Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 29 Dec 2004 (Wednesday) 09:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

ISO Question

 
dpp
Member
129 posts
Joined Oct 2004
     
Dec 29, 2004 09:27 |  #1

Hello

This maybe a daft question- actually it probably is.

Anyway here goes.

If I take shots on a gloomy day at ISO 400 and then go inside to an even gloomier room and use flash, can I put the ISO on 800 and use flash. And if I do what will be the difference between using say ISO 800 and ISO 200 with flah indoors.

I am getting confused. By using ISO 200 will the flash be more powerful or less powerful?
What will be the best setting to use regarding ISO indoors




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 227
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 09:43 |  #2

The flash, like any light, will be more effective at higher ISO settings. I won't say "more powerful" because it's only able to produce so much light, but the higher ISO setting will let the camera use it more effectively (faster shutter speed and smaller aperture). The difference between ISO 200 and ISO 800 under the same conditions will be two f/stops.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 12:15 as a reply to  @ Jon's post |  #3

At ISO 800 the minimum distance on your flash may become an issue. The change in ISO to 800, increases your flashes effective distance by a factor of 4. Your flash controls it's output by the length of time it's on. That can only be reduced so much. You might need to increase your minimum distance from the subject to 10-12 feet.

In addition let me clarify Jon's post. With regards to ISO and flash when you go from ISO 100 to 200 the flashes effective distance is increased by 1.4, and when you go from 100 to 400( meant to say 800) it is increased by 4.

Regards,
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 227
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 12:30 as a reply to  @ scottbergerphoto's post |  #4

scottbergerphoto wrote:
and when you go from 100 to 400 it is increased by 4.

Regards,
Scott

. . . er, by 2. Typo, I'm sure.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robertwgross
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,462 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2002
Location: California
     
Dec 29, 2004 16:31 as a reply to  @ Jon's post |  #5

Jon wrote:
. . . er, by 2. Typo, I'm sure.

We knew what Scott was thinking, even though his fingers were not cooperating that instant.

Each one stop increase in ISO should yield about 1.4 times the effective distance.

---Bob Gross---




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 19:15 as a reply to  @ robertwgross's post |  #6

Thanks guys. I meant to say that 100 to 200 = 1.4 and 100 to 400=2, then 100 to 800=4x(Should read 2.8X). The original poster indicated ISO 800.

eg. At ISO 100 at 550EX at f/1.0 will go 55 M
At ISO 400 it will go 110M and
At ISO 800 it will go 220M (should read 154M)
Regards,
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 19:22 |  #7

ISO 100 to 800 is 3 stops, so 2.8.

Scott, time for a new keyboard. :-)


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PacAce
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,900 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Keystone State, USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 19:30 as a reply to  @ Scottes's post |  #8

Scottes wrote:
ISO 100 to 800 is 3 stops, so 2.8.

Scott, time for a new keyboard. :-)

We knew what he meant. His fingers just aren't cooperating today, is all! ;)


...Leo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Dec 29, 2004 19:37 as a reply to  @ PacAce's post |  #9

PacAce wrote:
We knew what he meant. His fingers just aren't cooperating today, is all!

Let's hope that he doesn't have to use the word "supercalifragilistice​xpialidocious" in his next post... The forum could crash again.

Hey, wait a second... How can we pick on him when CDS's typing is such easy game? Sorry, Scott. We'll be good.
:-)


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robertwgross
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,462 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2002
Location: California
     
Dec 29, 2004 20:03 as a reply to  @ scottbergerphoto's post |  #10

scottbergerphoto wrote:
eg. At ISO 100 at 550EX at f/1.0 will go 55 M

So now we all go rush around and look for our f/1.0 lens.

I wish.

---Bob Gross---




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dpp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
129 posts
Joined Oct 2004
     
Dec 30, 2004 03:34 as a reply to  @ robertwgross's post |  #11

Guys

Thanks very much indeed, I have leaernt so much from this forum its incredible, I am a newbie and like anything new that you study it baffles you, I apologise for the stupid questions and thank you all for your patience and understanding




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
Dec 30, 2004 06:12 as a reply to  @ robertwgross's post |  #12

robertwgross wrote:
So now we all go rush around and look for our f/1.0 lens.

I wish.

---Bob Gross---

Robert,
As I recalll it was you, who not so long ago corrected me, when I posted a Guide Number without referencing f/1.0 as the f stop used when referring to a Guide Number. If you want to have it both ways, you'll have to go to a different kind of forum:lol: .
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
Dec 30, 2004 06:19 as a reply to  @ scottbergerphoto's post |  #13

My apologies to those of you with cameras that lack that invisible f stop between 400 and 800. On my very special camera, there is one . That's why I came up with a factor of 4 and not 2.8. For those of you with normal cameras and not under the influence of mind altering drugs:p , going from 100 to 800 is in fact 3 stops and the factor is 2.8.

I hope this resolves any confusion my posts created. I am sufficiently humbled that I won't answer any flash questions or make fun of Robert Gross for being slightly more of a curmudgeon then me for the next five minutes;) .

Often wrong, but never in doubt,
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Dec 30, 2004 07:25 as a reply to  @ scottbergerphoto's post |  #14

scottbergerphoto wrote:
...I won't answer any flash questions or make fun of Robert Gross for being slightly more of a curmudgeon then me...

Well that just takes the fun out of life.

I mean, flash is everything. :wink:


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robertwgross
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,462 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2002
Location: California
     
Dec 30, 2004 10:06 as a reply to  @ scottbergerphoto's post |  #15

scottbergerphoto wrote:
Robert,
As I recalll it was you, who not so long ago corrected me, when I posted a Guide Number without referencing f/1.0 as the f stop used when referring to a Guide Number. If you want to have it both ways, you'll have to go to a different kind of forum:lol: .
Scott

As I'm sure we all know, the Guide Number gets divided by the f/stop of the lens. However, that f/stop is very rarely 1.0.

A newbie might assume that the Guide Number gets divided by f/1.0 no matter what. For a typical f/3.5 lens, that might lead to flash underexposure.

I was sitting out one night, ready to do some night wildlife photos, so I had all of the gear rigged to fire. However, I had to go through the math to make sure that I had enough light. Unfortunately, I had nothing to write with, so I was doing all of the meters to feet calculations, and divide by the f/stop, and all that... in my head. An f/1.0 lens would have made life easier.

---Bob Gross---




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,758 views & 0 likes for this thread, 8 members have posted to it.
ISO Question
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Thunderstream
1106 guests, 124 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.