Best for low light.
 

Quick question,which is best for low light on an EX1? Interlaced or progressive ?

Thanks.

Paul.

Quick, but difficult one...

Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, which is only really viable in progressive...

I use the latter option exclusively.

Would the better light sensitivity in interlaced affect the dof?

How on earth? Because it'd make you close the iris? Well - use ND filters! Or even faster shutter, if DOF is your priotity.

Well by shooting interlaced you appear to be gaining a stop more. Just wondered what effect that might have if any on dof.

Yes - the effect you mean I mentioned above.

Thats why I asked the question. If you dont know and you have already said you don't. Thats fine, let someone else answer?

At a given focal length, only the iris affects DOF. Chip sensitivity (gain, interlacing etc.) will have no effect on DOF unless you stop down to compensate.

But as Piotr said, there are ways other than stopping down the iris to compensate for exposure - such as ND filters (the best solution) and shutter. Using these methods will have no effect on DOF.

OK so nothing is happening to let more light in?. Yes thanks! I know about ND filters use them all the time. Just wanted to understand why Interlaced has a stop more and what that means. No difference in dof. Thanks.

With interlacing the extra stop has nothing to do with the optical path. The chip has twice as many photons to work with on a given field (half the resolution) and hence is twice as bright.

Thanks Eric; I tried to explain the exactly same thing to Mark, but apparently my English is not good enough :)

Interlaced is better in low light then,thanks guys.

Paul.

Paul,

I refer you back to Piotr's response - you are not really getting something for nothing...

Yes but with nothing in between wouldnt you get to much motion blur?

Mark,

Perhaps my answer should have been worded like this (bolds added):

"Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, thus gaining one stop, which is only really viable in progressive as you don't get the motion blur you would get in interlaced..."

Is it more clear now?