Beginner Did I miss something (preparing to shoot)?

StewartR said:
Ha ha. I very deliberately said "most of the time", just in case someone who's cleverer or more experienced than me came up with a scenario where ISO isn't the least important.

Anyone up for the challenge? Then I can bask in the smugness of my cautious approach.
Click to expand...
A still life photo using a tripod, and studio work where flash is your SS and you have plenty of power... In those cases you can use pretty much any settings you want, and then ISO can be considered to be equally important. Not "more important," but not "least" either.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
ISO least important or most important - you can argue both ways. It's most important because it allows you to use both the shutter speed and aperture you want :D
Click to expand...

Being able to shoot at the shutter and aperture I want is a great feature with some of the later cameras if all I want is a screen image or relatively smallish print. For example my GX7 and A7 both produce useable images at ISO 25,600 but rather than use this ability to shoot black cats at midnight I'm more likely to shoot at ISO 25,600 at 1/100-1/160 and f5.6-8 on a dull day in northern England possibly when under trees or some other cover. With my old 20D or 5D I'd be at ISO 3200 with an aperture wider than I'd ideally want and limited depth of field.

BTW, re your comment about film speeds. I probably shot more with 1600 film than anything else as much of my shooting was done at live gigs and no one ever complained, far from it, but being honest the relatively small size of the prints probably hid a lot.
 
Last edited:
dinorock said:
each to there own phil but i spent years getting out of AUTO mode so i'll stick to knowing what my iso is not what my camera has randomly selected for me
Click to expand...
Hmm. There's so much wrong with that! Where to begin...?

  1. There's nothing wrong with AUTO mode on occasion - better to grab a shot with iA than miss it altogether!
  2. Most cameras, you can set the upper limit for Auto ISO - I think mine is set to 6400? but ...
  3. ... modern software algorithms are so sophisticated - my camera will NOT go above ISO 1600 unless it absolutely has to, so 'random selection' it's not
  4. I'd rather choose aperture and/or shutter speed both of which have more effect on an image than ISO
  5. I can have full Manual control of aperture and shutter speed, while Auto ISO means I can still have auto-exposure
  6. Even with Auto ISO I know what ISO the camera has selected, so I can override if necessary
  7. ISO noise is controllable, and is less evident if you don't pixel peep.
 
Chrisphoter said:
Hmm. There's so much wrong with that! Where to begin...?

  1. There's nothing wrong with AUTO mode on occasion - better to grab a shot with iA than miss it altogether!
  2. Most cameras, you can set the upper limit for Auto ISO - I think mine is set to 6400? but ...
  3. ... modern software algorithms are so sophisticated - my camera will NOT go above ISO 1600 unless it absolutely has to, so 'random selection' it's not
  4. I'd rather choose aperture and/or shutter speed both of which have more effect on an image than ISO
  5. I can have full Manual control of aperture and shutter speed, while Auto ISO means I can still have auto-exposure
  6. Even with Auto ISO I know what ISO the camera has selected, so I can override if necessary
  7. ISO noise is controllable, and is less evident if you don't pixel peep.
Click to expand...
i'd rather choose all three ;)
 
dinorock said:
i'd rather choose all three ;)
Click to expand...
Phil V said:
Well you can't.
Click to expand...
Come on Phil, you know better than that.

I want minimal sensor noise so I choose ISO 100.
I want to freeze the action so I choose 1/4000th.
I want to get front-to-back sharpness so I choose f/16.
Easy! Why are you telling me I can't do this?



PS Why are all my pictures so dark?
 
dinorock said:
tosh
Click to expand...
Then you live in a universe where the laws of physics are different to mine.

Either that or you don't understand the exposure triangle.

Or you can explain to me...
It's a Sunny afternoon, You've decided you want to use f8 and a shutter speed of 1/200, how much 'choice' of ISO do you have and keep a correct exposure? Your meter is suggesting 100, are you free to use 400 or 50?
 
StewartR said:
That's your problem right there. No creativity.
Click to expand...
love it a wedding photographer with "no creativity" what exactly is a correct exposure Phil surely it depends on the subject and how you the photographer wish to see it.
 
dinorock said:
love it a wedding photographer with "no creativity" what exactly is a correct exposure Phil surely it depends on the subject and how you the photographer wish to see it.
Click to expand...
A correct exposure is simply that, a correct exposure. How you choose the 3 variables to reach the correct exposure is up to you and what 'effect' you want, but there are still limitations ;)
 
snerkler said:
A correct exposure is simply that, a correct exposure. How you choose the 3 variables to reach the correct exposure is up to you and what 'effect' you want, but there are still limitations ;)
Click to expand...
will every one stop trying to teach me to suck eggs i know the exposure triangle i know about dof i know ALL cameras have limitations. i simply don't like the idea of using auto iso cheers mike
 
dinorock said:
will every one stop trying to teach me to suck eggs i know the exposure triangle i know about dof i know ALL cameras have limitations. i simply don't like the idea of using auto iso cheers mike
Click to expand...
Crikey, it was only meant as light hearted banter :eek:
 
dinorock said:
love it a wedding photographer with "no creativity" what exactly is a correct exposure Phil surely it depends on the subject and how you the photographer wish to see it.
Click to expand...
You do realise Stewart's 'no creativity' comment was sarcasm based on your complete lack of the grasp of the exposure triangle.

As the sarcasm was a bit much for you. I'll try it with small words.

If you have chosen a shutter speed and an aperture, and you know what exposure you want (as creative as you like ;) ), without being able to control the light source, your ISO is fixed for you. It's not a choice.

You can choose ISO and aperture, or aperture and shutter speed, or shutter speed and ISO, but you never have free reign to choose all 3. It's a simple fact, and the fact that your initial response to that fact was...
dinorock said:
tosh
Click to expand...
Is just proof that your typing fingers have got you into an argument that your intellect can't back up.

Simple physics, an EV is an EV, you have no control over it, unless as I said, you are using studio lighting, and even then, it should be obvious that it's not limitless control, it's fixed by how many stops of power control the lights allow.

You really are in above your head here.
 
dinorock said:
will every one stop trying to teach me to suck eggs i know the exposure triangle i know about dof i know ALL cameras have limitations. i simply don't like the idea of using auto iso cheers mike
Click to expand...
Are you sure you understand it, you definitely appeared to suggest that you wanted to control all 3 elements.

The point is, you're perfectly free to not want to use Auto ISO, no one here would give a flying f***. But you decided to come in with the idea that you had some superiority because you set your own ISO, no matter how many people told you that your assumptions were flawed, you just had to keep digging. You then resurrected this thread to prove a point, it's a bit late to play the victim, you could have left the thread dead, no one cared.
 
FireflyHeather said:
Well that was an eye-opener - what I really want to know is, how do you take a landscape shot while correctly exposing for the highlights, midtones, shadows and the sky? I expect to take separate shots and photo merge them in photoshop. I've gathered from you guys that I should use manual ISO as well as manually set the aperture and shutter speed...o_O
Click to expand...

personally i'd use a graduated ND filter - but taking seperates and merging them as you suggest is an option, or indeed just taking one shot and processing it differently to create lights and darks, or applying a grad effect in light room.

on the settings thing I use maual ISO because i never had a camera where auto was any good until i got the 70D , I hardly ever use M , most of the time i use AV - end of the day there isnt a right way per se, you have to find out what works for you (and don't pay too much attention to purists who suggest manual everything isd the one true god - unless you want to)


welcome to TP btw (its friendly here really - i think nerves must be a bit stretched for some reason today)
 
Last edited:
I suppose, given ideal conditions, I'd like to control all three too. But as conditions are not ideal 99 times out of 100, if I had to choose one element to go auto with USUALLY ... it would be ISO, as long as it wasn't a ridiculous value. But then, it never will be, as I've set an upper limit of 6400. ;)
 
Chrisphoter said:
I suppose, given ideal conditions, I'd like to control all three too. But as conditions are not ideal 99 times out of 100, if I had to choose one element to go auto with USUALLY ... it would be ISO, as long as it wasn't a ridiculous value. But then, it never will be, as I've set an upper limit of 6400. ;)
Click to expand...
As we're broadly in agreement I'm loathe to do this, but...

It's not about ideal conditions, it's simply impossible. You can't choose all 3, there has to be a variable. If 1/100 f8 and 400ISO is right, the same settings with 800ISO is overexposed and at 200ISO is underexposed.
 
Phil V said:
As we're broadly in agreement I'm loathe to do this, but...

It's not about ideal conditions, it's simply impossible. You can't choose all 3, there has to be a variable. If 1/100 f8 and 400ISO is right, the same settings with 800ISO is overexposed and at 200ISO is underexposed.
Click to expand...
Ah, this is down to pure semantics I think? When I said 'ideal', I meant that there might be one shot in a 100 where your chosen aperture, shutter speed, and ISO just happen to deliver a good exposure. Otherwise, as you say, there has to be at least one variable.
 
But you still haven't explained why my pictures are all so dark!
 
dinorock said:
i'd rather choose all three ;)
Click to expand...
IMO, there's nothing wrong with working in full manual... if the subject/situation allows it. And I do believe that ability/knowledge is an essential skill.

IMO, working in an auto mode is "harder." You have to know what the camera is doing, what it will do, why, and how to override it when it gets it "wrong"... all as things are changing.
 
sk66 said:
IMO, there's nothing wrong with working in full manual... if the subject/situation allows it. And I do believe that ability/knowledge is an essential skill.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I know what you mean. But many people like to claim they're working in full manual, when all they're doing is setting the shooting parameters so that the camera tells them they have a correct exposure ... in which case they aren't doing anything that an automatic mode wouldn't do more quickly and easily.
 
sk66 said:
IMO, there's nothing wrong with working in full manual... if the subject/situation allows it. And I do believe that ability/knowledge is an essential skill.

IMO, working in an auto mode is "harder." You have to know what the camera is doing, what it will do, why, and how to override it when it gets it "wrong"... all as things are changing.
Click to expand...
Nope, nothing wrong with at all. But neither is there working in manual with auto ISO, or working in aperture/shutter priority (with or without auto ISO) as long as you know what you're doing, understand how you camera works, and are getting the results you want (y)
 
StewartR said:
Indeed. I know what you mean. But many people like to claim they're working in full manual, when all they're doing is setting the shooting parameters so that the camera tells them they have a correct exposure ... in which case they aren't doing anything that an automatic mode wouldn't do more quickly and easily.
Click to expand...
But the camera might come up with (at least) three different combinations of settings for that same meter reading/"proper exposure."

There are two types of "manual users" that tend to annoy me... the old farts (like myself) who never learned to use the new technology. And the photographers who just recently learned to use manual mode and think they have finally mastered their camera/photography (because the old farts told them so).
 
StewartR said:
But you still haven't explained why my pictures are all so dark!
Click to expand...

Its because you are a dark brooding soul and are making an artistic statement about the pointlessness of life and the nature of being through your work...
 
snerkler said:
Nope, nothing wrong with at all. But neither is there working in manual with auto ISO, or working in aperture/shutter priority (with or without auto ISO) as long as you know what you're doing, understand how you camera works, and are getting the results you want (y)
Click to expand...
Honestly, I don't know how some people work in manual mode effectively... I know some bird photography "experts" that swear by it (and say anything else is dumb/unprofessional).

Monday was a beautiful day so I decided to spend it sitting next to the river photographing eagles. Not a cloud in the sky so I thought I'd revisit manual mode... I was not at all happy with my shots most of the time. If the eagle was in it's own shadow (or shadow of a tree) it was underexposed. If the head was in bright light it was overexposed/clipped. If it was to the left front it was good, if it was to the right front it wasn't.

TBF, the shots that were in the sweet spot were good/consistent... I just couldn't convince the eagles to go there.
 
sk66 said:
...

IMO, working in an auto mode is "harder." You have to know what the camera is doing, what it will do, why, and how to override it when it gets it "wrong"... all as things are changing.
Click to expand...
The way I see it, the camera is quite a simple machine. It doesn't take a lot of knowledge to be able to predict when it's going to make mistakes. And it'll make the same mistakes whether it's in M or AV.

Of course, there are times when M is the only option (when using flash as a key light), but for the most part I can program the machine to give me exactly what I want whilst I concentrate on getting the picture. Which is the important part.

When people who don't know how to work the machine, or how to get a decent image start spouting how they're 'in control' it really does wind me up, not because it effects me in any way, but because they aren't learning the important stuff whilst they're messing about with the unimportant stuff. Clinging to the belief that camera settings are somehow the important thing, then wondering why their photos are boring.
 
Phil V said:
but for the most part I can program the machine to give me exactly what I want whilst I concentrate on getting the picture. Which is the important part.

.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. I'm confident that 99% of the time, whether in aperture priority or manual with auto ISO, the camera will choose the settings I would choose anyway, and it does it instantly without me having to take my 'eye off the ball'.
 
Phil V said:
The way I see it, the camera is quite a simple machine. It doesn't take a lot of knowledge to be able to predict when it's going to make mistakes. And it'll make the same mistakes whether it's in M or AV.
Click to expand...
Here's an interesting thing though, Phil. The camera isn't such a simple machine as it used to be, and that makes it harder to predict what it will do.

All of my pre-digital SLRs had a fairly simple metering system. You had spot metering, centre weighted average, and maybe something in between that wasn't quite a spot but didn't use the whole frame. It was quite easy to predict how they would respond and therefore to assess whether any exposure compensation would be required.

But now Canon DSLRs have evaluative metering, which uses a sophisticated algorithm to determine the exposure based on inputs from multiple metering segments and multiple autofocus points. It gets it right more often than simpler methods would, but it's harder to predict when and why it will get it wrong. Nikon DSLRs have matrix metering, which compares the readout from the metering sensors with a database of over 30,000 images to decide what exposure to use. Again, predicting when and how it will err is difficult.
 
StewartR said:
Here's an interesting thing though, Phil. The camera isn't such a simple machine as it used to be, and that makes it harder to predict what it will do.

All of my pre-digital SLRs had a fairly simple metering system. You had spot metering, centre weighted average, and maybe something in between that wasn't quite a spot but didn't use the whole frame. It was quite easy to predict how they would respond and therefore to assess whether any exposure compensation would be required.

But now Canon DSLRs have evaluative metering, which uses a sophisticated algorithm to determine the exposure based on inputs from multiple metering segments and multiple autofocus points. It gets it right more often than simpler methods would, but it's harder to predict when and why it will get it wrong. Nikon DSLRs have matrix metering, which compares the readout from the metering sensors with a database of over 30,000 images to decide what exposure to use. Again, predicting when and how it will err is difficult.
Click to expand...
Tbh I don't think knowing when to use exp comp etc is any more difficult than it used to be, you had to know the scene and how your camera interpreted it then and you have to know the same now. I find the metering on my cameras very consistent and predictable.

But no, cameras aren't that simple. There's so many features etc to learn these days and I'd be lying if I said I knew about every feature/ function of my camera. But with sophisticated AF, metering systems etc they have made shooting much easier in many situations. I'd hate to try and shoot sports wide open and tracking with manual focus, all the time trying to adjust the exposure settings as light etc changes as I pan :eek:
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
Here's an interesting thing though, Phil. The camera isn't such a simple machine as it used to be, and that makes it harder to predict what it will do.

All of my pre-digital SLRs had a fairly simple metering system. You had spot metering, centre weighted average, and maybe something in between that wasn't quite a spot but didn't use the whole frame. It was quite easy to predict how they would respond and therefore to assess whether any exposure compensation would be required.

But now Canon DSLRs have evaluative metering, which uses a sophisticated algorithm to determine the exposure based on inputs from multiple metering segments and multiple autofocus points. It gets it right more often than simpler methods would, but it's harder to predict when and why it will get it wrong. Nikon DSLRs have matrix metering, which compares the readout from the metering sensors with a database of over 30,000 images to decide what exposure to use. Again, predicting when and how it will err is difficult.
Click to expand...
Well either:
  • I've got really low standards and I'm happy with any old crap
  • The camera is brilliant and gets it right always
  • Or I've worked out where and when I need to kick my brain in, and honestly I'm no genius so it can't be that difficult (maybe the evaluative metering is more predictable than we've heard).

But more importantly - what you said is true whether we shoot in PAS or M, it's the same meter, and as I keep saying - learning to understand how to interpret and manipulate the meter is far more important than what mode we shoot in.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
  • I've got really low standards and I'm happy with any old crap.
Click to expand...
Hey this isnt the business strapline thread you know :LOL:
 
Phil V said:
The way I see it, the camera is quite a simple machine. It doesn't take a lot of knowledge to be able to predict when it's going to make mistakes. And it'll make the same mistakes whether it's in M or AV.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say it takes a lot of knowledge...the basics of metering/exposure are the same no matter what you are doing. I don't think the camera makes "mistakes" in manual mode... you might if you mis-meter the scene and believe what the camera is telling you.

As far as being "simple" goes, that is largely true... If you choose an auto mode and settings *because* of the way it behaves, then you probably know what/why and how to change that behavior. I never use S(Tv) because I don't like the way that mode operates (Nikon favors changing aperture over changing ISO). And I would be happy using full auto/P *if* I understood that algorithm and it suited the situation, but I can't pretend that I do understand/know it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top