it's not too
contrasty of a scene with susceptible highlights.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
Me
2009-04-29 00:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Furman
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none
lab testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two
pictures of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less
artifacts at 100% and the image looks cleaner.
I made a few shots outside of the sky, a few inside with flash and a
few inside with tungsten light. They all were better at 100 ISO.
Maybe there are some issues I overlooked, but for now I'm keeping mine
at 100 ISO :D
At 100% the difference is quite visible.
That's a pushed ISO 100 so theoretically will have a bit less dynamic
range. Highlights might blow easier.
There's also less contrast, and if you adjust contrast to be the same as
the ISO 200 shot, the difference in visible noise lessens.
Bob Larter
2009-05-01 10:58:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bertram Paul
Nikon has set the standard ISO for the D90 at 200. But after some none lab
testing, I found that the best ISO setting is 100. If you take two pictures
of the same object, same light, the 100 has much less artifacts at 100% and
the image looks cleaner.
Most cameras look good at 100 ISO. ;^)
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Loading...