Game Specials

Let us know what this list looks like....

I'm sure some of us could do with extra kit :)
 
ToxicBunny said:
Let us know what this list looks like....

I'm sure some of us could do with extra kit :)
Click to expand...

No not you you are a mean bunny :p:D

I will post as soon as I get it but I think I am going to have a look first :p That is if you guys don't mind ;)
 
I think I can cope with having two different brands fighting for my affection :p
 
Devill said:
That is the D40x (10MP and 100 ISO min) to the D40 (6.2 MP & 200 ISO min) IIRC
Click to expand...

As understand it, the fact that the D40 has a base ISO of 200 is better. It means that the photosites of the sensor are twice as sensitive to light as a camera with base ISO 100.
 
greg_SA said:
As understand it, the fact that the D40 has a base ISO of 200 is better. It means that the photosites of the sensor are twice as sensitive to light as a camera with base ISO 100.
Click to expand...

With higher ISO, comes more noise (something you don't want).
 
greg_SA said:
As understand it, the fact that the D40 has a base ISO of 200 is better. It means that the photosites of the sensor are twice as sensitive to light as a camera with base ISO 100.
Click to expand...

But the option of being able to set the ISO lower sometimes is very handy as I understand it.

I agree with merc's post on the noise from to high ISO.
 
As I understand it, the sensor has a certain sensitivity to light, which gives "base ISO value" which is a certain signal strength. To increase the output of the sensor (i.e. a higher ISO) there are gain stages that amplify the signal. This is what introduces noise.

The D40 is only 6MP which makes the photosites on the sensor bigger and more sensitive, hence the base ISO of 200. The ISO 200 is the most noise free signal that is possible.
 
I do more daylight shooting than anything so having such a high min ISO would really get on my nerves.
 
ISO 200 on a 400D is also virtually noiseless. My point is however that when I'm shooting outdoors at 100 I'm able to open my aperture up a lot more than I can at ISO200. Ideally - for me - I'd like to be able to shoot at ISO50.
 
bwana said:
ISO 200 on a 400D is also virtually noiseless. My point is however that when I'm shooting outdoors at 100 I'm able to open my aperture up a lot more than I can at ISO200. Ideally - for me - I'd like to be able to shoot at ISO50.
Click to expand...

I see, I assume you mean for the same shutter speed? But in most cases can't a higher shutter speed compensate for this?
 
greg_SA said:
I see, I assume you mean for the same shutter speed? But in most cases can't a higher shutter speed compensate for this?
Click to expand...
Up to a point but I regularly find that even 1/4000 (my max) isnt enough and all you can do is reduce the aperture.
 
greg_SA said:
As I understand it, the sensor has a certain sensitivity to light, which gives "base ISO value" which is a certain signal strength. To increase the output of the sensor (i.e. a higher ISO) there are gain stages that amplify the signal. This is what introduces noise.

The D40 is only 6MP which makes the photosites on the sensor bigger and more sensitive, hence the base ISO of 200. The ISO 200 is the most noise free signal that is possible.
Click to expand...

I I don't that's necessarily it. The pixel density on the 6MP crop cams are roughly similar (slightly higher, i.e. slightly smaller pixels in the case of the D40) than on the 12MP FF Canon 5D, which has ISO100.

The Pentax K100D Super also starts at 200 and goes to 3200 (natively).
 
bwana said:
Up to a point but I regularly find that even 1/4000 (my max) isnt enough and all you can do is reduce the aperture.
Click to expand...

Mybe invest in an ND filter?

EDIT: In bright sunlight I run out of shutter speed on the 40D too (1/8000), even at f/4. Even in England :)
 
koffiejunkie said:
Mybe invest in an ND filter?
Click to expand...
for what I'm shooting a polariser might make more sense . . let me go see. :)

EDIT - it helped quite a bit - now I just need to get them for my 50mm and **gulp** my 16-35 with its freakishly sized 82mm.
 
Last edited:
bwana said:
for what I'm shooting a polariser might make more sense . . let me go see. :)

EDIT - it helped quite a bit - now I just need to get them for my 50mm and **gulp** my 16-35 with its freakishly sized 82mm.
Click to expand...

What about using an adapter ring? I might look a bit odd though, but a lot cheaper :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X