[Leica] Is ASA 200 the new 100 ?

[bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen)]

The answer has to be slightly Clintonesque - it varies with the camera,
and the sensor size. But if you're talking about the better DSLRs, 100
iso digital is equivalent to shooting a slow film - as in around 100.
Oddly enough, you will find that 1600 iso on the latest Canon DSLRs is
MUCH cleaner than 1600 film, and I find that on the Oly E-1 it is
cleaner than 1600 film - as long as you don't under expose. This means,
of course, that being limited to 2.8 lenses isn't quite as much of a
burden as one might expect.

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Emanuel Lowi
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 9:22 PM
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: [Leica] Is ASA 200 the new 100 ?


This question is related to the issues which result
from the digital crop factor reality (which I keep
getting mixed up with crap factories and crop circles,
but I digress)..

I ask it in utter ignorance of digital technology.

Are the ASA settings on today's digital cameras really equivalent
quality-wise to their numerical equivalents in film?

For example, ASA 100 film is the usual daylight speed
for me in my normal shooting conditions. I'll load a
slower film (ASA 50, 25) when conditions allow and a
faster film (200, 400) when conditions demand.
Otherwise it's all ASA 100 all the time, because this
gives me the quality I need while allowing me my
preferred shutter speeds and apertures.

Would ASA 100 still be my  "normal" setting with
today's digital technology? Or can ASA 200 be used
without worry and with quality equivalent  to what I
am used to, due to a kind of sensitivity setting
inflation ?

(Please, spare me the Clinton-esque debates over what
I mean by "normal" and "quality."  If you can't
proceed to an answer without getting all tangled up in semantics, please
don't bother).

See, if a digital M has a crop factor, we've only got
the 28/2 and Cosina 28/1.9 as fast-ish wide-ish
lenses. Anything wider is f2.8 or slower and I cannot
see how Leica or Zeiss or Cosina will deliver a
quality 21/2 or 24/2 (never mind f1.4) that won't
obstruct our viewfinders.

But if digital ASA 200 is just as good as the "old"
film ASA 100,  there's less of a problem with the
slower wides and the crop factor.

Be nice to me if I've asked a ridiculously stupid
question.

Emanuel Lowi
Montreal

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information