HAND.
HAND.
The 11 was necessary to deal with the range of ISOs.
BTW, for scenes wider than 11 stops lens flare starts to undercut linearity.
www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/Dynamic-range-fair-share-of-flare-and-glare
Thank you, but it's not an isosceles triangle. It's a right triangle. It's just a teaching aid.
You could make it an isosceles triangle if you did that.
What definition for ISO are you using? What does the camera do when the ISO setting is changed? Do all cameras do the same thing when the ISO setting is changed?
Whatever the camera manufacturer chooses.
In the vast majority of the cases, it applies conversion gain, analog gain, and/or digital gain to the sensor photodiode charge..
Not all. The Fuji GFX 50S and 50R are an exception at some ISO settings. But not the GFX 50S II.
For dual-gain sensors, the diagonal should have a step at some ISO. At least that's what photonstophotos shows for my Fuji gear.
But in general, I agree with the graph's sentiment.
Dual conversion gain sensors do not affect clipping. They affect only read noise.
True enough, but dynamic range is always in reference to a baseline noise level, right?
@SrMi has written: @bastibe has written:For dual-gain sensors, the diagonal should have a step at some ISO. At least that's what photonstophotos shows for my Fuji gear.
But in general, I agree with the graph's sentiment.
Dual conversion gain sensors do not affect clipping. They affect only read noise.
True enough, but dynamic range is always in reference to a baseline noise level, right?
I do not follow. The graphics does not relate to DR.
@bastibe has written:For dual-gain sensors, the diagonal should have a step at some ISO. At least that's what photonstophotos shows for my Fuji gear.
But in general, I agree with the graph's sentiment.
Dual conversion gain sensors do not affect clipping. They affect only read noise.
Well, the two conversion gains should give different absolute clipping levels in the photosites, but it doesn't usually show because the digitization clips lower than FWC.
Most references to FWC that you see are really about the digitization clipping at base ISO, not the actual "well". It is impossible to measure FWC on most real world cameras, unless you can hack the system and use a lower analog gain after the source follower than the firmware normally uses.
@SrMi has written:Dual conversion gain sensors do not affect clipping. They affect only read noise.
Well, the two conversion gains should give different absolute clipping levels in the photosites, but it doesn't usually show because the digitization clips lower than FWC.
I don't consider what happens at the photosites clipping. It's more gradual than that. The ADC clips hard.
Most references to FWC that you see are really about the digitization clipping at base ISO, not the actual "well".
Correct. That's what this graphic shows.