Does Native ISO differ between Canon and Nikon?

[Del]

I read a rebuttal recently online concerning the validity of ISO noise comparisons between Canon and Nikon cameras, it was a comparison of the Canon 7D versus the Nikon D7000, but for the life of me I cannot find it again. But one apparently knowledgeable person said that the native or 'base' ISO setting on the Canon is 100 whilst it is 200 for Nikon, then the Digic or Expeed chips boost the light sensitivity with software/algorithms etc.

Is this true? ???

If so, then are most of the Nikon vs Canon comparisons (let's face it all are based on ISO performance) flawed? Or if there is a full stop difference in base ISO settings then we should adjust when making comparisons e.g. compare Canon with f5.6 vs Nikon at f4.0, or alternatively Canon camera+lens combo photo @ ISO 400 vs similar Nikon package @ ISO 800 and so on. Or am I just talking nonsense and is there a difference between captured noise and process-generated noise?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

It varies by the sensor and camera model, not by Manufacturer. The term Native ISO is also somewhat undefined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#ISO_12232

This is a topic for considerable arguement. The only thing for sure is that different companies and organizations seem to intrepret the ISO 12232 slightly differently. DXO, for example, has their own way of measuring Camera ISO which is different from the manufacturers.

Who's on first??

 

[Del]

It varies by the sensor and camera model, not by Manufacturer. The term Native ISO is also somewhat undefined.

That makes sense, doing some recent research on speedlites/flashguns I came across something similar that posted actual recorded ISO (think by distance e.g. 20 feet) versus manufacturers claimed ISO for the Canon 580EXii versus Metz 58AF2 versus Nissin Di866 II and so on. Confused the hell out of me :-\

I guess that ISO 100 is a base reference number, so for flash units they can meter the light at various distances to measure the GN, thus doing it in reverse for a set distance then can work backwards using intensity/strength. Anyway the Canon 580EX II had a recorded ISO of 73! Now I've confused everyone else as well

 

[bycostello]

i don't know the ins and outs of it... but that rings true from what i have heard from elsewhere..

 

[psolberg]

I don't even look at that stupid figure. I look at the picture. looks good? then I don't care if it was base ISO or not.

 

[Del]

I don't even look at that stupid figure. I look at the picture. looks good? then I don't care if it was base ISO or not.

The whole point of my question was that when 900,000 potential DSLR owners go onto YouTube and watch a Chinese guy in Hong Kong with a British Cockney accent (his name is Kai and he's a Nikon Fan Boy) tell them that Canon sucks when compared to a similar priced Nikon model in the review (sorry review = ISO for online comparative surveys) because Canon cameras exhibit more noise at ISO= x, y & z, then are these tests really justified or not? Not whether you are a great photographer