• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / ETTR — Just crank up the ISO? Part 16

ETTR — Just crank up the ISO? Part 16

February 22, 2013 JimK 1 Comment

I got RawDigger to work on the NEX-7 files by running it on a different computer, so I have the NEX-7 results now.

The self heating test at ISO 6400 and 1/4 second exposures of blackness shows some slight self heating (look at the dotted green line, which is a straight line fitted to the green data using least-squares error as the fitting criterion), in spite of the fact that the NEX-7 is in live view mode all the time. The line goes opposite to the direction that I would have thought it would.

The standard deviation of the noise (the noise of the noise) over the series:

How noise floor varies with ISO setting:

The uplifted position of the ISO 6400 point is suprising. High ISO noise reduction is turned off. I wonder if there’s some processing at ISO 6400 that can’t be shut down.

The standard deviation of the noise floor:

Again, there’s that funny kink at the right end of the line.

Making a series of exposures (16 per data point) that keep a 200×200 square at the center of the image near zone VI — a count of 4000 in the green channel — as we progress through the ISO setting possibilities:

The kink is evident at high count levels as well.

Subtracting out the half a stop per stop photon noise slope, we get this — the thinner lines are plus and minus two standard deviations, computed from the 16 exposures per point; the solid lines are the mean values:

This shows slight improvements in SNR by advancing the ISO setting over just using the Exposure control in Lightroom or ACR. The ISO 6400 point is strange, and makes me even more suspicious that there’s some in-camera noise reduction that takes place at that ISO setting no matter how you set up the camera.

At Zone III — about 500 counts in the green channel — we see what is turning into a pattern with this camera:

Subtracting out the photon noise slope, we see:

This set of curves shows that, for the shadow SNR, there’s no point in turning up the ISO setting over the native value of 100; you’ll get slightly better results adding Exposure in Lightroom. I would ignore the kink at the end.

The Last Word

← ETTR — Just crank up the ISO? Part 15 ETTR and ISO settings →

Trackbacks

  1. Leica M sensor low light performance state of the art? - Leica User Forum says:
    August 28, 2013 at 8:36 am

    […] and D4, and the Leica M9, I've only seen evidence of such processing at ISO 6400 on the NEX-7. Here's a link to those results. […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.