Discussion of two not dumbed down articles on ISO from DPreview

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

I was especially interested in what they said about camera settings like Canon's Highlight Tone Priority setting and similar for other brands whatever they might call it. If I get the gist of it they push the ISO to minimum of 200 (base normally 100) but even though at 200 keep the amplification at baseline. The advantage being more headroom to avoid highlight clipping. Nothing one couldn't do with blinkies, but still an interesting concept.
 
Member's gallery
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I was especially interested in what they said about camera settings like Canon's Highlight Tone Priority.
Click to expand...
I tried my R5’s Highlight Tone Priority, hoping to protect detail in the white feathers of pied birds like stilts.

I’m not in a position to compare with/without images taken of the same bird at the same time; however, I can report that, if applied, DxO PR3 will strip the (allegedly?) RAW image (.CR3) of Canon’s magic, leaving it excessively dark.

… David
 
David Berry said:
I tried my R5’s Highlight Tone Priority, hoping to protect detail in the white feathers of pied birds like stilts.

I’m not in a position to compare with/without images taken of the same bird at the same time; however, I can report that, if applied, DxO PR3 will strip the (allegedly?) RAW image (.CR3) of Canon’s magic, leaving it excessively dark.

… David
Click to expand...

That was something I was unclear about, whether one would have to use Canon software to get the benefit. The higher iso would protect the highlights by forcing underexpose, but we could do that with blinkies. I guess the net effect would be to change the standard for metering from Canon's usual 12.8% reflectance to around 18%.
 
Member's gallery
Thank you for the links. It was an interesting reading.

If I read it right, the discussion points out to a practical choice of a photographer: Increase analogue amplification to recover dark tones with less noise at the cost of decreased dynamic range, or keep high dynamic range at the cost of increased noise in dark areas (all of that after applying PP to the RAW image)

It would be interesting to see the next article to see a proposal for more appropriate definition of ISO for RAW digital pictures and its practical implications.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
That was something I was unclear about, whether one would have to use Canon software to get the benefit.
Click to expand...
Bill, in my experience it is only DxO PureRAW that is at odds with Canon's Highlight Tone Priority tricks. My guess is that care should be taken with other brands' ISO tinkering if/when available.

Lightroom Classic, Topaz Photo AI and Luminar Neo don't strip out the effects of Canon's fiddling with ISO. (All of my photos are shot in RAW.)

… David
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top