Beginner Auto ISO in A, S, M mode.

Messages
22,391
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#41
ISO 2000? Really?

I really do wonder what and how people who limit themselves to low ISO's such as this shoot. Maybe people don't take pictures in anything but good light or maybe they only shoot static scenes or use flash. Meanwhile in the dim sunlight that passes for daylight in northern England I can sometimes be at ISO 2k+ in daylight never mind true low light and if people friendly shutter speeds and anything more than f1.x zero dof are involved being limited to a max of ISO 2k could result in very few pictures being taken, if any at all.

Limiting yourself to 2k seems like being in the days of film to me but each to their own and if taking a picture that stands any chance of being free from movement blur and stands a chance of having any depth at all means means using ISO's way in excess of 2k I'll happily do it given the abilities modern kit and modern software easily brings:D
 
Messages
8,566
Name
wayne clarke
Edit My Images
Yes
#42
ISO 2000? Really?

I really do wonder what and how people who limit themselves to low ISO's such as this shoot. Maybe people don't take pictures in anything but good light or maybe they only shoot static scenes or use flash. Meanwhile in the dim sunlight that passes for daylight in northern England I can sometimes be at ISO 2k+ in daylight never mind true low light and if people friendly shutter speeds and anything more than f1.x zero dof are involved being limited to a max of ISO 2k could result in very few pictures being taken, if any at all.

Limiting yourself to 2k seems like being in the days of film to me but each to their own and if taking a picture that stands any chance of being free from movement blur and stands a chance of having any depth at all means means using ISO's way in excess of 2k I'll happily do it given the abilities modern kit and modern software easily brings:D
I can't remember needing to go anywhere near 2K in daylight. Even shooting sport on a grim winters day, never mind dim sunlight. England must be darker than I remember.... ;)
 

StephenM

I know a Blithering Idiot
Messages
3,409
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
#43
On the other hand, Alan did mention needing a high shutter speed to stop motion, and a small aperture for depth of field. Using sunny 16 suggests a need for ISO 2000 to allow 1/2000 @ f/16, and higher ISO values when the light faces.
 
Messages
5,853
Edit My Images
Yes
#44
ISO 2000? Really?

I really do wonder what and how people who limit themselves to low ISO's such as this shoot. Maybe people don't take pictures in anything but good light or maybe they only shoot static scenes or use flash.
The limit you put on high ISO is determined by the particular camera's performance, and ones own threshold to noise. My last camera was quite old and imho it was a waste of time to go above 1600 ISO. :( :rolleyes: I'm happy with its replacement for slightly more than twice that. Some people saw noise in base ISO on ceratin Canon DSLR's, whilst many seemed quite happy and saw nothing. You would hope people would reassess high ISO performance as they get new cameras, but I wonder how many do. :thinking: :)

We are not seeing the big high ISO improvements we saw over the last 5-15 years with newer models, and some new cameras may have seemingly the same sensor as a previous model with little to no improvement in the sensor performance. :rolleyes:
 
Messages
23,560
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#45
This will clearly depend on what people shoot: but for me, the highest ISO I’ll use is whatever the camera allows. The amount of light available isn’t a choice*, so the variables are ISO, SS and aperture. The aperture is driven by the subject and the SS is driven by subject movement v camera movement (inc IS). Leaving ISO as the only option to change.

*adding light should be an artistic decision - careless flash use just changes a poor underexposed ambient lit image into a poor flash lit image.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,329
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
#46
Some very high ISOs are rather noisy though, so generally prefer not to use those. Depends if the pic will be usable or not; sometimes a bit of noise doesn’t really matter vs not getting the shot at all.
 
Messages
23,560
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#47
There’s an interesting philosophical question here.

A pro will raise the ISO to get the shot (because it’s all about getting the shot) but many amateurs will decide that they’d rather not have the noisy shot.

How many times do people put the camera away and miss taking photos that they’d later regret? I know that my photography regrets are pictures I didn’t take - rather than pictures I wished were less noisy.
 
Messages
22,391
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#48
There are limits and disappointments for me such as shooting mft or my 1" compact at high iso in some artificial lighting as that can result in a pretty poor picture that may only be useable after heavy processing and maybe converting to b&w. Those tend to be the extremes though and mostly I'm much more happy to have the picture than not especially if I can stop myself from pixel peeping at 100% and stick to looking at the picture as a whole.

I have so many pictures taken at high ISO's and I don't mean 2k or so I mean 8, 10, 16 plus up to and including 25,600. These pictures aren't going to win awards or be printed 2m wide and mounted on a gallery wall, they'll be looked at on smartphone, tablet and computer screens or maybe printed to A4.
 
Messages
22,391
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#49
I can't remember needing to go anywhere near 2K in daylight. Even shooting sport on a grim winters day, never mind dim sunlight. England must be darker than I remember.... ;)
I suppose the key there is that the light is good enough for the sport to be played and I'd guess you're shooting in more open spaces and at wider apertures too?

When the environment is more enclosed by buildings or nature 2k could well be peanuts especially if you want any depth.

This may be a minority view but I'm often nothing less than astounded when I read people on forums say they wont take pictures at ISO's like 2k.
 
Messages
22,391
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#50
On the other hand, Alan did mention needing a high shutter speed to stop motion, and a small aperture for depth of field. Using sunny 16 suggests a need for ISO 2000 to allow 1/2000 @ f/16, and higher ISO values when the light faces.
Just a little explanation, I usually don't go for shutter speeds that high but I find speeds in the double figures mostly useless for anything but static shots. Taking pictures of people and even nature (flowers and detal in nature etc) with the subject reasonably large in the frame could require three figure shutter speeds to prevent motion / wind blur and if shooting anything other than wide open or near wide open the iso can soon rise as the light levels drop.

I routinely use aperture priority until the light levels drag the shutter speed down and then I switch to manual and dial in the settings I want usually with auto iso enabling any iso up to the max. Aperture wise I'll use wide aperture lenses but there are times when I want more depth than f1.x gives so I may use f2.8 - f5.

It's maybe just me but for me 2k is often peanuts.

And then there's indoor shooting.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,067
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
#51
I use Auto ISO only when taking shots of wildlife up to 6400. Other than that I use ISO 100 for landscapes and HDR, and I use 3 separate settings for each 'field' of photography.
 
Top