No, ISO 6400 does not work, nor does ISO 3200. These are pseudo (fake) ISOs, created by numerical adjustments from the ISO 1600 values.Must be a typo on the website, hopefully ISO 6400 works.
Then would shooting @ 1600 in RAW and then exposing +2 yield a better result than .jpg shot at 6400?
sometimes when I was to shoot wide open outdoors the light can get a bit much I have to get the lowest ISO possible (originally why I thought 50 was awesome on the D300... should've reasearched that more)
Even on a Canon 40D I could shoot @ 100 without using ISO expansion (lo). I never really noticed any difference.
That's right, but I don't believe FusionZ06's claim, that the loss of crispiness had been caused by the lower ISO.But if he's on manual and shoots @ 1.8 ISO 100 @ 1/4000 and the same @ ISO 200 @ 1/8000 I believe that's a negligible variable
I did not say, that ISO 100 on the D300 is not real. I said if you deliver two images (as I described above), I can try to determine that from the images.when you say on a 40D ISO 100 is Normal, but for a D300 ISO 100 is not a real ISO gain?