I don't know why Canon did it but I see low ISO as an aid to bright sun
fill flash. It may well have reduced dynamic range but that may be a
small penalty to pay for getting the shot at all. You can maybe solve
the problem with high-speed sync flash units but that produces problems
of another sort... the flash range is pretty short because it requires a
lot of flash power to fire the flash multiple times in a short time
interval. Even so, I (grits teeth) am actually considering buying a
Metz 52-AF1 digital flash for micro 4/3 cameras. It's regularly $289
(same as an FL-600R) but it's more powerful and has a $60 rebate from
Bogen/Manfrotto if you buy by the end of January. B&H's site says by
the end of December 2014 but if you download the actual rebate form
you'll see it's January 2015. B&H error or big fib??
Dr. (don't say it, TTL) Flash ???
On 12/29/2014 4:53 PM, Moose wrote:
On the Canons, it had reduced DR, as I recall. I've assumed that regular
base ISO was set/chosen for optimal IQ and Low was only added with some
compromise as a sort of NR filter substitute.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|