Why don't cameras have ultra low ISO modes?

[meady100]

Anyone know why this would be? An ISO50 or even 10 would save having to buy ND filters! Seeing as it's making the sensor less sensitive rather than more I don't see any technical barrier?!

 

[dunganick]

A few of the Pro bodies can shoot ISO 50. Its a good question though, surely making the sensor less sensitive to light cant be more difficult than making it more sensitive?

 

[RyanD]

noink it used to be 200, alot of people dont like using low iso like 50 as they feel you dont have noise but do get less information across the sensor.

It all depends on how much of a pixel pincher you are tbh

 

[Maxdicapua]

I've got Lo80 on my A100...

 

[Andy.]

Mine has a low setting which equates to 50. Never used it or felt the need to, but I'm regularly shooting at 3200-6400. Perhaps when I win the lottery and fill my bag with f1.2 glass...

It is only 1 stop difference though, so in reality you'd still need a ND filter.

 

[GeordieClioDriver]

I can go to ISO 50.

 

[ukaskew]

I believe many DSLRs actually 'fake' anything lower than the base setting anyway, ISO200 is standard on my D90, the ISO100 mode is actually just a processed version of the ISO200 image.

The only reason the special 'lo' modes exist is to try and replicate an ND filter if you've left it at home.

A camera that has a standard base setting of ISO100 isn't necessarily 'better' than one that has a base of ISO200, forcing them to perform at a much lower base ISO will just compromise them at the other end of the scale.

 

[vibrio]

is has to do with the native range of the sensor. my 5D2 goes from 50 to 25600 but only 100-6400 are actual ISO's with the rest a software trick. ISO 50 on the 5D2 has reduced dynamic range