Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Opinion POLL: EPIC native ISO = 800 or ISO = 320?

Opinion POLL: EPIC native ISO = 800 or ISO = 320?

  • Total voters
    159
Will Keir

Will Keir

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
5,323
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
California
I thought Jim set it straight, the native ISO on the epic is 800. Still, I see fellow REDUSERS swearing by 320.

What are you guys shooting at?
 
Last edited:
Shooting at ISO 320 is a really excellent way to trash a stop and a third of your highlight range. There are certainly times I've liked the look of a shot I exposed at 800 set back down to 320 in RCX pro but I've never intentionally set the camera to 320 ISO, it's a waste and if you're friend can't get a good looking image at 800 he either needs to learn proper exposure techniques or send in his camera for repair.
 
It depends what you are aiming for, a huge DR or a noise free image. Doing greenscreen work then it's ofcourse preferable to be on a lower digital gain.. because thats what we talk about here. "Native ISO" is kind of a level of digital gain that RED find acceptable before to much noise is introduced to the image. Now different sensor size, compression rates and such actually kind of make this number a float.
 
Every time I shoot at ISO 800 I am amazed at how much more noise there is than at ISO 320. Sure you can shoot 800 and protect your highlights, or you can take account for that at 320 the same way shooting 800 does it for you automatically. But you also have to remember that if you shoot at 800, you can't process the footage at 800 because you'll lose all you gained by underexposing. You have to use the curves to get it.
 
This is not true in my experience, I'm not sure what you're viewing on, but viewed out of a Redrocket, full debayer and downscale to 1080P 10bit 422 on a calibrated dreamcolor my 800 ISO looks fantastic with only a slight hint of texture to the low 1/4 tones. Even 1600 ISO shows only minimal shadow noise.

Kemalettin Sert said:
People who claims its 320 ISO tests with gray card and lightmeter..
Click to expand...

There are more variables here than you might expect, like when the last time the meter was calibrated and where middle gray should fall on the tone curve being used.
All digital cameras use a curve to map linear sensor data to the human visual system and depending on the curve in use middle gray is not necessarily 50%.
I tend to like it at about 36-42% range for the latest RC3/RG3 space.

The below stills are from my Epic shot at 1600 ISO...
Claam1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Maybe I have a gem of a camera but at 800 ISO my Epic is considerably cleaner than any 35mm film stock I've ever shot, yes even under tungsten light.
Then again I do not want nor like a perfectly clean image, some texture actually adds to the filmic look IMHO. A 320 ISO exposure is going to look cleaner than 800 obviously but also sterile. And as far as keys go I always use green Kino flow bulbs to light my green screens because it's a chroma key and you will get fantastic keys from any color subject light if your greenscreen has nothing but green chroma in it.
 
Last edited:
Never had a noise problem at 800. 320 is fine also, but you should not have noise issues at 800 unless you have no light hitting the sensor.
 
It was stated long ago. Native ISO of the MX sensor is 320. Having said that, the camera has been designed to give you the most latitude at 800. They recommend 800, Native is 320.
 
Ian Laurie said:
It was stated long ago. Native ISO of the MX sensor is 320. Having said that, the camera has been designed to give you the most latitude at 800. They recommend 800, Native is 320.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's not really a matter of opinion. The sensor sees what it sees, changing the ISO does not increase the amount of photons actually collected by the sensor. When you shoot at 800 ISO you are effectively under-rating the sensor by 1 1/3 stops and "printing up." There's nothing wrong with this, but you should be aware of what's happening. Personally, I prefer to split the difference and shoot at 500 ISO unless I'm in a really low light situation or dealing super hot highlights that I need to protect.
 
"Native" is a misnomer, it implies there is only one answer. The real answer is whatever works for you, personally I feel I have the most dynamic range, and best tonal rendering with the most pleasing image texture at 800 ISO therefore that is my "Native". If another DP has a different esthetic that more closely fits 320 ISO then that can be his "Native" ISO. There is NO I repeat NO absolute ISO for any imaging device that records RAW. Film had an ISO that was formulated into the emulsion as well as a characteristic curve, these could be manipulated somewhat in processing but it was pretty much set. This just does not apply to linear digital imagers the same way.
 
Evin Grant said:
Shooting at ISO 320 is a really excellent way to trash a stop and a third of your highlight range. There are certainly times I've liked the look of a shot I exposed at 800 set back down to 320 in RCX pro but I've never intentionally set the camera to 320 ISO, it's a waste and if you're friend can't get a good looking image at 800 he either needs to learn proper exposure techniques or send in his camera for repair.
Click to expand...

+1.
 
Which is a problem and a major hurdle many new or "would be users" encounter. It's not a mystery why some choose to shoot Alexia, despite Epic's advantages. It's a camera system, it has specs, specs are absolute, like MTF on lenses.

"Whatever works for you, is great for those with experience and skill," but quite confusing for those new to digital or the Epic camera system. We do need clarity.

choose to not jump
Evin Grant said:
"Native" is a misnomer, it implies there is only one answer. The real answer is whatever works for you, personally I feel I have the most dynamic range, and best tonal rendering with the most pleasing image texture at 800 ISO therefore that is my "Native". If another DP has a different esthetic that more closely fits 320 ISO then that can be his "Native" ISO. There is NO I repeat NO absolute ISO for any imaging device that records RAW. Film had an ISO that was formulated into the emulsion as well as a characteristic curve, these could be manipulated somewhat in processing but it was pretty much set. This just does not apply to linear digital imagers the same way.
Click to expand...
 
This is just a Dangerous post and misleading

SO NOT COOL.

General guide lines I have my operators set at is

Tungsten indoors at ISO 500
Out doors normal day cloudy skys ISO 640 as long as im not shooting into the sun
Bright day to HOT bright day out doors ISO 800 and even 1,000 if i want to preserve the white clouds in the bright blue sky.

Cheers
 
Will Keir said:
Which is a problem and a major hurdle many new or "would be users" encounter. It's not a mystery why some choose to shoot Alexia, despite Epic's advantages. It's a camera system, it has specs, specs are absolute, like MTF on lenses.

"Whatever works for you, is great for those with experience and skill," but quite confusing for those new to digital or the Epic camera system. We do need clarity.

choose to not jump
Click to expand...

Oh the Alexa has the same issues, maybe not as pronounced on Prores but we routinely expose it down 1-1.5 stops to get the skin tones to look thier best, and the light meter almost never agrees.

Saggital or longitudinal MTF? MTF is just another measurement that is interperateable.
Leica lenses are regarded as some of the best out there yet their point of highest contrast is focused behind the point of highest resolution. It makes no sense but it looks great!

The more I shoot the more I realize the only truly consistent instuiment are my eyes. I know what I think looks good and I go with that.

Clarity is a marketing tool, trust your insticts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top