Discussions (5142)

d7000's native iso?

view profile

hyimted says:

so i've been googling, asking friends, etc. it seems there isn't a "definitive" answer to native iso ... even among other nikon models or other camera manufacturers.

as to the d7k specifically, i've heard it's somewhere around 200. but somebody mentioned it's a multiple of 160 (320, etc). nikon's own press release (press.nikonusa.com/D7000_Press_Release.pdf) says the native iso is "100-6400" .... which i'm thinking is more marketing jib-jab.

anyway ... any insight, thoughts or opionions on this would be appreciated. for now, i mostly shoot 200 ... but am considering 160 just to see what happens.
8:01AM, 25 May 2011 PDT (permalink)

view photostream

Ledio (mostly away) says:

I don't understand what you mean by "native" iso. You use ISO settings (whichever number) based on your lighting condition to get the proper exposure.
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

wilvoeka says:

Base ISO is the ISO the sensor is designed to work at with out "Amplifying" the signal.

The Base ISO on the D7000 is 100, on many Nikons like the D700 and D3 it is ISO 200.

NAtive ISO are the ISO's the sensor is capable of without the use of software.

When Nikon states the Native ISO is 100-6400, what they are saying is that those ISO's are achieved with the sensor, any ISO above or below those listed are achieved through software inside the camera.

When you shoot at ISO 6400 the sensor is recording at ISO 6400. When you change the ISO to 12,800 the sensor is still capturing at iso 6400 and the cameras software simply over exposing the shot by one stop. IT is no different than shotting the same shot at ISO 6400 and increasing the the brightness by one stop in photoshop.
Originally posted 112 months ago. (permalink)
wilvoeka edited this topic 112 months ago.

view photostream

phuviano says:

Wilvoeka, great explanation. I learned something new today, thanks.
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

hyimted says:

good explanation. i think most folks use the terms "native" and "base" inter-changeably, but i understand your distinction. thanks for the great info! :o)

just out of curiosity, where did you get the 100 number from?
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

luckyphoto2010 says:

Page 101 of the D7000 manual.

“ISO sensitivity” is the digital equivalent of film speed. Choose from settings that range from a value roughly equivalent to ISO 100 to one roughly equivalent to ISO 6400 in steps equivalent to 1/3 EV."
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

Ronmio says:

I think what is referring to is what has been well documented with Canons. Although they have a nominal ISO range of 100 to [whatever] with 200 recommended, tests have shown that the least noise is actually at 160. And multiples of 160 are better than there adjacent settings. For instance, 160 has less noise than any ISO setting, 320 has less noise than any setting between 160 and 320 (e.g., 320 is much better than 200 or 250), etc. on the 5D Mark II. There is a YouTube video that illustrate this. There are several others as well for various Canon DSLR's. Multiples of 160 are always the better ISOs.

I was hoping to find that someone has run this test for a Nikon camera – ideally, a D7000 – but to no avail. It would be interesting to know if the D7000 has a native ISO that is something like the 160 with the Canons.
Originally posted 112 months ago. (permalink)
Ronmio edited this topic 112 months ago.

view photostream

tvnewsbadge says:

"The Base ISO on the D7000 is 100, on many Nikons like the D700 and D3 it is ISO 200."

Sounds good but how do you know that? Is it ALWAYS the lowest number listed for any particular camera?
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

hyimted says:

thank you for understanding and explaining it better then i could have! :o)
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

Ronmio says:

Not being a mathematician, I may have misstated the mathematical relationship. 'Multiples of 160" may not be right because 480 (i.e., 500) is not a great ISO on the Canons. I think the relationship is a progression where the next good ISO is double the last one: 160, 320, 640, 1280 (1250), etc. with the in-between settings being generally less desirable.
Originally posted 112 months ago. (permalink)
Ronmio edited this topic 112 months ago.

view photostream

tvnewsbadge says:

No, you were right about the multiples of 160... If there is any real science behind it, that may be a different story.

THIS link tells the story.

www.petapixel.com/2011/05/02/use-iso-numbers-that-are-mul...
Originally posted 112 months ago. (permalink)
tvnewsbadge edited this topic 112 months ago.

view photostream

Ledio (mostly away) says:

@tvnewsbadge: thanks for the link. There's an interesting comment there:

"I did a similar test a few weeks ago and found that these numbers only apply to video and jpg files, NOT to raw files. The explanation that was given to me in the Planet 5D forum was that the raw files bypass the internal camera processor but the jpg and video files are processed internally. So, if you're shooting raw use the ISO best suited to the shot. If jpg or video, use multiples of 160.

youtu.be/LDsmVzp7p-w"
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

Ronmio says:

I'm not sure I buy the "not Raw" claim. My understanding is that the noise has to do with stray electronic crossover signals being picked up by the sensor. This is before any processing. If anything, it seems to me that an internal processor that's creating a JPG could be programmed to eliminate some of the noise. And that Raw would have all the unfiltered noise.

Now it could be that a Raw processor (e.g., Capture NX, ACR) used subsequently might have more sophisticated algorithms and subsequently filter out more noise when it creates an image. But the Raw itself is supposed to have a digital recording of everything that the sensor picks up ... noise and all.
112 months ago (permalink)

view photostream

marketsentimentz says:

tvnewsbadge:

hi all ..... seems Wilvoeka is right ..... base iso range is 100 to 6400 and this is the usable one and it is worked by amplifying action and software in the camera - with good results upto iso 1200 for low light performance - I go upto max iso 800 only ..... all i know is that for crop factor for iso works differently ..... the multiple is square of the crop factor of 1.5 that is 2.25 so the iso 100 is iso 225 on full frame ..... hope some boarder throws more light on the subject ..... regards
Originally posted 45 months ago. (permalink)
marketsentimentz edited this topic 45 months ago.

view photostream

Zeroneg1 is a group moderator Zeroneg1 says:

Oh wow very old thread. There are engineers that consider anything higher than the base ISO to not be native ISO but rather 'amplified ISO' which is technically correct since anything higher than the lowest ISO the signal is amplified.
45 months ago (permalink)

Would you like to comment?

Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).