And the amount of light that enters the sensor through the lens is insanely different. A couple of years ago I moved from a Canon G16 with a f/1.8-2.8 6.1-30.5mm (28-140mm FF eq) lens to a Olympus OM-D EM-10 with its pancake f/3.5-5.6 14-42mm (28-84mm FF eq) lens.
Long story short, the pancake gets almost 3 times as much light as the canon integrated lens, despite the higher f number, because of the areas and sizes involved on both. And if I had gone for an APS-C for FF camera, we'd be talking in the order of 5 to 10x more light (hence, better low light images, or the ability to use shorter exposures for the same results).
Phones f/1.8 cameras are great -- comparing to other phones. If you compare them to a camera (almost any camera), they're in trouble.
Yes, because the f number is a ratio between the effective aperture vs the length of the lens. A long lens with larger f number can focus more light into the sensor than a shorter one with a smaller number, say f/4.0 400mm against a f/2.0 50mm.
The factor is not directly sensor size but rather focal length of the lens. But with smaller sensors comes a smaller field of view on the same focal length, such that you need to reduce focal length to keep it the same. I think for phone cameras the factor is ~10x compared to 35mm sensors.
Professional wildlife and product studio photographer here. We certainly do shoot manual mode outside of the studio, just not with film.
With auto-ISO, "manual" camera mode (which refers to manually setting aperture and shutter speed) becomes an automatic exposure mode because the camera is metering the scene and adjusting ISO automatically. It is also possible and practical for certain applications to use "full manual" mode which also involves setting ISO, especially for something with a mostly-fixed scene such as astrophotography.
While camera-adjusted ISO and post-processing lightening (moving the exposure slider up in lightroom) are similar, the reason post-processing alone is not enough is because of dynamic range. Each camera sensor has a certain number of stops of light it can capture. If you're within that range, you can adjust in post and arrive at an image similar to what you would've got had you exposed in the camera. If you aren't within that range, you clip the highlights or shadows.
There are a few reasons why manual mode is beneficial. They mostly relate to speed and accuracy of control. First, aperture and shutter speed have different effects on the result of the image (depth of field, and motion-stopping capability respectively).
For example, I went to the shoreline on Monday and photographed birds. There were terns flying around protecting their young, the young wandering and gaping for food, while osprey were fishing just offshore. For terns and fast-moving birds, shutter speeds in excess of 1/2000 sec are necessary and there are many times when 1/3200 sec is not enough. Meanwhile, the tern chicks being about 25ft away mean that depth of field is shallow because the subject is near (minimum focusing distance on that lens is about 19ft). So an aperture of F8 for chicks is helpful but F5.6 is better for the further subjects and faster motion.
There's no good way to have a camera adjusting multiple settings (ISO and either aperture or shutter speed) because it doesn't understand the circumstances. In order to do this with aperture or shutter priority camera modes, you would be constantly switching the dial between aperture and shutter priorities which requires a button press and command dial turn, as opposed to ONLY adjusting the desired setting using one of two command dials.
I love being in full manual and being able to adjust the shutter speed and aperture without taking my eye off the viewfinder. I did it more as an enthusiast and was able to get some decent "motion" pictures at a local racetrack.
Did a few weddings/senior pictures as side gigs but what I enjoyed the most was the thrill of getting the 'shot' in action moments where you have a split second and that is it. Also hiking some trail to be at the top of the summit to get a perfect sunset is also very rewarding.
Simple website using zenfolio which has been abandoned as I now have a tech job that is full time so I don't have as much time for my photography hobby anymore.
Maybe this is just me speaking as someone who shoots with a camera that doesn't have a dial with the P, M, etc. letters on it, but I wouldn't consider auto-ISO a manual mode (and I'd use it in precisely the sort of situation you describe).
I can't watch the video right now, though, and maybe it really does mean "the dial setting with the M", no more and no less, when it says "manual mode". But I think that is a bit silly. Lots of cameras have different controls.
I agree with you, while it is called "Manual" exposure mode it is absolutely an auto-exposure mode when using auto-ISO. The thing was that GP specifically mentioned pros using aperture priority:
> "I know almost no professionals who shoot on manual mode...Instead, shoot on aperture mode...Use ISO setting to adjust further for light..."
It sounds to me like you're mostly in agreement: situations in which you want full manual (including ISO) are rare. Most of the time what you care about is either the aperture (setting ISO and shutter speed to get the correct exposure) or the speed (setting aperture and ISO to get the correct exposure).
For non-pros like myself, it's unfortunately not common to shoot with a camera that has good auto-ISO: basically anything above ISO 800 is going to be unusable, and ideally you want ISO 100 or 200 if your lighting situation can allow for it.
So most of the time I find myself in semi-manual modes: where I lock the ISO to a setting that's ideal for the light I have, use auto-focus (unless it's failing to lock on the correct target), and set either the aperture or shutter speed to what I want. The camera then adjusts the other factor appropriately, but I still find myself using Canon's quick adjustment exposure compensation tool almost constantly because my Canon blows out highlights pretty badly a lot of the time.
For a pro I imagine the situation is usually reversed: set both shutter speed and aperture how you want them, and trust your camera to be good enough with the auto-ISO. It sounds to me like GP was basically right: in a non-controlled setting, full manual mode is pretty rare.
There's a bit of confusion here. Importantly the GP is talking about "professionals." My post was written with that in mind, and the assertion that "...almost no professionals... shoot on manual mode outside of studio...Instead, shoot on aperture mode..."
The important distinction is that "manual mode" is being discussed and compared to "aperture mode." So it's about the PASM setting and not specifically about "true manual mode" (auto-ISO or not). The clear (and in my view incorrect) assertion of GP is that manual priority/mode is not for use outside the studio. It is said three times:
> I know almost no professionals who shoot on manual mode outside of studio settings.
> The only time manual mode is used is when you're in a studio...
Probably a combination of lack of everyday demand and the complexity of the task.
Time is notoriously difficult for many reasons which have been discussed at length [1].
The trend now is that the number of programmers doubles every 5 years [2]. This rapidly expanding group of potential users and creators means features just on the fringe today might become available at any time.
I think the issue is to make TTD work it needs to be designed in from the beginning as a hard feature. AKA if random new feature breaks TTD then random new features designers get told pound sand until they fix their code. The reverse means anyone trying to implement TDD keeps getting it broken with every release until they give up.
Also designed isn't the word I'd use for Javascript.
It's not even really a replacement for NetworkManager; it's designed to be used to provide basic networking within containers, for systemd-nspawn. It can be used on host systems, but it's deliberately fairly lightweight and designed for fairly simple configurations in containers, rather than as a full fledged replacement for other networking management daemons.
What's the best way to encourage someone to call when they're showing outward signs of depression but you don't know them?
I saw someone who was very clearly depressed streaming the other day. They weren't responding to chat. Crying. Fetal position on the floor for 7+ hours. Very depressing social media posts, etc.
But I did not know this person. I did encourage them to call, however it was a difficult message to compose. You don't want to make them feel like they're a burden or weak ("call if you need someone") and some people may need encouragement to actually pick up the phone.
So in a situation with a stranger online, who may not see or respond to your message, what would you say?
I think this is where social platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat) should allow friends to suggest anonymously to contact such a helpline (probably show it as an ad/post). Any other way would be considered judgmental/confrontational by the one who is already suffering. An inanimate / non-human thing like facebook suggesting to contact the local helpline may be very very effective in such cases.
Some phones actually have quite fast lenses. The iPhone 11 pro wide lens is f/1.8.