[Recovered Thread: 39663]

[lukester01]

Actually I am noticing that it didnt only choose ISO 400. It chose ISO 300 in one of the sample shots I posted. So it isnt 'stuck' on ISO 400.

[MasterOfNone]

lukester01 wrote:

Actually I am noticing that it didnt only choose ISO 400. It chose ISO 300 in one of the sample shots I posted. So it isnt 'stuck' on ISO 400.

It must be borked then, since ISO 300 isn't an option.

[davidl340]

I've got this camera, read this thread and the DP thread.

I started messing with in door shots all day today, and YES I did get some ISO 400's in auto mode WITH the flash, and yes, they were grainy. I was at probably the max range of the flash, so that's why I'm assuming the ISO 400 it chose in auto.

BUT, I have been having a lot of fun with setting the ISO to lower values, such as 100, and with the flash, the shutter speeds are still well within non-blur range, especially with the stabilization on (like 1/60 most of the time).

Does lowering the ISO to a manual 100 with the flash on seem reasonable, any draw backs? My observations, even in a dark setting, as long as you are in flash range, even at ISO 80, the shutter speed in auto mode still was 1/60, and produced a great picture.

Without a flash at all. in a very dim room, with ISO at 200 and shutter speed of 1/2.5, with optical stabilization, I was able to get a good picture after taking a couple shots, this is with me just free standing! I'm no expert, but I wonder if a camera w/o optical stab. could do that.

Anyway, I was a little dissapointed in this camera's low light shots to begin with, but I'm hoping that setting the ISO to about 100 or 200 or so during inside shots, it'll fix any grainy pics.

[NickTrop]

In reading this post, it seems that this camera adjusts the ISO (to 400) based on the distance between the CCD and the object you're focusing on. That is to say, if you're focusing on an object that is 20 feet away (guessing) in a low lit room, it increases the iso to 400 to increase the range of the flash so that you get a properly exposed shot - albeit a grainy one, rather than no shot at all.

If that's the case, I would argue the camera is too sophisticated for the individual who posted this thread who would seem happier with NO shot, than a grainy one and consider the camera that can't take the picture at all a "better camera" -or- in fairness, his old Canon might have had a more powerful flash that didn't require setting the ISO so high to get the range.

[davidl340]

I messed with the flash today and ISO at further distances. With the ISO at around 200, at the flash limits, the pics looked good, but any lower ISO the pics get dark, I don't know why it wouldn't leave the shutter longer. The more I mess with this stuff, the more I wish I could program what the "auto" mode does under different circumstances.

[bobc]

davidl340 wrote:

I messed with the flash today and ISO at further distances. With the ISO at around 200, at the flash limits, the pics looked good, but any lower ISO the pics get dark, I don't know why it wouldn't leave the shutter longer. The more I mess with this stuff, the more I wish I could program what the "auto" mode does under different circumstances.

There is a mode with a red camera on the dial. I think in that mode if you go into the menu, there is a slow shutter speed setting.

Have you tried that yet?

bobc

[davidl340]

ya, I've been using the red camera dial setting, and have set the slower speed setting to 1/2 second. I've discovered that no matter what ISO setting you set the camera too manually, with the flash on, it seems the maximum amount of time it will leave the shutter open is 1/60 of a sec. therefore the darker pics, I thought the lower the iso, the longer the exposure typically should be, even with a flash, am I wrong? Because 1/60 is as slow as it gets with flash.

[lukester01]

You guys might be getting at the heart of why the FX7 is chosing high ISO settings for indoors. The Canon does seem to have a really powerful flash.

I am still waiting to hear back from Panasonic. Maybe they will confirm what you suspect.

As to the one shot being ISO 300. It is one of the sample pics I posted, so you can see for yourself the EXIF data. That does seem weird though that the camera doesnt even have a ISO 300 setting, but can chose it itself.(I am taking your word for it, I boxed mine up alreadyt to go back).

[NickTrop]

lukester01 wrote:

That does seem weird though that the camera doesnt even have a ISO 300 setting, but can chose it itself.(I am taking your word for it, I boxed mine up alreadyt to go back).

In full auto, many digicams will calculate "in-between" iso settings. ISO is "just a number" to digicams if you will, since their's no film stock in the camera so it will on occasion set itself "in between" though it doesn't offer the option to the user. Not unusual...

My guess is the Canon had a stronger flash, which you prefer. Stronger flashes drain the battery much faster, so while you point out graininess, someone else might have posted complaining that the batteries drain faster than XXXX camera...

[kidscruff]

Is it not just an idea to manually set the ISO to 80 and leave it... Instead of having it set to Auto?

Also, does the FX7 (like the FX5) increases the shutter speed when the O.I.S is turned off?