 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eric
|
Interesting exif numbers when an iPhone chooses the settings….. Click here to comment on this image. Compared to a mirrorless camera…  Click here to comment on this image. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Sorry…saw this in the archive while furkelling for the above bird shot…and couldn’t resist it. Click here to comment on this image. |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
I have noticed this too - obviously the f number is fixed but the ISO seems to be set typically at a low number and the exposure time is some weird number like 1/1232 |
|||||||||
Eric
|
The thing I need help with is the exposure value difference between two cameras on what was (although different days) similar lighting. The iPhone used 1/1232, the Fuji used 1/800…….that is 1/2 stop LESS on the iphone. The iPhone used f1.8, the Fuji used f9……that is 41/2 stops MORE on the iphone The iPhone used iso 32, the Fuji used iso1000….that is 5stops MORE on the iphone. Summing up the iphone gained 9 stops of exposure value over the Fuji. On the goose image using the Sony the difference was ‘only’ 7 stops. I seem to be missing something. How can one camera record the same degree of correct exposure using 7 - 9 stops less than another camera? |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Sensitivity or sheer size of the sensor - phone sensors gather typically 4.5 stops less light. Also phones do a lot of processing of the image - some even do internal focus stacking. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
chrisbet wrote:Sensitivity or sheer size of the sensor - phone sensors gather typically 4.5 stops less light.Not sure I understand that? I BELIEVE my FX sensor gives the same exposure settings as the DX sensor for the same lighting? (Need to treble check that belief) I wonder if Jeff, who is now using the 4/3 Olympus, has seen an increase in ‘light gathering’ over his Nikon DX models? It could be a big advantage for bird photography (along with the 2x multiplier effect) if it gives better performance than FX and DX in low light! EDIT: Hmmm …. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/phone-camera-vs-dslr-cameras |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
I dont really look at exif these days Eric , I'm now on the third iteration of olympus the omd1-mkiii and once set up correctly just does the job . my main lens is the olympus 100-400 which gives in FF terms 200-800 thats more than adequate for my needs .it will take a 1.4 tc but I have now sold mine as it was hardly used .. the camera and lens combo weighs in at just under 2kg and coupled with the superb I.S systems of olympus and full water resistance features means these days I go out with just the camera and lens .. no bags , no covers ,no tripods or monopods and simply enjoy what i'm doing . while the A/F is not as good as some other brands I find that I can track b.i.f easily handheld using a single point A.F . I now also have a good collection of the older f2.8 four thirds lenses that were in there day top models and are more than adequate for my needs ,I went out the other week to do the town xmas lights with a 11-22 f2.8 lens and took a load of shots hand held in total darkness that were razor sharp .. I also now have the i.phone 12 which I often forget to use but as you have noted works extremely well |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |