On Thursday 05 Sep 2002 12:55 pm, Cleveland, Kyle E. wrote:
>  There are so many factors to consider when talking about "speed":
> shutter, film and also lens "speed".  The Nikon 885 was f2.8--not
> blazing by any stretch.  By the same token, my spasms aren't
> "shaky", so I don't have to deal with that.  Still, I use a tripod
> whenever possible. As Deri alluded, though, that wouldn't be
> practical when taking family snapshots.  I didn't get far enough
> into the 885 documentation to find the ASA/ISO speed equivalent.
>
> Deri, I'm surprised that ASA is still used in the "green and
> pleasant land". Would have thought that ISO would be your standard.
>  All of my '80s vintage bodies only have ASA, as well as my only
> good medium format.  If you don't have the conversion memorized, or
> a conversion calculator on hand, you might as well use the camera
> as a doorstop.  Oddly enough, my 35s and my 2.25" are all
> Japanese--one of the countries that pushed hard for ISO.  Irony,
> no?
>
> -Kyle
>
> (BTW--I'll be in "training" most of today and tomorrow.  I'll try
> to check my email whenever possible, but if I don't respond to a
> msg right away you'll know why.)
>

You can tell how much I know about "proper" photography!! Still
ASA/ISO film speeds are identical - not like mixing up
centigrade/fahrenheit!! DIN numbers are different though.

Its all about how fast it can "fix" the picture, either on the film
emulsion, or to the CCD on the Digital. When you think about it a
2.1m pixel camera has to do 6.3 million anologue to digital (1 for
Red/Green/Blue per pixel) conversions in the time it takes to open
and shut the aperture, and transfer all that data into memory, that's
why they have custom designed chipsets rather than a general purpose
CPU.

Cheers

Deri